Timothy Castagne

[C0YS]

Yea I think eye test is always best, I'd imagine someone like Zidane had all over the place stats based on how he played but you only have to watch him for 5 mins to see he's one of the best players ever.

Stats can be helpful in certain areas for sure but I'm with you I don't think stats tell the whole picture at all. Glad you rate Castagne, hopefully we can sign him as his versitility appeals.

Yeh, I only got into stats thanks to COVID and through my cynicism of them, and how they be misused and misinterpreted, particularly by conspiracy theorists. But by looking into it I learnt how they can actually be very useful. But having studied anthropology I value observation and understanding through context over numbers.

In my opinion stats can be useful in creating a hypothesis of how a player might be, or an outline, but without contextualising it through observation they aren't all that useful. But it can help remove confirmation bias's and tell us about the style of the player and the style of the team.

 

[biscuit]

There's only 1 stat that matters in this world and that's your funny rating per post or your "FPP" as some have coined it on this very forum.

Happy to help ?

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

Yeh, I only got into stats thanks to COVID and through my cynicism of them, and how they be misused and misinterpreted, particularly by conspiracy theorists. But by looking into it I learnt how they can actually be very useful. But having studied anthropology I value observation and understanding through context over numbers.

In my opinion stats can be useful in creating a hypothesis of how a player might be, or an outline, but without contextualising it through observation they aren't all that useful. But it can help remove confirmation bias's and tell us about the style of the player and the style of the team.

I agree and all very interesting.

 

[spursfan77]

Mate I'm generally in agreement, they are more useful to analyse style than ability. Similarly, not all stats are equal, and things like tackling, in particular are very misleading.

The stats back you up though, Aurier gives the ball away a lot. He's in the bottom 10% in europe in that. What the wheel shows is he is aggressive and is a good tackler and that he tries to get past players a lot.

You can also read into this information quite creatively. Aurier has a really good tackle win percentage, yet his total successful tackles a game are not that different than Castagne, even though Castagne doesn't win as many tackles attempted as Aurier. There is no stylistic reason why castagne should be attempting more tackles, and the same pattern was true for that other turkish fullback we are linked to. So this leads me to think, is Aurier in the correct positon to make the tackles. He wins a lot of tackles but doesn't attempt a lot of tackles, what does that say?

Well, his positioning has always been a massive question mark against him so it’s definitely that. It is the stat on the wheel that jumps out at you as it pretty much undoes lots of the good work that the rest of his game does. Again though, watching him shows us that.

Im sure the stats and figures our stat analysts look at are a lot more in depth than statsbomb and uncover more facets of signings games but you can’t beat watching a player still first and foremost. It’s why I harbour concerns about Hojbjerg although I understand we may use him differently to how he was employed at Southampton. His stats are good but I don’t see anything special in him when I see him on the pitch.

 

[C0YS]

Stats are fairly useless IMO when compaing individuals. Players operate in different teams against different opponents of varying quality. They are most likely given different priorities in how they play and what they do on the pitch. Their own team mates can have a very positive or negative effect on their data and I'd be surprised if there weren't some significant differences in the way data is collected and configured across the board. All in all, pretty much a waste of time.

I dunno, you have to account for that. But you can see certain habits from it for sure. I don't think the 'wheel' I posted shows Aurier in a particular good light, it just looks that way if you don't contextualise them and value each stat as if the figure itself is an indication of raw ability.

But it does show certain things, Aurier is aggressive, gives away the ball a lot and doesn't make many forward passes. Does that tell us if he is a good player or not? Not really.

Similarly, it shows castagne rarely gives away the ball. Whats more interesting isn't comparing the individuals but how they compare to European averages, particularly when comparing across leagues. But you also can expect certain things. Castagne is likely to make more tackles in the PL and he is likely to make more interceptions and pressures as well. But he might also give the ball away more and win less balls in the air. But there is still some image of the player you can gain from that.

 

[spursfan77]

There's only 1 stat that matters in this world and that's your funny rating per post or your "FPP" as some have coined it on this very forum.

Amusing. But I’m not rating your post as funny!

 

[Japhet]

I dunno, you have to account for that. But you can see certain habits from it for sure. I don't think the 'wheel' I posted shows Aurier in a particular good light, it just looks that way if you don't contextualise them and value each stat as if the figure itself is an indication of raw ability.

But it does show certain things, Aurier is aggressive, gives away the ball a lot and doesn't make many forward passes. Does that tell us if he is a good player or not? Not really.

Similarly, it shows castagne rarely gives away the ball. Whats more interesting isn't comparing the individuals but how they compare to European averages, particularly when comparing across leagues. But you also can expect certain things. Castagne is likely to make more tackles in the PL and he is likely to make more interceptions and pressures as well. But he might also give the ball away more and win less balls in the air. But there is still some image of the player you can gain from that.

There's far too many variables for me to take much notice. One of the main ones is how they are being asked to play by their respective managers. There's a fairly large number on here who don't like Harry Winks because he always passes sideways or back, doesn't hit long passes, doesn't score, doesn't create assists blah blah, but I've always been of the opinion that he does exactly what he's asked to do by his manager, which, unfortunately for him, isn't very sexy. In a different team or role he could(probably would) be a completely different player.

 

[C0YS]

There's far too many variables for me to take much notice. One of the main ones is how they are being asked to play by their respective managers. There's a fairly large number on here who don't like Harry Winks because he always passes sideways or back, doesn't hit long passes, doesn't score, doesn't create assists blah blah, but I've always been of the opinion that he does exactly what he's asked to do by his manager, which, unfortunately for him, isn't very sexy. In a different team or role he could(probably would) be a completely different player.

I don't disagree.

But on the latter point stats suggest the opposite. That Winks actually does make forward passes and is actually one of the best in Europe at it, and that's where they are useful, in challenging confirmation bias. Winks starts from a deeper position, and anyone in that role will always have fans criticise those very points, but stats, particularly comparative ones actually help challenge that argument.

You have to contextualise stats, look at the variables and see if anything can be gained, but with winks you can actually point to what he does well by looking into the stats. One of the problems is a lot of fans assume its still the 80s or early 90s where in England everything was vertical and every midfielder was box to box, and they just have an inherent idea of how a midfielder should look like that is divorced from the modern game. But if you use comparative stats you can actually say, well actually, he makes a lot of 'progressive passes' and lots of passes into the final third compared to other midfielders.

And that's the point, we contextualise stats and interpret them, but we also need to contextualise our own views. Keep in mind that we tend to look for things that support our own opinion of a player or of a way of thinking of something. Stats can challenge and inform our opinions.

With me posting Aurier comparisons, it wasn't about saying who is better. We know, more or less, what Aurier's strengths and weaknesses are, we might not agree to the extent of those strengths and weaknesses but none the less. To put another player is simply so we can compare what we know about Aurier with players that most people haven't seen play too often. This can help form an opinion and form an understanding of what they do.

Similarly, I've watched Castagne player probably half a dozen times and I can't tell you if he would be a hit in the PL. Because the way he plays in Atalanta is incomparable to how he will play here, stats have a similar problem. But give you an angle to look at, when comparing where he fits in each category right. So the stats I have presented suggested he will do alright in the air, and suggest he is technically good enough for that not to be a problem. However, there are worries in other aspects. Such as winning tackle percentage, which to me was surprisingly low, because I thought it was a strength, but now by looking at the stats I can test my assumptions and make a better judgement watching him more.

So stats can inform observation. These things are complementary to each other because it gives a different perspective outside of ones own judgement.

 

[kthwlsn]

So can somebody do a comparison of where they fall on the scale below. I’m not a scout and feel way too uninformed to tackle this...

 

[spursfan77]

I don't disagree.

But on the latter point stats suggest the opposite. That Winks actually does make forward passes and is actually one of the best in Europe at it, and that's where they are useful, in challenging confirmation bias. Winks starts from a deeper position, and anyone in that role will always have fans criticise those very points, but stats, particularly comparative ones actually help challenge that argument.

You have to contextualise stats, look at the variables and see if anything can be gained, but with winks you can actually point to what he does well by looking into the stats. One of the problems is a lot of fans assume its still the 80s or early 90s where in England everything was vertical and every midfielder was box to box, and they just have an inherent idea of how a midfielder should look like that is divorced from the modern game. But if you use comparative stats you can actually say, well actually, he makes a lot of 'progressive passes' and lots of passes into the final third compared to other midfielders.

And that's the point, we contextualise stats and interpret them, but we also need to contextualise our own views. Keep in mind that we tend to look for things that support our own opinion of a player or of a way of thinking of something. Stats can challenge and inform our opinions.

With me posting Aurier comparisons, it wasn't about saying who is better. We know, more or less, what Aurier's strengths and weaknesses are, we might not agree to the extent of those strengths and weaknesses but none the less. To put another player is simply so we can compare what we know about Aurier with players that most people haven't seen play too often. This can help form an opinion and form an understanding of what they do.

Similarly, I've watched Castagne player probably half a dozen times and I can't tell you if he would be a hit in the PL. Because the way he plays in Atalanta is incomparable to how he will play here, stats have a similar problem. But give you an angle to look at, when comparing where he fits in each category right. So the stats I have presented suggested he will do alright in the air, and suggest he is technically good enough for that not to be a problem. However, there are worries in other aspects. Such as winning tackle percentage, which to me was surprisingly low, because I thought it was a strength, but now by looking at the stats I can test my assumptions and make a better judgement watching him more.

So stats can inform observation. These things are complementary to each other because it gives a different perspective outside of ones own judgement.

So, and I'm going to use Son as an example, we should be looking really for players who play in teams the same way now as to how we are going to play next season if we want them to be a success. Son was bought because he played for Leverkusen, who were a team that played like us at the time. I read about it the other week. We got him because we thought he was use to pressing from the front in fast moving teams and cutting in from the wing. Obviously his injury problems in the first season meant he didn't have much luck that year but afterwards he was a hit.

We don't seem to be though. Unless we are going to change how we play next season or we are hoping that the players we sign can adapt very quickly. If that is then case then I am not unhappy because it means we are trying to sign intelligent footballers. The opposite od what I think Serge is, without being too rude.

 

[PrettyColors]

So, all the rumoured lineups I’ve seen tonight have Castagne starting on the bench with Goosens at LB and Hateboer at RB. You’ve got to think that if he misses out on the highest level match of the season it would be time to leave...

Definitely a little disappointing from a scouting perspective though as you don’t get to go against Neymar, Icardi, and Mbappe every week.

 

[delawarespur]

So, all the rumoured lineups I’ve seen tonight have Castagne starting on the bench with Goosens at LB and Hateboer at RB. You’ve got to think that if he misses out on the highest level match of the season it would be time to leave...

Definitely a little disappointing from a scouting perspective though as you don’t get to go against Neymar, Icardi, and Mbappe every week.

They’ve been the 2 first choice wing backs though so it is what I expect. Usually, the odd one out between the three comes on in the second half at some point, and gasperini loves a like-for-like change, as the system requires a lot of running defensively. However, against PSG tonight, I suspect it’ll be more of a back five at least in the opening stages, which would’ve been a great test for castagne defensively and hopefully something we still see tonight.

 

[spids]

Well, his positioning has always been a massive question mark against him so it’s definitely that. It is the stat on the wheel that jumps out at you as it pretty much undoes lots of the good work that the rest of his game does. Again though, watching him shows us that.

Im sure the stats and figures our stat analysts look at are a lot more in depth than statsbomb and uncover more facets of signings games but you can’t beat watching a player still first and foremost. It’s why I harbour concerns about Hojbjerg although I understand we may use him differently to how he was employed at Southampton. His stats are good but I don’t see anything special in him when I see him on the pitch.

I always thought Scotty Parker looked bang average for other clubs until he played for us alongside Bale, Modric and VDV. He was immense for us and gave the others the platform to perform.

 

[C0YS]

So, and I'm going to use Son as an example, we should be looking really for players who play in teams the same way now as to how we are going to play next season if we want them to be a success. Son was bought because he played for Leverkusen, who were a team that played like us at the time. I read about it the other week. We got him because we thought he was use to pressing from the front in fast moving teams and cutting in from the wing. Obviously his injury problems in the first season meant he didn't have much luck that year but afterwards he was a hit.

We don't seem to be though. Unless we are going to change how we play next season or we are hoping that the players we sign can adapt very quickly. If that is then case then I am not unhappy because it means we are trying to sign intelligent footballers. The opposite od what I think Serge is, without being too rude.

Ideally we should. Although I think Son did take time to adapt to the pace of the league as well. But, unfortunatly you don't always have the choice.

 

[C0YS]

They’ve been the 2 first choice wing backs though so it is what I expect. Usually, the odd one out between the three comes on in the second half at some point, and gasperini loves a like-for-like change, as the system requires a lot of running defensively. However, against PSG tonight, I suspect it’ll be more of a back five at least in the opening stages, which would’ve been a great test for castagne defensively and hopefully something we still see tonight.

Not quite true, Castagne has started most games recently. But yes, as you say, there isn't much in it so there is always an odd one out.

I highly doubt Atalanta will be sitting back. If they do I feel they are doomed. They've ripped most teams to shreds playing their brand of football and they shouldn't fear anyone, they need to go for it.

 

[RikkiRocket]

I don't disagree.

But on the latter point stats suggest the opposite. That Winks actually does make forward passes and is actually one of the best in Europe at it, and that's where they are useful, in challenging confirmation bias. Winks starts from a deeper position, and anyone in that role will always have fans criticise those very points, but stats, particularly comparative ones actually help challenge that argument.

You have to contextualise stats, look at the variables and see if anything can be gained, but with winks you can actually point to what he does well by looking into the stats. One of the problems is a lot of fans assume its still the 80s or early 90s where in England everything was vertical and every midfielder was box to box, and they just have an inherent idea of how a midfielder should look like that is divorced from the modern game. But if you use comparative stats you can actually say, well actually, he makes a lot of 'progressive passes' and lots of passes into the final third compared to other midfielders.

And that's the point, we contextualise stats and interpret them, but we also need to contextualise our own views. Keep in mind that we tend to look for things that support our own opinion of a player or of a way of thinking of something. Stats can challenge and inform our opinions.

With me posting Aurier comparisons, it wasn't about saying who is better. We know, more or less, what Aurier's strengths and weaknesses are, we might not agree to the extent of those strengths and weaknesses but none the less. To put another player is simply so we can compare what we know about Aurier with players that most people haven't seen play too often. This can help form an opinion and form an understanding of what they do.

Similarly, I've watched Castagne player probably half a dozen times and I can't tell you if he would be a hit in the PL. Because the way he plays in Atalanta is incomparable to how he will play here, stats have a similar problem. But give you an angle to look at, when comparing where he fits in each category right. So the stats I have presented suggested he will do alright in the air, and suggest he is technically good enough for that not to be a problem. However, there are worries in other aspects. Such as winning tackle percentage, which to me was surprisingly low, because I thought it was a strength, but now by looking at the stats I can test my assumptions and make a better judgement watching him more.

So stats can inform observation. These things are complementary to each other because it gives a different perspective outside of ones own judgement.

Winks stats re forward passes don’t show where that / those passes end up. Normally at the oppositions feet ?.

 

[RikkiRocket]

I always thought Scotty Parker looked bang average for other clubs until he played for us alongside Bale, Modric and VDV. He was immense for us and gave the others the platform to perform.

And, importantly, great hair. ?

 

[C0YS]

Winks stats re forward passes don’t show where that / those passes end up. Normally at the oppositions feet ?.

erm for progressive passing and passes in the final third they only count completed ones....

Also, Scott Parker has literally just won fwa player of the year. So it's really not comparable to the PEH stuff. Though I think he will be a good and affordable addition on the balance of probabilities, and I am pretty sure I'll be making similar arguments to those defending Winks. On the basis that the nature of the position means that you will see lots of unadventurous passing.

 

[Montalbano]

I personally don’t think he’s good enough defensively, and for that reason I don’t think he’s Mourinho’s first choice.

Here’s an example of Ashley Young, the muppet, skinning him.

 

[doctor stefan Freud]

There's only 1 stat that matters in this world and that's your funny rating per post or your "FPP" as some have coined it on this very forum.

You can’t mention funny ratings without referencing @Nine while nine. He’s Pele to our Grzegorz Rasiak