Javi Garcia

[Blue Heaven]

Well you were bringing the statistics of pass completion in to the debate about us missing De Jong, if the only debate was who had a better percentage out of him and Garcia then it would be essential and relevant.

However, as I understood it the debate is more about whether De Jong was better than Garcia all round, and my point is the stats won't tell you the whole story.

As I say, I rate De Jong and like him, I've not seen enough of Garcia yet to make an informed opinion, although I'm sure you can enlighten me with his statistics to back up whatever your opinion is of him!

I'm delighted for De Jong that he played an important part in our success, he really deserved it with the amount of good work he did for us. But "bursting forward" was hardly a strength of his, and remember QPR were playing a flat back 9 at the time so there wasn't many players for him to "burst" past!

Yes I mentioned pass completion because Simon23 said Garcia's distribution was better than De Jong's and given that Garcia's average is about ten percentage points worse than De Jong's, I think it begs some questions as to the validity of the statement. It does not mean that pass completion is the only aspect of distribution that counts but it is an important aspect of distribution. I could have added that Garcia has only made one key pass in two games; whereas De Jong made one key pass in one appearance this season, which is another fact that does not support the contention that Garcia's distribution is better but I didn't want to write an essay on the subject.

I also noted that Garcia has been averaging more tackles per game, so far, than De Jong does; which was in response to De Jong being better defensively. Again, this was not meant to paint the whole picture but to point to a fact that did not support the opinion offered.

I didn't actually offer an opinion on who was the better player in either specific area or in terms of their all round game because I've only seen Garcia play three games.

Sadly, my comment didn't get a response from the poster it was aimed at but instead got you explaining why stats are more important in NFL and baseball and how they are less important to a fluid game like football. Heaven knows what baseball has got to do with Javi Garcia; although his name wouldn't be out of place in the NY Yankees' bullpen. Of course what you failed to mention was that the nature of those sports made it much easier to record stats manually and that it is only through advances in technology that football has truly been able to match the level of statistical analysis in those sports, which means there could in fact be a lot more value to be found from what is a much newer science (or art) but that's a whole other thread.

Interesting discussion - statistics may be more important in baseball than in football, either proper or American, for a simple reason, namely that in baseball, there are "stoppages" in play between each and every pitch. In addition, much of what happens in baseball is a consequence of the pitch thrown and the response of the batter. Maybe this is why strike/ball (or strikes/total pitches) ratio, OBP (on-base percentage, not Kenobi-wan stat), slugging percentage and OPS are such dominant stats in baseball.

In American football, there are also stoppages between plays, but other than the quarterback stats (each play initiated by the center/QB exchange), the other stats are partially influenced by the play of units of players (such as linemen, linebackers, defensive backs, etc.). It is more difficult to gauge the importance of a critical stat like "tackles made" if one stops to consider that some defensive formations "funnel" the ball carrier to a particular player(s). Also, for instance, there is a huge difference in responsibilities between playing middle linebacker in a 3-4 defense than a 4-3 defense...!!

In football, tackle and pass percentages are important, but also do not take into account the quality of the pass, nor the effect of the unit's or team's play as a whole on each individual statistic.

Statistics are important in football, but an over-reliance on them in analyzing matches is not always a productive exercise, unless, of course, one sits in a corporate office all day crunching numbers for that next SEC filing... ;-)

 

[Shaelumstash]

Well you were bringing the statistics of pass completion in to the debate about us missing De Jong, if the only debate was who had a better percentage out of him and Garcia then it would be essential and relevant.

However, as I understood it the debate is more about whether De Jong was better than Garcia all round, and my point is the stats won't tell you the whole story.

As I say, I rate De Jong and like him, I've not seen enough of Garcia yet to make an informed opinion, although I'm sure you can enlighten me with his statistics to back up whatever your opinion is of him!

I'm delighted for De Jong that he played an important part in our success, he really deserved it with the amount of good work he did for us. But "bursting forward" was hardly a strength of his, and remember QPR were playing a flat back 9 at the time so there wasn't many players for him to "burst" past!

Yes I mentioned pass completion because Simon23 said Garcia's distribution was better than De Jong's and given that Garcia's average is about ten percentage points worse than De Jong's, I think it begs some questions as to the validity of the statement. It does not mean that pass completion is the only aspect of distribution that counts but it is an important aspect of distribution. I could have added that Garcia has only made one key pass in two games; whereas De Jong made one key pass in one appearance this season, which is another fact that does not support the contention that Garcia's distribution is better but I didn't want to write an essay on the subject.

I also noted that Garcia has been averaging more tackles per game, so far, than De Jong does; which was in response to De Jong being better defensively. Again, this was not meant to paint the whole picture but to point to a fact that did not support the opinion offered.

I didn't actually offer an opinion on who was the better player in either specific area or in terms of their all round game because I've only seen Garcia play three games.

Sadly, my comment didn't get a response from the poster it was aimed at but instead got you explaining why stats are more important in NFL and baseball and how they are less important to a fluid game like football. Heaven knows what baseball has got to do with Javi Garcia; although his name wouldn't be out of place in the NY Yankees' bullpen. Of course what you failed to mention was that the nature of those sports made it much easier to record stats manually and that it is only through advances in technology that football has truly been able to match the level of statistical analysis in those sports, which means there could in fact be a lot more value to be found from what is a much newer science (or art) but that's a whole other thread.

Interesting discussion - statistics may be more important in baseball than in football, either proper or American, for a simple reason, namely that in baseball, there are "stoppages" in play between each and every pitch. In addition, much of what happens in baseball is a consequence of the pitch thrown and the response of the batter. Maybe this is why strike/ball (or strikes/total pitches) ratio, OBP (on-base percentage, not Kenobi-wan stat), slugging percentage and OPS are such dominant stats in baseball.

In American football, there are also stoppages between plays, but other than the quarterback stats (each play initiated by the center/QB exchange), the other stats are partially influenced by the play of units of players (such as linemen, linebackers, defensive backs, etc.). It is more difficult to gauge the importance of a critical stat like "tackles made" if one stops to consider that some defensive formations "funnel" the ball carrier to a particular player(s). Also, for instance, there is a huge difference in responsibilities between playing middle linebacker in a 3-4 defense than a 4-3 defense...!!

In football, tackle and pass percentages are important, but also do not take into account the quality of the pass, nor the effect of the unit's or team's play as a whole on each individual statistic.

Statistics are important in football, but an over-reliance on them in analyzing matches is not always a productive exercise, unless, of course, one sits in a corporate office all day crunching numbers for that next SEC filing... ;-)

I totally agree mate. From what I understand of NFL each play has a very pre determined pattern and each player knows exactly where he is meant to run. The play only lasts a matter of seconds before there is a stop and they get a different instruction, so it is much more simple to analyse tackles won, yards gained, catches, etc.

In football successful passes, runs and even tackles are not so obvious. One person might think a 60 yard Hollywood pass was great, while someone else might think it was stupid because it isolated the player receiving the ball. There is no way of analysing the right pass with stats because it is too subjective.

Football is so much more fluid, with much fewer breaks in the game. Players receive instructions about their general position and responsibility, but they don't have exact instructions for each ten seconds of play. This makes it far more difficult to analyse where they did their job correctly for any given 10 seconds. It is down to the player to constantly make decisions during the whole game, these decisions are the most important thing in football, and it is impossible to analyse those with statistics.

 

[OB1]

It does not mean that pass completion is the only aspect of distribution that counts but it is an important aspect of distribution.

Garcia's average what is 10% lower? His pass completion? That doesn't mean his distribution isn't better! What about quality of pass, timing of pass, intelligence of pass etc, there are no statistics for these things and never will be because it's subjective.

Try telling me something that I don't know or have not already alluded to.

 

[Blue Dawson]

I really rate Barry as he is a very cleaver player, but both him and Garcia are extremely immobile.

So you are saying that Barry is a hatchet man who is incapable of moving?

Lol......

 

[Marvin]

De Jong's days became numbered when teams started to park the bus against us

We don't need a midfielder who specialises in disruption we need a more all rounded player. Rodwell and garcia are those players. Why we needed two I don't know

 

[Stoned Rose]

De Jong's days became numbered when teams started to park the bus against us

We don't need a midfielder who specialises in disruption we need a more all rounded player. Rodwell and garcia are those players. Why we needed two I don't know

Why we needed two I don't know

indeed.

 

[Shaelumstash]

It does not mean that pass completion is the only aspect of distribution that counts but it is an important aspect of distribution.

Garcia's average what is 10% lower? His pass completion? That doesn't mean his distribution isn't better! What about quality of pass, timing of pass, intelligence of pass etc, there are no statistics for these things and never will be because it's subjective.

Try telling me something that I don't know or have not already alluded to.

"Yes I mentioned pass completion because Simon23 said Garcia's distribution was better than De Jong's and given that Garcia's average is about ten percentage points worse than De Jong's, I think it begs some questions as to the validity of the statement."

Well as I read this as Simon23 said Garcia's distribution was better, and you said "his average is 10% lower" as if it meant his distribution is 10% worse. Maybe you should have clarified you meant his pass completion is 10% lower.

Anyway, we both now seem to be in agreement that statistics can only give you a fraction of the story about how good a player / passer someone is. Still seems a bit strange that this is your view but you still bring statistics up to argue how good De Jong is, but hey ho.

 

[OB1]

Garcia's average what is 10% lower? His pass completion? That doesn't mean his distribution isn't better! What about quality of pass, timing of pass, intelligence of pass etc, there are no statistics for these things and never will be because it's subjective.

Try telling me something that I don't know or have not already alluded to.

"Yes I mentioned pass completion because Simon23 said Garcia's distribution was better than De Jong's and given that Garcia's average is about ten percentage points worse than De Jong's, I think it begs some questions as to the validity of the statement."

Well as I read this as Simon23 said Garcia's distribution was better, and you said "his average is 10% lower" as if it meant his distribution is 10% worse. Maybe you should have clarified you meant his pass completion is 10% lower.

Anyway, we both now seem to be in agreement that statistics can only give you a fraction of the story about how good a player / passer someone is. Still seems a bit strange that this is your view but you still bring statistics up to argue how good De Jong is, but hey ho.

Bloody hell, my English must be poor if thought I said Garcia’s distribution was 10% worse than NDJ’s. Indeed, my English must be appalling as I do not seem to be able to get my message across but here is one last attempt to do so.

I was not expressing an opinion that NDJ is better than Garcia either defensively or at distributing the ball or in any other way.

I was simply trying to point out that an opinion expressed by someone else appeared anomalous to a couple of statistics. I was trying to use the statistics as a device to stimulate a debating point about the players; not about the value of statistics in general.

I do not think that pointing out that pass completion does not give the whole picture regarding a player’s distribution in any way provides a useful argument to support the view that the player with the worse pass completion is better at distribution than the one with the better pass completion.

I am not attempting to define how important statistics are or how much weight should be given to them. I do think statistics are useful and interesting and useful in taking a balanced view of performance; I do not care who agrees with that view or disagrees with that view.

 

[brian the blue]

De Jong's days became numbered when teams started to park the bus against us

We don't need a midfielder who specialises in disruption we need a more all rounded player. Rodwell and garcia are those players. Why we needed two I don't know

Why we needed two I don't know

indeed.

Mancini wanted De Rossi.

Rodwell + Garcia were the back up plan. Rodwell was bought as one for the future as well.

 

[BlueCityfan]

De Jong's days became numbered when teams started to park the bus against us

We don't need a midfielder who specialises in disruption we need a more all rounded player. Rodwell and garcia are those players. Why we needed two I don't know

Why we needed two I don't know

indeed.

Mancini wanted De Rossi.

Rodwell + Garcia were the back up plan. Rodwell was bought as one for the future as well.

Rodwell was probably more of an replacement for Hargreaves/Pizarro. Garcia for De Jong.
We failed to get in a proper deep lying playmaker. I remember the OS describing Garcia as one...but i don't think he is.

Think Mancini values physicality from his holding midfielders more....otherwise i'm sure Mancini would have bought Veratti. Who has been very impressive for PSG. But lacks the physique. De Rossi would have offered both.