Idrissa Gueye - now gone

[brontebilly]

I think we will miss him, 18 months ago most of us were pissing our pants?

edit 12 months? not long really

Nah he is a gutless pr*ck. Another one who threw in the towel routinely when we went behind last season. The stats may say he is a good midfielder but he is another one of the despicable 15/16 crew for me.

[Risso]

I know that.  I would argue though, that £7m in terms of the new Premier League money is essentially for nothing, especially when we're apparently contemplating spending £15m on a 30 year old striker from another non-Premier League club.

It still isn't Moneyball. Same as it wasn't Moneyball when we signed him for pretty much the same amount.

Jesus, not that I really care, but:

Moneyball isn't really portable in its entirety from baseball to football due to the more individualistic nature of baseball, but as a handy term that describes a set of circumstances that anybody who isn't being pedantic to the nth degree would understand, it's fine,  In the baseball version, it was concentrating on statistics that hadn't always been appreciated, and then finding players on the cheap who were undervalued and who could provide those less popular but secretly useful skills.

So useful stats that other teams might not have picked up or value less - yes.
Cheap in terms of transfer fee and therefore "undervalued" - arguably.  Cheap in terms of wages - haven't seem it reported anywhere, so who knows.

Oh and I've seen the film and read the book before you ask!

[PeterWithesShin]

It's still not Moneyball no matter how often you say it.

And you care at least as much as me as your spending the same amount of time debating it as I am, difference is i'm right so ner ner.

[tomd2103]

I know that.  I would argue though, that £7m in terms of the new Premier League money is essentially for nothing, especially when we're apparently contemplating spending £15m on a 30 year old striker from another non-Premier League club.

It still isn't Moneyball. Same as it wasn't Moneyball when we signed him for pretty much the same amount.

Jesus, not that I really care, but:

Moneyball isn't really portable in its entirety from baseball to football due to the more individualistic nature of baseball, but as a handy term that describes a set of circumstances that anybody who isn't being pedantic to the nth degree would understand, it's fine,  In the baseball version, it was concentrating on statistics that hadn't always been appreciated, and then finding players on the cheap who were undervalued and who could provide those less popular but secretly useful skills.

So useful stats that other teams might not have picked up or value less - yes.
Cheap in terms of transfer fee and therefore "undervalued" - arguably.  Cheap in terms of wages - haven't seem it reported anywhere, so who knows.

Oh and I've seen the film and read the book before you ask!

Didn't it also involve coming up with a way of playing to suit those skills?  It's probably more applicable to cricket than football really. 

[KevinGage]

The Moneyball term is fine by me, it's a common term where dud signings have been made on the basis of stats taken out of context over ability and impact. Whether that be Gueye, Comolli's Dream XI or whoever.   

And baseball is fucking pish anyway.

[Dave]

The Moneyball term is fine by me, it's a common term where dud signings have been made on the basis of stats taken out of context over ability and impact.

It's only a common term in the above context when used by people who don't know what the word they're using means.

Hearing and using a word and not understanding it doesn't change the meaning of the word.

[Ads]

It will eventually loike.

[Sexual Ealing]

The Moneyball term is fine by me, it's a common term where dud signings have been made on the basis of stats taken out of context over ability and impact.

It's only a common term in the above context when used by people who don't know what the word they're using means.

Hearing and using a word and not understanding it doesn't change the meaning of the word.

I don't care, or know, about moneyball, but you're very wrong about that bit in bold. Language changes. The words decimate and enormity spring to mind. They're not used in the 'correct' way the vast majority of the times that they're used, but they are used. Which means that their meaning has changed.

[KevinGage]

Actually that's how the English language (and most other languages) progress.

Is crucial really cool?   Is cool trendy? 

The difference is we don't have anally retentive weather presenters coming on here (yet) making a defiant stand about it.

[Dave]

It will eventually loike.

True. I guess in five years Moneyball might be new "literally" or "awful".

But it doesn't mean that it should just be allowed to happen without a fight.

[Risso]

It's still not Moneyball no matter how often you say it.

And you care at least as much as me as your spending the same amount of time debating it as I am, difference is i'm right so ner ner.

Well, it's not baseball, and it's not a film about it, but as a term to describe as close a situation as is possible when a club buys an undervalued player based on stats they value, it's as accurate as you're going to get.  You're right in that most people misuse the term to either mean just looking at stats, or simply buying talented youngesters cheap.

[PeterWithesShin]

The Moneyball term is fine by me, it's a common term where dud signings have been made on the basis of stats taken out of context over ability and impact.

It's only a common term in the above context when used by people who don't know what the word they're using means.

Hearing and using a word and not understanding it doesn't change the meaning of the word.

I don't care, or know, about moneyball, but you're very wrong about that bit in bold. Language changes. The words decimate and enormity spring to mind. They're not used in the 'correct' way the vast majority of the times that they're used, but they are used. Which means that their meaning has changed.

Isn't the more common use of enormity influenced by the word enormous though rather than the meaning just evolved on its own?

Decimation i'll agree with although it did take a couple of thousand years for it to be used differently.

[Ads]

It will eventually loike.

True. I guess in five years Moneyball might be new "literally" or "awful".

But it doesn't mean that it should just be allowed to happen without a fight.

We will.fight them on the news paper comments section. On the Facebook, the Twitter and the message boards. We will never surrender.

[Sexual Ealing]

The Moneyball term is fine by me, it's a common term where dud signings have been made on the basis of stats taken out of context over ability and impact.

It's only a common term in the above context when used by people who don't know what the word they're using means.

Hearing and using a word and not understanding it doesn't change the meaning of the word.

I don't care, or know, about moneyball, but you're very wrong about that bit in bold. Language changes. The words decimate and enormity spring to mind. They're not used in the 'correct' way the vast majority of the times that they're used, but they are used. Which means that their meaning has changed.

Isn't the more common use of enormity influenced by the word enormous though rather than the meaning just evolved on its own?

Decimation i'll agree with although it did take a couple of thousand years for it to be used differently.

It originally had nothing to do with the word enormous (or if it did I guess the relationship worked in reverse).

[Toronto Villa]

The point is and I think Risso had touched on it, Moneyball or the principle of it is so much easier to apply to a sport like baseball that literally drowns in stats. While football has stats it is a far more fluid sport and doesn't have as many specific or defined parameters.