Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

TeaCider's Summer Transfer Thread 2022 - Land of Hoppe & Glory?


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Will said:

Volume of saves is not a good way to measure if a goalkeeper is good.

Is anything really? Maybe save percentages, but that would need an asterisk beside it given he has faced much better finishers than he will face at this level. 

Basically, stats are useless for this circumstance as we don't have a comparable season to judge him on in terms of quality of opponent. All we can go off really is his pedigree, which is about as strong as you can possibly ask for at our level. Does this guarantee he will be a success? Of course not, but that doesn't exist in football, especially not in lower levels where you are always signing players with flaws. But all the signs are excellent for me. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 25.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I appreciate people are going to dismiss my information and think I'm full of ****  but thought I would post this because of mixed reaction and comments which I fully understand where you are all comi

Sorry everyone, I can't go into too much detail atm with what I have been informed so that's why I'm not responding to everyone's posts. Larsen was there again today and trained. Not sure what th

When Scott came we were all dreaming of him finding a Pukki for us, a player who had seriously underwhelmed in his career before Norwich. Now we are having meltdowns because that is exactly what the C

Posted Images

8 minutes ago, Will said:

Volume of saves is not a good way to measure if a goalkeeper is good.

it is a good way to measure if a keeper is bad though. as we seen with lumley and bettinelli. everything goes past them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dynamo Kev said:

it is a good way to measure if a keeper is bad though. as we seen with lumley and bettinelli. everything goes past them.

Always thought Lumley made more saves than Bettinelli. Lumley made lots of self inflicted errors and didn’t save too many where as Bettinelli made less clangers but saved virtually nothing. Either way both atrocious goalkeepers. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dynamo Kev said:

it is a good way to measure if a keeper is bad though. as we seen with lumley and bettinelli. everything goes past them.

Is it? A goalkeeper can be terrible and still have a very high volume of saves, a goalkeeper can also be brilliant and have a lower number of saves. It literally doesn't tell us anything. Save % would be better, but still doesn't tell the whole story as @Neverbefore has said. The best measure I've seen is goals prevented, which is expected goals against minus actual goals against.

Of goalkeepers who had more than 30 appearances, Sam Johnstone had by a long way the fewest saves in the league, does that make him the worst keeper in the league? Just to circle back to save %, he also had a worse save % than Lumley but I'm sure we'd all agree that he is a far better goalkeeper than Lumley is.

In terms of saves per 90 to standardise for number of appearances, the highest is Luke Southwood, who Joe Lumley has just been brought in to replace...

Edited by Will
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Will said:

Is it? A goalkeeper can be terrible and still have a very high volume of saves, a goalkeeper can also be brilliant and have a lower number of saves. It literally doesn't tell us anything. Save % would be better, but still doesn't tell the whole story as @Neverbefore has said. The best measure I've seen is goals prevented, which is expected goals against minus actual goals against.

Of goalkeepers who had more than 30 appearances, Sam Johnstone had by a long way the fewest saves in the league, does that make him the worst keeper in the league? Just to circle back to save %, he also had a worse save % than Lumley but I'm sure we'd all agree that he is a far better goalkeeper than Lumley is.

is he? or is he just a flash in the pan. wasnt bettinelli on the verge of an england call a few years back. but we know he is awful now.

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dynamo Kev said:

is he? or is he just a flash in the pan. wasnt bettinelli on the verge of an england call a few years back. but we know he is awful now.

Is Sam Johnstone better than Joe Lumley? Is this a serious question?

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Will said:

Is Sam Johnstone better than Joe Lumley? Is this a serious question?

i'm not saying that am i. i'm saying is sam johnson also a bad keeper. and we are just assuming hes good because he was a few years back. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dynamo Kev said:

i'm not saying that am i. i'm saying is sam johnson also a bad keeper. and we are just assuming hes good because he was a few years back. 

I am saying he is good because I've seen him play plenty and he is good, and set to get a move to the Premier League off the back of being good..

Link to post
Share on other sites

just picked this off a palace forum. 

Reading wba forums, it's hard to see him coming in as our No. 1. In fact, he gets worse references than I would give Butland.

Kicking and command of his area seem the main criticisms. And being a mistake maker.

sooooo the stats say he had a bad season and the fans say he had a bad season.

does that make him as bad as lumley? NO thats surely not possible. lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

johnson probably is to. but hes gone to the prem on a bosman so must be good. i'd say if he was good then someone would have bought him. it doesnt really matter to us either way. Not saying your wrong will but the sats do tell a story. so i wouldnt write them off as being pointless.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dynamo Kev said:

just picked this off a palace forum. 

Reading wba forums, it's hard to see him coming in as our No. 1. In fact, he gets worse references than I would give Butland.

Kicking and command of his area seem the main criticisms. And being a mistake maker.

sooooo the stats say he had a bad season and the fans say he had a bad season.

does that make him as bad as lumley? NO thats surely not possible. lol

Do they? He had 15 clean sheets and only conceded 33 goals. The only stat that says he had a bad season is the one you want to believe means something in volume of saves made, which is a dreadful measure of how good a goalkeeper is. 

I'll give you an example to try and illustrate my point:

If goalkeeper X faces 200 shots and saves 50% of them he'd have 100 saves for the season.

If goalkeeper Y only faces 100 shots and saves 80% of them he'd have 80 saves for the season.

By your logic goalkeeper X has had the better season, despite letting in significantly more of the shots he's faced.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Will said:

Do they? He had 15 clean sheets and only conceded 33 goals. The only stat that says he had a bad season is the one you want to believe means something in volume of saves made, which is a dreadful measure of how good a goalkeeper is. 

I'll give you an example to try and illustrate my point:

If goalkeeper X faces 200 shots and saves 50% of them he'd have 100 saves for the season.

If goalkeeper Y only faces 100 shots and saves 80% of them he'd have 80 saves for the season.

By your logic goalkeeper X has had the better season, despite letting in significantly more of the shots he's faced.

yes i understand. i'm really not to arsed tbh. the baggies said he was *** so i think he probably is. the stats you just explained make sense thankyou. by volume i thought without paying much mind he let in a high volume of shots faced. meaning he wasnt very good at saving shots. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Will said:

Do they? He had 15 clean sheets and only conceded 33 goals. The only stat that says he had a bad season is the one you want to believe means something in volume of saves made, which is a dreadful measure of how good a goalkeeper is. 

I'll give you an example to try and illustrate my point:

If goalkeeper X faces 200 shots and saves 50% of them he'd have 100 saves for the season.

If goalkeeper Y only faces 100 shots and saves 80% of them he'd have 80 saves for the season.

By your logic goalkeeper X has had the better season, despite letting in significantly more of the shots he's faced.

I'd agree that % of shots saved is a better metric than number of shots saved.

However clean sheets & goals conceded can have a lot to do with the defence as well. A bad keeper can have a lot of clean sheets against their name if they're well protected by their back line.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Uwe changed the title to TeaCider's Summer Transfer Thread 2022 - Land of Hoppe & Glory?
  • Borodane changed the title to TeaCider's Summer Transfer Thread 2022 - It's a slow market...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...