| End of (next) season table on 02:29 - Jul 22 with 1764 views | Kaos_Agent |
What caught my eye was that we are the oldest squad. I'm OK with getting Rio for a year but we need some younger legs.
BTW what criteria determine a club's market value? |  |
| "Then it has all been in vain. The fellowship has failed."
"Not if we hold true to each other." |
|  |
| End of (next) season table on 03:01 - Jul 22 with 1749 views | CanadaRanger |
| End of (next) season table on 02:29 - Jul 22 by Kaos_Agent |
What caught my eye was that we are the oldest squad. I'm OK with getting Rio for a year but we need some younger legs.
BTW what criteria determine a club's market value? |
Some (sometimes dodgy) guestimates at player values... Click on any club to see.
Some posters on here don't like that site because they disagree with the valuations. However, the overall outcome for the team is probably accurate to +/-15%. Also, even if they are inaccurate for every team, they still make relative sense as there is no way (e.g.) that Palace's squad is worth as much as Chel$ea's... |  | | |
| End of (next) season table on 05:24 - Jul 22 with 1703 views | jamois |
Please explain so i dont have to go through the site - so they estimate where you're going to finish based on their estimate of the value of your squad? |  |
| |
| End of (next) season table on 07:18 - Jul 22 with 1611 views | CanadaRanger |
| End of (next) season table on 05:24 - Jul 22 by jamois |
Please explain so i dont have to go through the site - so they estimate where you're going to finish based on their estimate of the value of your squad? |
No. All they do is provide listings of players and assign a rough value to each to get a market value for each team. I'm not a betting man, but the values table would be a handy for predictions if I were.
It is my observation - and only an observation - (althoughI have done some math on in previous seasons) that the value table approximates the league table. Thus big value teams such as Man U, Man City and Chelsea, tend to finish top because they buy the best players, and smaller clubs like ours and WBA are way down the pecking order.
What I have also done before (when QPR were in the prem) was to create a "performance" or "value for money" league table - which QPR were bottom of... In this you take the cost of team position and subtract the actual league position to get a number which can be positive (good value), negative (an under-performing team), or zero (a team whose players performances are matching their valuation).
So, if Chel$sea are the biggest spenders on players (#1) and also are top of the league (#1), then 1-1 = 0 and that means they are where you'd expect them to be if it were all down to the number of oil and gas rubles spent... Whereas if QPR were 12th in cost of players but were 20th in the league then 12 - 20 = -8, and that indicated a very poor return on Uncle Tony's money. Two years ago West Brom and Swansea were two of the clubs that out-performed their value, i.e. their league position was higher than their position in the value table.
[Post edited 22 Jul 2014 7:46]
| | | |
| End of (next) season table on 07:22 - Jul 22 with 1601 views | eghamranger |
Can't see Villa being that far up. |  | | |
| End of (next) season table on 07:25 - Jul 22 with 1591 views | CanadaRanger |
| End of (next) season table on 07:22 - Jul 22 by eghamranger |
Can't see Villa being that far up. |
So you are predicting their players will (AGAIN) under-perform their valuation... I agree.
That also goes towards how difficult it gets for a team to sell (under-performing) players for their supposed market value... | | | |
| End of (next) season table on 07:44 - Jul 22 with 1561 views | CanadaRanger |
So, of the clubs still in the Premiership, who over-performed and who under-performed relative to their valuation last season?
(Team, Current value position - Final league position = difference)
OVER-PERFORMERS
Palace 17 - 11 = +6
Liverpool 6 - 2 = +4
Everton 8 - 5 = +3
ABOUT RIGHT PERFORMERS
Stoke 11 - 9 = +2
Man City 2 - 1 = +1
Southampton 9 - 8 = +1
Arsenal 4 - 4 = 0
West Ham 13 - 13 = 0
Sunderland 14 - 14 = 0
Spurs 5 - 6 = -1
Hull 15 - 16 = -1
WBA 16 -17 = -1
Swansea 10 - 12 = -2
Chelsea 1 - 3 = -2
UNDER-PERFORMERS
Villa 12 - 15 = -3
Newcastle 7 - 10 = -3
Man U 3 -7 = -4
So, last season Palace were best value for money and Man U were the biggest disappointment... I think we all knew the latter, but it does show how good a job they've been doing at Palace...
(Note: I am using current valuations and should really have used average valuations for last season...)
[Post edited 22 Jul 2014 21:50]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
