RE: [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages

I think they got relegated. _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LEESE Matthew Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 2:46 PM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages Jeremy - can you find out what happened t

Re: [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages

But you have to admit, there is a very strong relationship. Don't worry about the anomolies. They aren't important. Bear in mind also that wages are not a perfect analogue for player quality, which is the real determinant of league position. A great players can join a club on 30k a week but he

Re: [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages

I'll shout it this time so it gets heard: I'VE ONLY GOT DATA FOR ONE SEASON. THE AUTHOR OF SOCCERNOMICS HAS DONE ANALYSIS ON MORE YEARS OF DATA On 20 December 2011 14:59, Paul Crowe wrote: > Thanks Steve but this is only for last season, what about previous > seasons? > > ** ** > > Paul C

FW: [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages

Sorry I got the results for the Wolves the wrong way round and I did not delete Blackpool, corrected table below. Dear Steve, I found these figures on the web from Deloitte's annual football report for season 2009 to 2010, the season before your figures. Results as follows: Team

RE: [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages

Dear Steve, I found these figures on the web from Deloitte's annual football report for season 2009 to 2010, the season before your figures. Results as follows: Team..League Rank...Wage Rank...Difference Burnley. .18..191 Fulham.

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Because if teams started doing it thyen it would be represented in the figures. However they don't so it seems that all premier league managers have similar levels of skill On 20 December 2011 15:00, LEESE Matthew wrote: > ** > But if 90% of it were explained by manager's wages, where does that

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Anomolies are to be expected. It's part of life. Most things in life follow what is called a normal distribution, often known as the bell curve. You get a lot of cases around the average and then a few outliers. The outliers could be caused by a range of factors but it's perfectly reasonable to

RE: [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages

Thanks Steve but this is only for last season, what about previous seasons? Paul Crowe Sales Manager - Asia Pacific ConTech (Sydney Office) PO Box 3517 Rhodes Waterside Rhodes NSW 2138 Tel: 02 97396636 Fax: 02 97396542 Mob: 0406009562 Email:

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

This is the equivalent of trying to prove that smoking isn't bad for you by claiming that your grandfather smoked sixty a day and lived to be 100. We're not talking about Mick being a non-league manager. He is competent and experienced. Also if we got rid of him we're not replacing him with Ferg

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Voodoo then. However, I have backed them up with Steve's figures, 2 anomaly's from last season and at least 4 anomaly's so far this season. Not very conclusive at all! Paul Crowe Sales Manager - Asia Pacific ConTech (Sydney Office) PO Box 3517 Rhodes Waterside Rhodes NSW 2138 T

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Depends on him having a certain level of competence but yes, United should finish third, plus or minus a couple of spots On 20 December 2011 14:05, LEESE Matthew wrote: > ** > Do you believe that if you took Man United and replaced Ferguson with a > manager from a non League club (a more realis

RE: [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages

Jeremy - can you find out what happened to West Ham last season please. From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Steven Millward Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 2:36 PM To: nswolves Subject: [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages

RE: [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages

I'm sure if you applied the same to manager/coach wages over the lifetime of the Premiership you would see a high correlation between the teams that have spent the most on these wages and league position, proving that (assuming the better the manager/coach the more their value in a free market)

[NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages

Here's the wages data that Paul Crowe asked for, It's more or less the same as the data I have already shared. West Ham is an outlier and linear regression is not robust so you get a stronger r-squared when you take it out. God knows what happened to them last season -- Boo! Thick Mick Out.

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

If you can't back up your claims with numbers Paul they can only be one of two things - gut feel or voodoo. Which is it? From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Crowe Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 2:30 PM To: nswolve

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Steve, It is not my gut feel. I was using your figures from last season and also applied them to the season so far. I am not convinced, please send me your Professor's spreadsheet so I can study your claims? Thanks in advance Dopameine Deficient Crowe Paul Crowe Sales Manager

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Do you believe that if you took Man United and replaced Ferguson with a manager from a non League club (a more realistic proposal than Marcus' month each in charge for designated fans) that Man United would still finish in the top 3 of the Premiership? From: nsw

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew [sec=unclassified] [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Yes, so using this theory: West Brom are 8 places above where they should be Liverpool are 2 places below where they should be Same man responsible for both. Is he a good manager or a bad manager? On 20 December 2011 08:08, Morris, Lee SGT wrote: > ** > > *UNCLASSIFIED* > So using this theor

Re: [NSWolves] Climate change

Yeah, its generally called 'Climate Change' now, because the scientists and statiticians who were previously calling it 'Global Warming' couldnt explain why temperatures have been going down in recent years, and so rather than reconsider their own belief system, changed its name instead. On Tue,

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

It might even be that managers work at local club level and even in some of the lower divisions in England, which is where you have seen results and formed opinions. My analysis is only on the Premier league where money is bigger. It's just that another 5m of player wages completely negates the i

Re: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Nothing. I showed you a table that showed that 18 of 20 teams were within 3 places of the forecast and 15 were within 2 places. There is an element of luck and other factors in this as I explained in my earlier response to Matt. It's not a perfect model but it explains 90% of variability. On

Re: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

ok, let's see how much you trust your statistics. How much are you willing to place on a bet that Wolves will finish exactly fourth from bottom? On 20/12/2011, at 10:20 , Steven Millward wrote: > See you're trying to discredit me by the absurd. The last bastion of a > scoundrel. > > I say

Re: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

See you're trying to discredit me by the absurd. The last bastion of a scoundrel. I say there is a need for a manager to do the things that managers do, but that beyond a certain level of competence and experience there is very little difference in the influence they have on performance. We need

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

I can't quantify the importance of a manager either. However, in statistics there is something called "explanation of variance". When building a predictive model you can understand how much variance you can explain (league position) by the factors that drive it (just wages for me" In pure scienc

Re: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

you are correct that insurance is very heavily dependant on statistics for assessing and pricing for risks. However, I am not an actuary and my role for the best part of 17 years has been to challenge actuaries to ensure that my products are affordable and sustainable, in effect disproving many

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Wages are quantifiable and can therefore be used to present figures to support an argument. A manager/coach's ability is less tangible/quantifiable and so its difficult to present an argument for their importance that is backed by numbers. The fact that they have for many years been seen as such

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Look chaps I've got a football coaching ticket and I'm packed ready to lead the charge for 60 k a year and your input we could lead the boys back to glory ! We are Wolves Sent from my iPhone On 20/12/2011, at 9:41 AM, Steven Millward wrote: > As I said: > > There is random error when you lo

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

As I said: There is random error when you look at football over a short term due to refereeing decision, who plays who etc. If you get 20 friends and ask them to toss coins 15 times, some people will have more than 10 heads and some people will have fewer than 5 heads. Over a larger number of th

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

It's not that strange a cultural phenomenon. the top brass cover their backsides by perpetuating the myth that the manager is to blame and that all is well within the hallowed walls of the boardroom. _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Steven

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

I'm saying that the difference between a competent mamanger and a great manager is very small. As most managers are competent and have their coaching badges then there is little upside from having a better one in the *current system*. If there was a salary and transfer cap then management would b

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

What about this season? Sent via BlackBerry® from Telstra -Original Message- From: Steven Millward Sender: nswolves@googlegroups.com Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 09:22:34 To: Reply-To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew Yes but Paul, a professor of economi

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

If managers/coaches have so little impact on the success of a football team why do clubs across the world, at all levels of the game, put so much importance on them and strive to appoint the best available? Are you saying that the collective world of football administration is wrong and should b

Re: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Interesting point of view from someone that works in insurance, an industry that is entirely based on the statistical pricing of risk. Please take the stats I have presented and make them support your agenda. I can send you the spreadsheet if you want to have a go. I understand it must be confron

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Yes but Paul, a professor of economics did the analysis over 20 years and found an even stronger relationship. The facts are there. If you have similarly strong facts to dispute it then please share them but your gut feel doesn't count. Mick outperformed resources, hence Wolves are in the top ha

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

So Tony Abbott according to his figures. Hang on, so's Julia Gillard. From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Tonks Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 9:00 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [NSWolves] Welcome

RE: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

O that is such a pathetic cop out. Get real! Boo, optipessioptipessimistic Turncrowet out! _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Crowe Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 8:56 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [NSWolves] K

RE: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Why bother with a manager when they have so little impact on the the way the team plays and the result of games? If we got rid of Mick and all the coaching staff we should be able to use their wages to pay the wages of better players and therefore improve our results and league position. The st

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

But Mattie, he's right! _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LEESE Matthew Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 8:56 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew Less gullible? _ From: nswolves

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

How well does the cloth cap fit, Roger? _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rog & Reet Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 8:54 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew Why aren't the great man's teachin

RE: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

For MM (come on Lee - WHO IS YOUR SUITABLE REPLACEMENT THAT HAPPENS TO BE AVAILABLE?) Don't really care but I do think we do better without him. We should shore up midfield in Jan Yes we need another quality striker. Who's coming out on loan? Is Tevez available? JT (The Tevez question was

RE: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

I really loved MM and am very thankful for his hard work and what he has done for the Club but it is time for a change. I do not think he is the man to take us forward. MM out!! Don't care who the replacement is as I know the Board will choose the best person available. Paul Crowe Sales M

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Less gullible? From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Rog & Reet Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 8:54 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew Why aren't the great man's teachings seepi

[NSWolves] Climate change

This is what I was reading. it's seriously laughable - especially when you actually read the original research. The press release is a total fabrication! http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/research/2011/28JacobsWalnut.html _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroup

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Why aren't the great man's teachings seeping in on here? Would you be implying we're even thicker than MMers? From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jeremy Tonks Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 8:12 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [NSWolves

RE: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED Thats right, lets have our own poll then. For MM = Against MM (I'm against but only if a suitable replacement is available) Should Henry be our first choice defensive midfielder = Should we sign someone specifically to replace him (I think we need someone better in his position)

RE: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Guess what I'm reading on line at the moment Marcus. _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Marcus Chantry Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 8:40 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Re: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Stats can be made to support any agenda that a person wants to push. Climate Change is the perfect example of how both sides can manipulate statistics to support their own agenda. On 20/12/2011, at 08:36 , Jeremy Tonks wrote: > You’ve missed the point Lee ;) > > How much is he being paid?

RE: [NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

You've missed the point Lee ;) How much is he being paid? I'm not sure 1 game without him this season gives us any statistical validity?! I think I'd like to see which games he missed (as in opponents) as well. _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups

[NSWolves] Karl Henry Stats [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED Whilst on the subject of statistics, did anyone else see the Karl Henry stats on Mol Mix? Are these stats too much of a coincidence 2010-2011 - With Karl Henry P28 ( + 1 sub ) W7 ( 21 points ) D6 ( 6 points ) L16 Pts: 27 2010-2011 - Without Karl Henry P9 W4 ( 12 points )

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew [sec=unclassified] [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

I'm not going to put Sunderland in that basket for a few more weeks yet. .and the wages statistics still tell me that Sh*te will fall on their collective backsides sooner rather than later :-) _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Morris,

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew [sec=unclassified] [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED There lies the problem because first the Baggies and now Sunderland have nicked the obvious candidates...we have dithered too much IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Department of Defence and is subject to the jurisdiction of section 70 of the Crimes Act 1914. If

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew [sec=unclassified] [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

You raise good points Lee but you fail in the usual way. just who is it that is going to replace MM? _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Morris, Lee SGT Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 8:09 AM To: nswolves@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: [

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

As I read the Molmix thread it appears that some of the great guru's teachings might be seeping into some thickish heads :-) _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Steven Millward Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2011 6:31 AM To: nswolves@googleg

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Now Paul brings us into the other 10%. He raises the spectre of dithering administration over an extended period of time and the tendency to chop and change. I seem to remember us being within 1 or 2 places of promotion on numerous occasions in those big spending Chumpionship days. I don't think

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew [sec=unclassified] [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

UNCLASSIFIED So using this theory, West Brom are 8 places above where they should be, simply because they found a bloody good manager to replace the dross they had previoulsyI rest my case. Again using West Brom as an example, we were just about on equal terms when they appointed their curre

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

Morning Steve, Are you winding us up? Or do you seriously believe "There's no room to say that management is important and Mick is a bad manager because the facts don't support it". Even in your listed figures for last season there are some major anomaly's like West Brom (difference 8) and

RE: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

You're in the wrong job Steve. Oh, wait a minute. Couldn't have said it better myself. In fact I couldn't have said that at all. But you are, of course, 97% correct. JT _ From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Steven Millward Sent: Tu

Re: [NSWolves] Welcome Back Matthew

I've taken my points on to Molineux Mix if anyone's interested http://molineuxmix.co.uk/vb/showthread.php?t=66061 Here's some more interesting data in the table below. League rank is the position that the team finished in the league Wage rank is the position forecast by wages You'll notice that