Hargreaves - one signing too many?

Alex · 29th January 2008, 18:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plechazunga

Hang on cnutos, when I work out Hargreaves' figures according to ESPN's stats, I get:

Played 1050 mins, in which 20 have been scored and 6 let in.
That's one scored every 52.5 mins, one let in every 175

Still not as good as the team without him, but much better than stated before.

Good stat

Shotgun raisin · 29th January 2008, 18:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plechazunga

Hang on cnutos, when I work out Hargreaves' figures according to ESPN's stats, I get:

Played 1050 mins, in which 20 have been scored and 6 let in.
That's one scored every 52.5 mins, one let in every 175

Still not as good as the team without him, but much better than stated before.

I used the stats from the premierleague.com website and then used Skysports.com to fill in the gaps. These are the actim stats for Hargreaves in the Premiership so far (it's date, match number, opposition, final score, minutes played, goals scored, goal assists and so on, in that order). The last line gives 935 minutes played all season. Do ESPN include Champions Leagues games or something?

12 Aug 1 RE(H) 0-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.5 0
15 Aug 2 PO(A) 1-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -5634 6.5 0
19 Aug 3 MC(A) 0-1 90 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -8019 6.4 2
26 Aug 4 TH(H) 1-0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -3340 6.4 3
1 Sep 5 SU(H) 1-0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1180 6.4 3
15 Sep 6 EV(A) 1-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2243 6.4 0
23 Sep 7 CH(H) 2-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -5206 6.3 0
29 Sep 8 BC(A) 1-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -4817 6.2 0
6 Oct 9 WI(H) 4-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -7296 6.1 0
20 Oct 10 AV(A) 4-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -4990 6.1 0
27 Oct 11 MI(H) 4-1 65 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1430 6.0 5
3 Nov 12 AR(A) 2-2 90 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 683 6.0 1
11 Nov 13 BR(H) 2-0 76 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 6.0 3
24 Nov 14 BW(A) 0-1 90 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -283 6.0 2
3 Dec 15 FU(H) 2-0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 157 6.0 5
8 Dec 16 DC(H) 4-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1836 6.0 0
16 Dec 17 LI(A) 1-0 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 -2105 6.0 4
23 Dec 18 EV(H) 2-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -218 6.0 0
26 Dec 19 SU(A) 4-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -703 6.0 0
29 Dec 20 WH(A) 1-2 79 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -908 6.0 2
1 Jan 21 BC(H) 1-0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -405 6.0 1
12 Jan 22 NU(H) 6-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1131 5.9 0
19 Jan 23 RE(A) 2-0 69 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1340 5.9 3
30 Jan 24 PO(H) - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -156 5.9 0
935 0 1 6 0 0 1 0 0 3 34

Plechazunga · 29th January 2008, 19:00

Ah, that'll be it, I was including all competitions, but according to ESPN he's only played ten minutes in the CL anyway.

The two FA cup games do help his stats, because Ronaldo scored twice in the 11 minutes he was on against Villa. But having argued that stats tend to iron out such anomalies, I guess I'm going to have to swallow that one. Better slightly overrate Hargreaves than admit I was wrong...

Shotgun raisin · 29th January 2008, 19:14

Plechazunga says something spastic once every 32.3 posts but admits his mistakes only once every 155.9 posts.

The Rubberman posts something a bit retarded once every 0.3 posts. The context is mainly that he's a bit retarded.

Plechazunga · 29th January 2008, 19:18

Sam#1 · 29th January 2008, 19:42

My head hurts.

Surely this thread has now run it's course ?

Feedingseagulls · 29th January 2008, 19:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam#1

My head hurts.

Surely this thread has now run it's course ?

I suspect that will only happen a few years after OH has run his.

Bilbo · 29th January 2008, 19:54

My two pence, for what its worth.

I was at the Emirates when we played Arsenal earlier this season. I'm not a Hargreaves fanboy, but I do acknowledge the necessity of a good holding midfielder these days.

Anyway, Hargreaves was immense that day IMO. I know that Anderson got the media plaudits that day, but I thought Hargreaves was the major reason that we managed to contain Arsenal as well as we did. If he was wearing a Roy Keane costume the Cafe would have been drooling.

The benefit of a Hargreaves will hopefully be seen in the CL, when we are playing for a good away result, rather than against the likes of Birmingham at home, when his strengths clearly won't be apparent.

RedDevilCanuck · 29th January 2008, 19:55

Hargreaves has played decent and will get better. His passing isnt great but can run all day, make great tackles,intercept passes and bugger a dangerous player all game, he is here for our CL run lets judge this signing at season's end.
END THREAD.

djemba's arse · 29th January 2008, 20:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pogue Mahone

Our home record this season is awesome (just started a thread about it actually) and our away record ain't the best. Is this because Hargreaves has played in a lot of away games, or because the team, as a whole hasn't been firing away from home? Cause and effect, I suppose but my money's on the team under-performing. And that's enough games to skew the stats.

Hargreaves didn't play in any of our away games last season, and our away form was outstanding - picking up 42 out of a possible 57 points (2.2 points per game), winning 13 of our away games. This season we have taken 20 out of a possible 33 away from home (1.8 points per game), not that bad - but at the end of the season this will mean we have picked up 8 points less on our travels if things continue.

Not saying this indicates that "Hargreaves is shit", but at least it shows we are able to do well away from home (in the premier league) without him (in fact, you would have to go as far back as the 02/03 season to find one where our away form was worse than it is now).

(disclaimer: feel free to do the maths yourselves, I wouldn't rule out my maths being wrong here

)
Source: http://www.premierleague.com/page/St...,12306,00.html

Nucks · 29th January 2008, 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plechazunga

No, that's the whole point of statistics like this, they tend to iron out unusual or extraordinary factors. Their usefulness lies in the fact that they allow you to avoid having to go through each game's conditions and opposition etc. on a case by case basis.

If I told you Ronaldo had scored at least one goal in 70% of the games he's played this season, you wouldn't then go through every game, checking the quality of the opposition, in order to establish whether that meant he'd been in good goalscoring form this season. Whereas if I presented the same evidence based on one game where he'd got a hat-trick, you would.

The Hargreaves stat, as Shotgun said, is too divergent from the figure showing games without him to just dismiss out of hand. It's suggestive at the very least.

Your example is completely different. You can't draw any sort of rational conclusion when comparing two players in such a way. Making a comment about goal scoring is a statement of fact. Player X has scored Y number of goals is a fact. Now, if you tried to draw conclusions on Rooney vs Tevez this season based JUST on goal scoring then you are starting to tread in the same water this other guy is.

There are just WAY too many factors for his "stats" to be used in a comparative manner between two players. You can't take stats like that without defining the commonalities and measuring with them in mind.

What if Tevez only gets to play when it is a down pour and the pitch is sloppy and he scores 8 all season while Rooney only plays when it is sunny and the pitch is fast and firm and he scores 20.

Someone can come along and say, Rooney played X number of games and scored 20, Tevez played Y number of games and scored 8. Then they draw their conclusions.

Nucks · 29th January 2008, 20:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by djemba's arse

Hargreaves didn't play in any of our away games last season, and our away form was outstanding - picking up 42 out of a possible 57 points (2.2 points per game), winning 13 of our away games. This season we have taken 20 out of a possible 33 away from home (1.8 points per game), not that bad - but at the end of the season this will mean we have picked up 8 points less on our travels if things continue.

Not saying this indicates that "Hargreaves is shit", but at least it shows we are able to do well away from home (in the premier league) without him (in fact, you would have to go as far back as the 02/03 season to find one where our away form was worse than it is now).

(disclaimer: feel free to do the maths yourselves, I wouldn't rule out my maths being wrong here

)
Source: http://www.premierleague.com/page/St...,12306,00.html

Remind me quickly.

How many games did Ronaldo miss at the start of last season? How many did Scholes miss at the the first half of last season? How many did Rooney miss the first half of last season?

Do me a favor and do the math on that.

I'd be interested to see how many games 3 of our most important offensive players missed cumulatively this season compared to last.

Eyepopper · 29th January 2008, 20:45

Surely people think Fergie.....

ahhhh fuck it, whats the point!

djemba's arse · 29th January 2008, 20:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nucks

Remind me quickly.

How many games did Ronaldo miss at the start of last season? How many did Scholes miss at the the first half of last season? How many did Rooney miss the first half of last season?

Well, both Rooney and Scholes missed the first three games of last season due to suspension. Scholes missed much of the final half of the 05/06 season (and unless my mind is playing tricks on me, so did Rooney due to injury..?). In any case, I'm just saying our away form has been very good the last couple of seasons.

When saying that Hargreaves has played mostly away games, hence making sense of why we might have picked up fewer points with him in the side, I felt our away form in the last couple of season would be relevant to the discussion.

Ekeke · 29th January 2008, 21:01

"We've played better this season when Hargreaves hasn't been in the side."

Alex · 29th January 2008, 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by djemba's arse

Well, both Rooney and Scholes missed the first three games of last season due to suspension. Scholes missed much of the final half of the 05/06 season (and unless my mind is playing tricks on me, so did Rooney due to injury..?). In any case, I'm just saying our away form has been very good the last couple of seasons.

When saying that Hargreaves has played mostly away games, hence making sense of why we might have picked up fewer points with him in the side, I felt our away form in the last couple of season would be relevant to the discussion.

Not the first 3, Rooney had a brace in the opener v. Fulham

djemba's arse · 29th January 2008, 21:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

Not the first 3, Rooney had a brace in the opener v. Fulham

You're right, they didn't start their sentence until a couple of games in.

Mozza · 30th January 2008, 00:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilbo

If he was wearing a Roy Keane costume the Cafe would have been drooling.

I'd have been wondering about why Keano had lost the ability to pass

Plechazunga · 30th January 2008, 01:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nucks

Your example is completely different. You can't draw any sort of rational conclusion when comparing two players in such a way. Making a comment about goal scoring is a statement of fact. Player X has scored Y number of goals is a fact. Now, if you tried to draw conclusions on Rooney vs Tevez this season based JUST on goal scoring then you are starting to tread in the same water this other guy is.

There are just WAY too many factors for his "stats" to be used in a comparative manner between two players. You can't take stats like that without defining the commonalities and measuring with them in mind.

What if Tevez only gets to play when it is a down pour and the pitch is sloppy and he scores 8 all season while Rooney only plays when it is sunny and the pitch is fast and firm and he scores 20.

Someone can come along and say, Rooney played X number of games and scored 20, Tevez played Y number of games and scored 8. Then they draw their conclusions.

Re my Ronaldo example, I wasn't saying there'd be any debate about how many goals he'd scored, I was saying that by your lights, in order to infer from the number of goals whether he was in good form, you'd have to go though every goal and check what opposition it was against, whether it was a fluke, etc.

As it happens, I was actually talking bollocks - although you didn't work out the reason why it was bollocks, which is that Hargreaves hasn't played enough games to serve as a decent sample. I assumed he'd started more than 12 games, that's not a big enough sample size to effectively iron out the unusual features of each game. When he's played 100 games though, if we're still letting in more and creating less than we are without him over the same period, that will be very good evidence that he's making us play worse.

Same goes for your point about Rooney and Tevez, if your sample size is 3 games, then yes it's perfectly possible that the results are distorted by the fact that Rooney's was in a 4-5-1 in the rain against Arsenal, Chelsea and Milan. If your sample size is reasonable, then it will iron out factors like opposition and weather and be a good guide to how effective the players are.

sincher · 30th January 2008, 01:12

Let's face it. Hargreaves is a decent addition to the squad, but we were stiffed by Bayern for price. He's roughly at the level of Flamini, only injured a lot more often.

Plechazunga · 30th January 2008, 01:19

That's right

Although, I still maintain Flamini's shit, and will do until he carries on being really good for about 3 more seasons, at which time I'll change my mind, just as he begins to turn shit again.

CnutOfAllCnuts · 30th January 2008, 01:21

Can someone make a quick summary of this thread, please...?

GusHiddink · 30th January 2008, 01:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by sincher

Let's face it. Hargreaves is a decent addition to the squad, but we were stiffed by Bayern for price. He's roughly at the level of Flamini, only injured a lot more often.

I struggle to think who else would have paid that for him. Didnt get the impression there were many after him..nor that he wanted to go elsewhere. Someone should have a word with our negotiating team. We cant have flown over there with a figure anywhere near 17million in our heads. Madness but hey. Carrick at least there was the arguement that spurs are in the same league and therefore there is a more direct impact and they should be compensated for strengthening their "rivals"

sincher · 30th January 2008, 01:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plechazunga

That's right

Although, I still maintain Flamini's shit, and will do until he carries on being really good for about 3 more seasons, at which time I'll change my mind, just as he begins to turn shit again.

He's not shit. Do you actually watch any other teams at all?

Plechazunga · 30th January 2008, 01:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by sincher

He's not shit. Do you actually watch any other teams at all?

He was shit. Shittish. Now he's playing well...the cnut.

No, not really, unless they're playing United or I happen to be in the pub. I go to the odd Sunderland game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CnutOfAllCnuts

Can someone make a quick summary of this thread, please...?

He's Owen Hargreaves.

Wes · 30th January 2008, 01:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by CnutOfAllCnuts

Can someone make a quick summary of this thread, please...?

Carrick>Hargreaves

Johnno · 30th January 2008, 02:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by WesBrownIsAGod

Carrick>Hargreaves

Retard>WesBrownIsAGod

peterstorey · 30th January 2008, 02:37

FlaminiIsAGod (compared to Carrick or Hargreaves and he only cost £1M)

29th January 2008, 19:00	#1003 (permalink)
Plechazunga Phones, soup, paint and chairs are troubling. Join Date: May 2003 Location: In the principality is chief executive of David evroshampiona Gil. Posts: 49,809	Ah, that'll be it, I was including all competitions, but according to ESPN he's only played ten minutes in the CL anyway. The two FA cup games do help his stats, because Ronaldo scored twice in the 11 minutes he was on against Villa. But having argued that stats tend to iron out such anomalies, I guess I'm going to have to swallow that one. Better slightly overrate Hargreaves than admit I was wrong...

29th January 2008, 19:14	#1004 (permalink)
Shotgun raisin Reserve Team Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: the path of the Mean Posts: 2,664	Plechazunga says something spastic once every 32.3 posts but admits his mistakes only once every 155.9 posts. The Rubberman posts something a bit retarded once every 0.3 posts. The context is mainly that he's a bit retarded.

29th January 2008, 19:18	#1005 (permalink)
Plechazunga Phones, soup, paint and chairs are troubling. Join Date: May 2003 Location: In the principality is chief executive of David evroshampiona Gil. Posts: 49,809

29th January 2008, 19:42	#1006 (permalink)
Sam#1 First Team Regular Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Leroy Lita Posts: 14,087	My head hurts. Surely this thread has now run it's course ?

29th January 2008, 19:54	#1008 (permalink)
Bilbo First Team Sub Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 5,777	My two pence, for what its worth. I was at the Emirates when we played Arsenal earlier this season. I'm not a Hargreaves fanboy, but I do acknowledge the necessity of a good holding midfielder these days. Anyway, Hargreaves was immense that day IMO. I know that Anderson got the media plaudits that day, but I thought Hargreaves was the major reason that we managed to contain Arsenal as well as we did. If he was wearing a Roy Keane costume the Cafe would have been drooling. The benefit of a Hargreaves will hopefully be seen in the CL, when we are playing for a good away result, rather than against the likes of Birmingham at home, when his strengths clearly won't be apparent.

29th January 2008, 19:55	#1009 (permalink)
RedDevilCanuck Reserve Team Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Decent mix between America and Britain. Posts: 1,407	Hargreaves has played decent and will get better. His passing isnt great but can run all day, make great tackles,intercept passes and bugger a dangerous player all game, he is here for our CL run lets judge this signing at season's end. END THREAD.

29th January 2008, 20:45	#1013 (permalink)
Eyepopper First Team Regular Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Lowering the Tone since 2006 Posts: 16,918	Surely people think Fergie..... ahhhh fuck it, whats the point!

29th January 2008, 21:01	#1015 (permalink)
Ekeke McFuckwit Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 6,915	"We've played better this season when Hargreaves hasn't been in the side."

30th January 2008, 01:12	#1020 (permalink)
sincher Les jeux sont Fait Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: YSC Posts: 14,156	Let's face it. Hargreaves is a decent addition to the squad, but we were stiffed by Bayern for price. He's roughly at the level of Flamini, only injured a lot more often.

30th January 2008, 01:19	#1021 (permalink)
Plechazunga Phones, soup, paint and chairs are troubling. Join Date: May 2003 Location: In the principality is chief executive of David evroshampiona Gil. Posts: 49,809	That's right Although, I still maintain Flamini's shit, and will do until he carries on being really good for about 3 more seasons, at which time I'll change my mind, just as he begins to turn shit again.

30th January 2008, 01:21	#1022 (permalink)
CnutOfAllCnuts Bald Boring Cnut Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 21,096	Can someone make a quick summary of this thread, please...?

30th January 2008, 02:37	#1028 (permalink)
peterstorey Winner of the 'Most pompous arrogant pretentious Gooner' title 2004 Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Happy those, who can remain at Highbury! Posts: 9,211	FlaminiIsAGod (compared to Carrick or Hargreaves and he only cost £1M)