Javi Garcia

[mammutly]

Garcia/Mediocrity/Anonymity/Negativity

The guy eats the momentum from our play.

 

[peter.evans]

Not really he gave the ball away in the same places as Milner and Negredo today

And like I said. They were shit too. Especially Milner.

Yes, Milner was much worse than Garcia today but he escapes much of the shit on here.

Well said. Sadly the numbnuts have got to have a victim to bully and the facts are not allowed to get in the way of their moronic agenda. I just can't understand these people but however much you try and put forward sensible opposition you can't win with the "he's gash or shite " cretins. Let me put forward my view of today's game. A poor performance generally against a team that made it difficult for us. Our defence was OK but offered absolutely nothing when we really needed a couple of them to utilise the huge spaces they could have pushed into. Lescott is an embarrassment in terms of carrying and passing a ball. Nastasic was pretty much the same today. The two full backs were pathetic. Clichy confirmed he cannot pass wind even when in acres of space and offers absolutely nothing going forward, which is criminal in today's game. Surely his performance today ends the debate over who is the number one left back ? The front two were pretty poor and Dzeko, yet again, was not prepared to roll his sleeves up and work for the team. Despite all that we would have won the game had it not been for a poor mistake by Pantilimon. Milner was an absolute shambles and gave the ball away constantly,e.g. the first half pass to Clichy where he overlapped and Milner could not even weight the ball into his path ! Had Garcia done what Milner did when he mis controlled the ball in his own half and actually dribbled the fuckin thing into touch ( absolutely embarrassing but \I aint see any of the Garcia is gash merchants mention this one ) the Garcia is shite merchants would have crapped on about it all night giving him unmerciful stick. For me Garcia was OK, no more no less. He did what he was asked to do and did it pretty well. Other players cost us the win, Pants with his mistake and Boyata with his stupid sending off.

 

[The Flash]

i really never understand people who think stats prove anything, i have said it before if a stat can prove Crouch is a better England CF than Shearer that Frank Clark is the 4th best ever Prem league manager and that 1 season John O.Shea was United deadliest striker what can be the point in them, show me 2 years same amount of games played v same level opposition and i might take notice, but when i hear he averaged 1.87 touches per 3.98 mins with only 2.74 take ons in the last 1.56 games i just have to..... well has anyone got the Ed Norton slamming laptop gif ?

It's the opposite. People reading the stats don't understand that stats aren't trying to prove unspecific things.

If you show someone a pass completion stat and use it as proof that "Garcia is a better passer of the ball than BArry", you're using it wrong.

If you show someone a pass completion stat and use it as proof that "Garcia has completed a higher percentage of passes than Barry" then you're using it correctly.

As I said earlier, the problem with statistics in football is that people don't actually LOOK at what they are looking at and think they say something else. The problem isn't within the statistics themselves, it's in how people are interpreting them.

Thanks, Statto.....

:)

 

[NQCitizen]

i really never understand people who think stats prove anything, i have said it before if a stat can prove Crouch is a better England CF than Shearer that Frank Clark is the 4th best ever Prem league manager and that 1 season John O.Shea was United deadliest striker what can be the point in them, show me 2 years same amount of games played v same level opposition and i might take notice, but when i hear he averaged 1.87 touches per 3.98 mins with only 2.74 take ons in the last 1.56 games i just have to..... well has anyone got the Ed Norton slamming laptop gif ?

It's the opposite. People reading the stats don't understand that stats aren't trying to prove unspecific things.

If you show someone a pass completion stat and use it as proof that "Garcia is a better passer of the ball than BArry", you're using it wrong.

If you show someone a pass completion stat and use it as proof that "Garcia has completed a higher percentage of passes than Barry" then you're using it correctly.

As I said earlier, the problem with statistics in football is that people don't actually LOOK at what they are looking at and think they say something else. The problem isn't within the statistics themselves, it's in how people are interpreting them.

This post alone should be a sticky topic "Statistics: A Beginners' Guide"

 

[mammutly]

i really never understand people who think stats prove anything, i have said it before if a stat can prove Crouch is a better England CF than Shearer that Frank Clark is the 4th best ever Prem league manager and that 1 season John O.Shea was United deadliest striker what can be the point in them, show me 2 years same amount of games played v same level opposition and i might take notice, but when i hear he averaged 1.87 touches per 3.98 mins with only 2.74 take ons in the last 1.56 games i just have to..... well has anyone got the Ed Norton slamming laptop gif ?

It's the opposite. People reading the stats don't understand that stats aren't trying to prove unspecific things.

If you show someone a pass completion stat and use it as proof that "Garcia is a better passer of the ball than BArry", you're using it wrong.

If you show someone a pass completion stat and use it as proof that "Garcia has completed a higher percentage of passes than Barry" then you're using it correctly.

As I said earlier, the problem with statistics in football is that people don't actually LOOK at what they are looking at and think they say something else. The problem isn't within the statistics themselves, it's in how people are interpreting them.

This post alone should be a sticky topic "Statistics: A Beginners' Guide"

It could be, but Damocles is actually making the same point as the person he thinks he is disagreeing with.

 

[bluemc1]

i really never understand people who think stats prove anything, i have said it before if a stat can prove Crouch is a better England CF than Shearer that Frank Clark is the 4th best ever Prem league manager and that 1 season John O.Shea was United deadliest striker what can be the point in them, show me 2 years same amount of games played v same level opposition and i might take notice, but when i hear he averaged 1.87 touches per 3.98 mins with only 2.74 take ons in the last 1.56 games i just have to..... well has anyone got the Ed Norton slamming laptop gif ?

It's the opposite. People reading the stats don't understand that stats aren't trying to prove unspecific things.

If you show someone a pass completion stat and use it as proof that "Garcia is a better passer of the ball than BArry", you're using it wrong.

If you show someone a pass completion stat and use it as proof that "Garcia has completed a higher percentage of passes than Barry" then you're using it correctly.

As I said earlier, the problem with statistics in football is that people don't actually LOOK at what they are looking at and think they say something else. The problem isn't within the statistics themselves, it's in how people are interpreting them.

well if someone posted a stat during a debate about who is a better passer of the ball and someone said Garcia has a pass completion rate than Barry im sorry yes i would think they were using that as proof, otherwise whats the fucking point of stating the stat ? like before when you said his defensive contribution is better than YaYas ? how are you hoping people interpret that ?

 

[Damocles]

It could be, but Damocles is actually making the same point as the person he thinks he is disagreeing with.

Yeah, I'm not though am I? His point was "stats don't prove anything", my point was "stats prove extremely specific things in an objective and quantifiable way".

well if someone posted a stat during a debate about who is a better passer of the ball and someone said Garcia has a pass completion rate than Barry im sorry yes i would think they were using that as proof, otherwise whats the fucking point of stating the stat ? like before when you said his defensive contribution is better than YaYas ? how are you hoping people interpret that ?

And they'd be wrong to be using that as proof, which is my point. "Best passer" is a subjective term that could mean a million different things. "Pass completion" is an objective term than can only mean one specific thing.

Good example, Garcia's pass completion rate over the season is about 92% whilst David Silva's is lower at 87%. Who do the stats point to as the better passer of the ball?

Nobody. Pass completion doesn't mean "better at passing" it just means "gives the ball away less". If I told you that Javi Garcia gives the ball away less than David Silva then I think you'd probably agree if you thought about it, Silva being a guy who will take more "risky passes" and that. And that is all the information that can be derived from that one piece of information. Anything else is just people trying to point to evidence that isn't there.

Also "defensive contribution" is a term used in football statistics. It takes the number of clearances, the number of tackles, the number of blocks and the number of interceptions a player makes and adds them up to produce their "defensive contribution" as a number.

 

[NQCitizen]

It could be, but Damocles is actually making the same point as the person he thinks he is disagreeing with.

Yeah, I'm not though am I? His point was "stats don't prove anything", my point was "stats prove extremely specific things in an objective and quantifiable way".

well if someone posted a stat during a debate about who is a better passer of the ball and someone said Garcia has a pass completion rate than Barry im sorry yes i would think they were using that as proof, otherwise whats the fucking point of stating the stat ? like before when you said his defensive contribution is better than YaYas ? how are you hoping people interpret that ?

And they'd be wrong to be using that as proof, which is my point. "Best passer" is a subjective term that could mean a million different things. "Pass completion" is an objective term than can only mean one specific thing.

Good example, Garcia's pass completion rate over the season is about 92% whilst David Silva's is lower at 87%. Who do the stats point to as the better passer of the ball?

Nobody. Pass completion doesn't mean "better at passing" it just means "gives the ball away less". If I told you that Javi Garcia gives the ball away less than David Silva then I think you'd probably agree if you thought about it, Silva being a guy who will take more "risky passes" and that. And that is all the information that can be derived from that one piece of information. Anything else is just people trying to point to evidence that isn't there.

Also "defensive contribution" is a term used in football statistics. It takes the number of clearances, the number of tackles, the number of blocks and the number of interceptions a player makes and adds them up to produce their "defensive contribution" as a number.

Excellently put. Even then "defensive contribution" is rocky ground as a brilliant player can stifle attacks by purely taking up the right position which becomes impossible to quantitatively measure (before getting jumped on I'm not suggesting this is all about Garcia).

 

[skybluepete]

And like I said. They were shit too. Especially Milner.

Yes, Milner was much worse than Garcia today but he escapes much of the shit on here.

Well said. Sadly the numbnuts have got to have a victim to bully and the facts are not allowed to get in the way of their moronic agenda. I just can't understand these people but however much you try and put forward sensible opposition you can't win with the "he's gash or shite " cretins. Let me put forward my view of today's game. A poor performance generally against a team that made it difficult for us. Our defence was OK but offered absolutely nothing when we really needed a couple of them to utilise the huge spaces they could have pushed into. Lescott is an embarrassment in terms of carrying and passing a ball. Nastasic was pretty much the same today. The two full backs were pathetic. Clichy confirmed he cannot pass wind even when in acres of space and offers absolutely nothing going forward, which is criminal in today's game. Surely his performance today ends the debate over who is the number one left back ? The front two were pretty poor and Dzeko, yet again, was not prepared to roll his sleeves up and work for the team. Despite all that we would have won the game had it not been for a poor mistake by Pantilimon. Milner was an absolute shambles and gave the ball away constantly,e.g. the first half pass to Clichy where he overlapped and Milner could not even weight the ball into his path ! Had Garcia done what Milner did when he mis controlled the ball in his own half and actually dribbled the fuckin thing into touch ( absolutely embarrassing but \I aint see any of the Garcia is gash merchants mention this one ) the Garcia is shite merchants would have crapped on about it all night giving him unmerciful stick. For me Garcia was OK, no more no less. He did what he was asked to do and did it pretty well. Other players cost us the win, Pants with his mistake and Boyata with his stupid sending off.

Without getting involved in a debate, tbf Milner has been playing quite well consistently for a while and making a comparison of criticism of Garcia and Milner isn't really fair.
Im not a fan of Garcia- i dont HATE him but come on , lets have it right his style of play just doesn't suit the premiership its as simple as that but MP just continues to play him overlooking other members of our squad- fair crack of the whip comes to mind.

 

[bluemc1]

It could be, but Damocles is actually making the same point as the person he thinks he is disagreeing with.

Yeah, I'm not though am I? His point was "stats don't prove anything", my point was "stats prove extremely specific things in an objective and quantifiable way".

well if someone posted a stat during a debate about who is a better passer of the ball and someone said Garcia has a pass completion rate than Barry im sorry yes i would think they were using that as proof, otherwise whats the fucking point of stating the stat ? like before when you said his defensive contribution is better than YaYas ? how are you hoping people interpret that ?

And they'd be wrong to be using that as proof, which is my point. "Best passer" is a subjective term that could mean a million different things. "Pass completion" is an objective term than can only mean one specific thing.

Good example, Garcia's pass completion rate over the season is about 92% whilst David Silva's is lower at 87%. Who do the stats point to as the better passer of the ball?

Nobody. Pass completion doesn't mean "better at passing" it just means "gives the ball away less". If I told you that Javi Garcia gives the ball away less than David Silva then I think you'd probably agree if you thought about it, Silva being a guy who will take more "risky passes" and that. And that is all the information that can be derived from that one piece of information. Anything else is just people trying to point to evidence that isn't there.

Also "defensive contribution" is a term used in football statistics. It takes the number of clearances, the number of tackles, the number of blocks and the number of interceptions a player makes and adds them up to produce their "defensive contribution" as a number.

Excellently put. Even then "defensive contribution" is rocky ground as a brilliant player can stifle attacks by purely taking up the right position which becomes impossible to quantitatively measure (before getting jumped on I'm not suggesting this is all about Garcia).

well thanks for letting me know what " defensive contribution " covers, but i am still confused why in a thread debating a holding midfield player (Garcia) you would post a stat comparing his "defensive contribution" to YaYas, a player we rely on to score and create goals ? as i can see by what you put about Silva "risky passes" you understand comparing players in different positions is pointless. not being funny now i think i might be missing something, are you saying we can't use stats to prove who is the better of 2 players ? just more stuff like player A ran 2 miles during a game player B ran 1.8 miles so that stat is just a plain and simple fact ? if thats the case and i know this will sound rude but i don't care about pointless stats like that when discussing if a player is any good or not but realise a lot of people must find it interesting