From: milivella on 30 Mar 2010 15:58 milivella: > 6th update: February 16: Fulham is 16th. 7th update: March 16: Fulham is 16th. OK, Luiz (who wins if Fulham end the season >11th) will win it. Since there is no more suspense at all, I'll skip April 16 and, in the next update, will jump through to the end of the season (May 16). Data-filled screenshots: Played matches: http://i.imgur.com/8VfvD.jpg Competitions: - Premier League: http://i.imgur.com/U7rkw.jpg - [out of Europa League, FA Cup and League Cup] Players' stats: - Goalkeepers: http://i.imgur.com/X5J79.jpg - Defenders: http://i.imgur.com/mVieu.jpg - Midfielders: http://i.imgur.com/kdLpy.jpg - Attackers: http://i.imgur.com/y6zT2.jpg -- Cheers milivella
From: Futbolmetrix on 30 Mar 2010 20:51 On Mar 30, 3:58 pm, milivella <milive...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > milivella: > > > 6th update: February 16: Fulham is 16th. > > 7th update: March 16: Fulham is 16th. > > OK, Luiz (who wins if Fulham end the season >11th) will win it. Since > there is no more suspense at all, I'll skip April 16 and, in the next > update, will jump through to the end of the season (May 16). So, is Fulhamark's poor performance due to: a) lack of chemistry (or, as famous Catania president once said when told that his team lacked chemistry: "Tell me where this guy Chemistry plays, and I'll go out and buy him!" b) our overestimating the quality of Fulhamark's players. Many of them are mid-level Serie A players. Given current UEFA coefficients, that wouldn't be too surprising. c) Poorly assorted roster. For example, why is Marchionni listed as a LM? Why is Marco Motta listed as a midfielder? d) Bad luck. Injuries (only a few players seem to have played almost all matches, all the others rotate a lot). Or simply bad luck in the sense that Fulhamark should have accumulated more points than it actually did, but caught many bad breaks. D
From: Clément on 30 Mar 2010 23:59 On Mar 30, 4:58 pm, milivella wrote: > milivella: > > > 6th update: February 16: Fulham is 16th. > > 7th update: March 16: Fulham is 16th. > > OK, Luiz (who wins if Fulham end the season >11th) will win it. I think this is kind of unfair. All I did was to predict the worst outcome for MarcoFulham. I guess I do deserve some credit for suspecting the team was overrated by most bets, but even then I was conservative by betting on just one table position lower than than the lowest bet before mine. That gave me 7 different winning outcomes, which were at least 5 more than any other player except for Mark V, who had 6 - but really, what were the odds FullMarko would contend for a UCL spot? I don't know which criteria Daniele used to make his prediction. But really, all I did was pick his guess and predict a slightly worse outcome. Anyway, I thought this was an interesting game. Maybe it could use a little tweaking to prevent what I perceive as some inbalance, but I still like it as it is. Abraço, Luiz Mello
From: milivella on 31 Mar 2010 02:32 Futbolmetrix: > So, is Fulhamark's poor performance due to: This is the question! > a) lack of chemistry (or, as famous Catania president once said when > told that his team lacked chemistry: "Tell me where this guy Chemistry > plays, and I'll go out and buy him!" :) And this is only one of his memorable quotes! > b) our overestimating the quality of Fulhamark's players. Many of them > are mid-level Serie A players. Given current UEFA coefficients, that > wouldn't be too surprising. > > c) Poorly assorted roster. For example, why is Marchionni listed as a > LM? Why is Marco Motta listed as a midfielder? > > d) Bad luck. Injuries (only a few players seem to have played almost > all matches, all the others rotate a lot). Or simply bad luck in the > sense that Fulhamark should have accumulated more points than it > actually did, but caught many bad breaks. Great. I think that we can rule out b (quality). In fact, if you pick the best 16 players for each EPL team, the sum of their current abilities is: 2663 Chelsea 2633 Manchester United 2564 Manchester City 2558 Liverpool 2532 Arsenal 2465 Tottenham 2388 Everton 2357 Aston Villa -> 2294 Fulham 2268 Sunderland 2251 West Ham 2182 Wigan 2162 Blackburn 2154 Bolton 2147 Portsmouth 2141 Stoke 2132 Wolves 2086 Birmingham 2066 Hull 1981 Burnley Fulham is 9th! So what about the other options? a) Lack of chemistry: and experience in EPL, I would add. It's possible: see how Manchester City is 3rd in the table above, while in the 20 simulations I ran it had less in average less points than Liverpool. c) Poorly assorted roster: it can be! Your spotting of Marchionni points in that direction: his best position according to FM is on the right, and it loses 6 "Miniger points" when played on the left. d) Bad luck: possible as well, the only way to know it would be to run more simulations of the 2009-10 season. -- Cheers milivella
From: milivella on 31 Mar 2010 03:25
milivella: > Futbolmetrix: > > > Why is Marco Motta listed as a midfielder? Excuse me, I forgot to answer to this bit. I guess that Motta is included among both defenders and midfielders because according to FM is position is "D/WB/M RL" ("defender/wayback/midfielder right/left": quite versatile, isn't he?). (Of course I'm deleting Motta and Marchionni from the Minger database: I've given you too many details about them! :) ) > if you pick > the best 16 players for each EPL team, the sum of their current > abilities is: > > 2357 Aston Villa > -> 2294 Fulham > 2268 Sunderland That is Fulhamark, of course. -- Cheers milivella |