While I'm on metrics...is there a good measure of transfer effectiveness
such as, for each player signed on perm for £x and weekly wages £y, total appearances divided by (x + n y) where n is the number of weeks since they signed. Or something. Predicated on the idea that whichever position they play, if they're doing well they'll appear and if they're not they won't.
Maybe count "on the bench" as half, "a used sub" as three quarters...whatever makes it work. Count long term injuries out as there's no legislating for that. Somehow include sell-on profit if any and so on. It must be possible to design a number or a set of numbers around this.
It's just that there's a lot of scuttlebutt about we are or we aren't good at transfers. Pretty much every top team has paid tens of millions for failures - we're no different in terms of having the odd stinker (though RvW still smarts, if I'm honest). Is there some ratio or measure of whether we're materially worse or better than others at the whole transfer thing?
Posted By: Old Man on May 7th 2018 at 20:32:54
Message Thread
- While I'm on metrics...is there a good measure of transfer effectiveness (General Chat) - Old Man, May 7, 20:32:54
- I'm a loyal listen of More or Less (fewer). I shall email in. (n/m) (General Chat) - Bravo win or die, May 7, 20:45:09
- Tut! *listener (n/m) (General Chat) - Bravo win or die, May 7, 20:45:40
- I'm a loyal listen of More or Less (fewer). I shall email in. (n/m) (General Chat) - Bravo win or die, May 7, 20:45:09
Reply to Message
In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.
If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.