In two great books.. "Soccernomics" and "The Numbers Game" the authors laid out with enormous data research what works in the transfer market....
1. Buy players age 20-23. They are old enough to be formed but still cheap. They also have the best sell-on values and are the best bang for the buck with the best upside.
2. Don't let managers run the transfer budget. On average the managers last 1.3 seasons and thus it becomes a merry go round of short term transfers and re-loading. Get a Director of Football to run it and think long-term.
3. Sell players around age 28-30, even if they are popular. You get the best value and sell before everyone else figures out that statistically players peak at age 27. Old players on long contracts kill clubs.
4. Focus on defense more than forwards. Adding one goal in a match increases table points 1.1 per match. Stopping one goal adds 1.4. The conventional wisdom is wrong. Defense actually matters more than offense.
5. When you sell a good older player, take that money and buy a few good younger ones. Repeat. Over and over.
6. Bring up through the academy. Investing in the academy has returns much, much, much higher than incoming transfers. And academy players fit in culturally quicker.
This makes sense to me and I wish we would do it. Cousins, Pope, Lookman, Konsa... that would have been a great core for the future.
I'm not sure its a case of too much money so much as, at his age and given his potential, he hasn't given up on breaking through at Chelsea eventually. At least I would hope h has that ambition.
I'm not sure its a case of too much money so much as, at his age and given his potential, he hasn't given up on breaking through at Chelsea eventually. At least I would hope h has that ambition.
Chelsea fans apparently put him above Ashley Cole at the same age.
In two great books.. "Soccernomics" and "The Numbers Game" the authors laid out with enormous data research what works in the transfer market....
1. Buy players age 20-23. They are old enough to be formed but still cheap. They also have the best sell-on values and are the best bang for the buck with the best upside.
2. Don't let managers run the transfer budget. On average the managers last 1.3 seasons and thus it becomes a merry go round of short term transfers and re-loading. Get a Director of Football to run it and think long-term.
3. Sell players around age 28-30, even if they are popular. You get the best value and sell before everyone else figures out that statistically players peak at age 27. Old players on long contracts kill clubs.
4. Focus on defense more than forwards. Adding one goal in a match increases table points 1.1 per match. Stopping one goal adds 1.4. The conventional wisdom is wrong. Defense actually matters more than offense.
5. When you sell a good older player, take that money and buy a few good younger ones. Repeat. Over and over.
6. Bring up through the academy. Investing in the academy has returns much, much, much higher than incoming transfers. And academy players fit in culturally quicker.
This makes sense to me and I wish we would do it. Cousins, Pope, Lookman, Konsa... that would have been a great core for the future.
I'm not sure its a case of too much money so much as, at his age and given his potential, he hasn't given up on breaking through at Chelsea eventually. At least I would hope h has that ambition.
Chelsea fans apparently put him above Ashley Cole at the same age.
I really think he'll be special
Would they have seen Cole much at that age? He was at Arsenal.
Is it not standard for the player to return in the event of injury anyway?
In reality money is not the issue if injured (i.e. RD can afford it whether he likes it or not), the small squad with inadequate replacements are the issues when considering players with injury records added to lack of emergency loans to cover even if we can send him back and save in wages.
I'm not sure its a case of too much money so much as, at his age and given his potential, he hasn't given up on breaking through at Chelsea eventually. At least I would hope h has that ambition.
Chelsea fans apparently put him above Ashley Cole at the same age.
I really think he'll be special
Would they have seen Cole much at that age? He was at Arsenal.
I agree but that's what I read. Perhaps it referred to cole when he joined Chelsea. All I know is he's extremely highly thought of.
In two great books.. "Soccernomics" and "The Numbers Game" the authors laid out with enormous data research what works in the transfer market....
1. Buy players age 20-23. They are old enough to be formed but still cheap. They also have the best sell-on values and are the best bang for the buck with the best upside. True but very simplistic as most clubs now try to do this. Young, English players have shot up in value in the last 2-3 years so it is very very difficult without excellent scouting
2. Don't let managers run the transfer budget. On average the managers last 1.3 seasons and thus it becomes a merry go round of short term transfers and re-loading. Get a Director of Football to run it and think long-term. What happens if you pick the wrong Director of Football?
3. Sell players around age 28-30, even if they are popular. You get the best value and sell before everyone else figures out that statistically players peak at age 27. Old players on long contracts kill clubs. Like Yann?
4. Focus on defense more than forwards. Adding one goal in a match increases table points 1.1 per match. Stopping one goal adds 1.4. The conventional wisdom is wrong. Defense actually matters more than offense. Maybe, but most promoted teams have a goal scorer who has scored over 20 goals I reckon, and currently we don't have one of those and to get one will cost money (although have not checked stats).
5. When you sell a good older player, take that money and buy a few good younger ones. Repeat. Over and over. Creating constant churn and no settled side?
6. Bring up through the academy. Investing in the academy has returns much, much, much higher than incoming transfers. And academy players fit in culturally quicker. The second part I certainly agree with. The first part was the way forwards until EPPP killed it for clubs with less than a CAT1 academy as have the crazy money contracts handed to kids who have never played by PL teams nowadays. I would be interested to know how much Charlton have made from having a very good (in English Football terms) academy in the last, say, 10 years NET of all operating costs.
This makes sense to me and I wish we would do it. Cousins, Pope, Lookman, Konsa... that would have been a great core for the future. Indeed (and add Gomez, Palmer, Solly, Fox, Harriott, it would have been easy top Championship), but in modern UK football the best will always be whisked away with a huge contract we and other FL teams can't match given the massive disparities now in the game.
For reasons I put above I am not sure I buy money ball completely. There are truths in buying young and having an excelling CAT1 category but didn't Huddersfield just prove the way to do it is to get a young coach well connected with the Chelsea manager and loan their best kids in for the season with a few other top PL kids alongside on loan then spend a little money filling the gaps?
It would be interesting to see the net profit from our academy, especially if you discount Lookman as not really a product of the academy, nor Fox (did he join at 16?). Aribo is definitely not, and neither was Pope
In two great books.. "Soccernomics" and "The Numbers Game" the authors laid out with enormous data research what works in the transfer market....
1. Buy players age 20-23. They are old enough to be formed but still cheap. They also have the best sell-on values and are the best bang for the buck with the best upside.
2. Don't let managers run the transfer budget. On average the managers last 1.3 seasons and thus it becomes a merry go round of short term transfers and re-loading. Get a Director of Football to run it and think long-term.
3. Sell players around age 28-30, even if they are popular. You get the best value and sell before everyone else figures out that statistically players peak at age 27. Old players on long contracts kill clubs.
4. Focus on defense more than forwards. Adding one goal in a match increases table points 1.1 per match. Stopping one goal adds 1.4. The conventional wisdom is wrong. Defense actually matters more than offense.
5. When you sell a good older player, take that money and buy a few good younger ones. Repeat. Over and over.
6. Bring up through the academy. Investing in the academy has returns much, much, much higher than incoming transfers. And academy players fit in culturally quicker.
This makes sense to me and I wish we would do it. Cousins, Pope, Lookman, Konsa... that would have been a great core for the future.
What a load of old cr*p. I will debunk that with just 2 points.
Two of our best strikers ever (Hales & Mendonca) were both aged around 30 when they joined us (or in the case of Killer, when he re-joined us)
You have to score goals to win games. Keep 46 clean sheets, but never score a goal will give you 46 points & very possibly relegation.
Scottish centre half we're linked with on twitter, forgotten his name sorry think he plays for Partrick Thistle
Liam Lindsay. Would be awesome signing. Is just 21, the only non-Celtic, non-Aberdeen player to make the 2016-17 team of the season. Leeds were going to snag until Monk left. Apparently Thistle will sell to the first team to offer £750k. Would be a good long-term solution.
What a load of old cr*p. I will debunk that with just 2 points.
Two of our best strikers ever (Hales & Mendonca) were both aged around 30 when they joined us (or in the case of Killer, when he re-joined us)
You have to score goals to win games. Keep 46 clean sheets, but never score a goal will give you 46 points & very possibly relegation.
Well, 20 years of data across the leagues are not usually "debunked" by two examples from one club from years ago.
So let's look at this rationally...
First, name the last 30-year old to lead the PL or Championship or L1 in scoring? Now compare that to how many under age 27 lead in scoring. Or even under 25? It's not really close.
Second, your theory of "don't score, have 46 table points and relegation".... on the other hand... if you score one and give up two every game, you have zero table points and CERTAIN relegation.
The facts... and they really are facts... is that each additional goal NOT given up adds more table points than scoring one more. If you don't like that... well... sorry. It stands as a fact whether you like the idea or not.
The idea is that since defense wins more than offense and defensive players are much cheaper, clubs can get more players that make a real difference for LESS money that way, and have it pay off in the table. Since we will NEVER have the transfer budget of the top 6 clubs, even if/when we make the PL, this is data worth noting if we ever want to play above our weight.
The points I made are based on the analysis of every season in the last 20 seasons (throught 2013) and all clubs by academia who use science to calculate the date. I tend to like and appreciate data based on long studies more than anecdotal theories.
If he has one year left on his Chelsea contract and we would get him on loan, that essentially means Chelsea is giving up on him. So why not just buy him now?
Dasilva is listed as having a value of £213k on Transfermarkt. That site is often quite far off in its values, but even if it is off by 100%, would find it well worth getting him for £400-500k, imho.
What a load of old cr*p. I will debunk that with just 2 points.
Two of our best strikers ever (Hales & Mendonca) were both aged around 30 when they joined us (or in the case of Killer, when he re-joined us)
You have to score goals to win games. Keep 46 clean sheets, but never score a goal will give you 46 points & very possibly relegation.
Well, 20 years of data across the leagues are not usually "debunked" by two examples from one club from years ago.
So let's look at this rationally...
First, name the last 30-year old to lead the PL or Championship or L1 in scoring? Now compare that to how many under age 27 lead in scoring. Or even under 25? It's not really close.
Second, your theory of "don't score, have 46 table points and relegation".... on the other hand... if you score one and give up two every game, you have zero table points and CERTAIN relegation.
The facts... and they really are facts... is that each additional goal NOT given up adds more table points than scoring one more. If you don't like that... well... sorry. It stands as a fact whether you like the idea or not.
The idea is that since defense wins more than offense and defensive players are much cheaper, clubs can get more players that make a real difference for LESS money that way, and have it pay off in the table. Since we will NEVER have the transfer budget of the top 6 clubs, even if/when we make the PL, this is data worth noting if we ever want to play above our weight.
The points I made are based on the analysis of every season in the last 20 seasons (throught 2013) and all clubs by academia who use science to calculate the date. I tend to like and appreciate data based on long studies more than anecdotal theories.
All coaches that I know in football, hockey, rugby union and Aussie reels always concentrate on defending i.e. Not conceding. This is at most senior levels
Ironic that there is an advert for a snoring remedy at the foot of that article.
Better value than a season ticket at this rate
You know that ads come up relating to what you've searched right? Does the Mrs have access to your laptop? Perhaps you're keeping her up all night for the wrong reasons.
In two great books.. "Soccernomics" and "The Numbers Game" the authors laid out with enormous data research what works in the transfer market....
1. Buy players age 20-23. They are old enough to be formed but still cheap. They also have the best sell-on values and are the best bang for the buck with the best upside.
2. Don't let managers run the transfer budget. On average the managers last 1.3 seasons and thus it becomes a merry go round of short term transfers and re-loading. Get a Director of Football to run it and think long-term.
3. Sell players around age 28-30, even if they are popular. You get the best value and sell before everyone else figures out that statistically players peak at age 27. Old players on long contracts kill clubs. 4. Focus on defense more than forwards. Adding one goal in a match increases table points 1.1 per match. Stopping one goal adds 1.4. The conventional wisdom is wrong. Defense actually matters more than offense.
5. When you sell a good older player, take that money and buy a few good younger ones. Repeat. Over and over.
6. Bring up through the academy. Investing in the academy has returns much, much, much higher than incoming transfers. And academy players fit in culturally quicker.
This makes sense to me and I wish we would do it. Cousins, Pope, Lookman, Konsa... that would have been a great core for the future.
I read the numbers game a while back, and I think this slightly misconstrues what it said (from memory).
I believe they were asking where the most value can be had in terms of transfer fees to points. Because strikers are relatively very expensive, there is more cash value in each goal stopped than each goal scored.
So if you were going to either prevent goals or score them - you are best investing in defending.
In reality though, teams that win the league need to be good at the back AND score lots of goals to be successful. I don't want to be keeping our head just above water and having to choose one or the other.
Ironic that there is an advert for a snoring remedy at the foot of that article.
Better value than a season ticket at this rate
You know that ads come up relating to what you've searched right? Does the Mrs have access to your laptop? Perhaps you're keeping her up all night for the wrong reasons.
So that's why the other 26 adverts were penis extension kits.
It seems to me that clubs in League One pretty much have the following options in the transfer market...
1. Buy the best players from L2 that Championship teams don't overpay for 2. Perhaps poach someone from our own league or from a club relegated from it 3. Get older players past their prime from The Championship
Is this basically true?
Cuz that is kind of bleak.
It's almost a wonder that teams gets better in our league from the transfer market at all. Can anyone think of the last time they said about some team at the end of the window... "Wow, that League One team really killed it in the transfer market this window. They are going up for sure!"
Comments
1. Buy players age 20-23. They are old enough to be formed but still cheap. They also have the best sell-on values and are the best bang for the buck with the best upside.
2. Don't let managers run the transfer budget. On average the managers last 1.3 seasons and thus it becomes a merry go round of short term transfers and re-loading. Get a Director of Football to run it and think long-term.
3. Sell players around age 28-30, even if they are popular. You get the best value and sell before everyone else figures out that statistically players peak at age 27. Old players on long contracts kill clubs.
4. Focus on defense more than forwards. Adding one goal in a match increases table points 1.1 per match. Stopping one goal adds 1.4. The conventional wisdom is wrong. Defense actually matters more than offense.
5. When you sell a good older player, take that money and buy a few good younger ones. Repeat. Over and over.
6. Bring up through the academy. Investing in the academy has returns much, much, much higher than incoming transfers. And academy players fit in culturally quicker.
This makes sense to me and I wish we would do it. Cousins, Pope, Lookman, Konsa... that would have been a great core for the future.
I really think he'll be special
Two of our best strikers ever (Hales & Mendonca) were both aged around 30 when they joined us (or in the case of Killer, when he re-joined us)
You have to score goals to win games. Keep 46 clean sheets, but never score a goal will give you 46 points & very possibly relegation.
Hope we can do better than that. Ajose scored more goals for us in half a season than Nouble has since Obama was in his first term.
So let's look at this rationally...
First, name the last 30-year old to lead the PL or Championship or L1 in scoring? Now compare that to how many under age 27 lead in scoring. Or even under 25? It's not really close.
Second, your theory of "don't score, have 46 table points and relegation".... on the other hand... if you score one and give up two every game, you have zero table points and CERTAIN relegation.
The facts... and they really are facts... is that each additional goal NOT given up adds more table points than scoring one more. If you don't like that... well... sorry. It stands as a fact whether you like the idea or not.
The idea is that since defense wins more than offense and defensive players are much cheaper, clubs can get more players that make a real difference for LESS money that way, and have it pay off in the table. Since we will NEVER have the transfer budget of the top 6 clubs, even if/when we make the PL, this is data worth noting if we ever want to play above our weight.
The points I made are based on the analysis of every season in the last 20 seasons (throught 2013) and all clubs by academia who use science to calculate the date. I tend to like and appreciate data based on long studies more than anecdotal theories.
https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/24986/charlton-working-deal-bring-chelsea-man-back-valley/
Better value than a season ticket at this rate
If he has one year left on his Chelsea contract and we would get him on loan, that essentially means Chelsea is giving up on him. So why not just buy him now?
Does the Mrs have access to your laptop? Perhaps you're keeping her up all night for the wrong reasons.
I read the numbers game a while back, and I think this slightly misconstrues what it said (from memory).
I believe they were asking where the most value can be had in terms of transfer fees to points. Because strikers are relatively very expensive, there is more cash value in each goal stopped than each goal scored.
So if you were going to either prevent goals or score them - you are best investing in defending.
In reality though, teams that win the league need to be good at the back AND score lots of goals to be successful. I don't want to be keeping our head just above water and having to choose one or the other.
1. Buy the best players from L2 that Championship teams don't overpay for
2. Perhaps poach someone from our own league or from a club relegated from it
3. Get older players past their prime from The Championship
Is this basically true?
Cuz that is kind of bleak.
It's almost a wonder that teams gets better in our league from the transfer market at all. Can anyone think of the last time they said about some team at the end of the window... "Wow, that League One team really killed it in the transfer market this window. They are going up for sure!"
Seems like one big crapshoot. No?