Jump to content

Platinum

Members+
  • Posts

    3,836
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Issue Comments posted by Platinum

  1. On 27/07/2022 at 10:45, NeilUK said:

    To be fair that is the team being classed as underperformers not the manager , whether they had 1 or 10 managers in that season they would still be classed as underperforming. After all if they hadn't underperformed you wouldn't have had the chance to take over.

    It said they underperformed under my management

  2. On 27/01/2022 at 16:59, Sparacello said:

    Hi Platinum, I have checked what you wrote.
    Of course it is correct, but you have to calculate how FM's statistical engine "thinks".

    Decisive passes (red) are identical in both statistics, so it is correct.
    As for clear-cut chances created (green), it is as you say, but in the context of FM statistics they are of no use.

    It is always the key passes that count, i.e. the pass that creates a potential dangerous chance.

    All the data you think is missing can be found in the "Key Passes" statistics.

    So the important thing is that the Key Passages match.

     

    Immagineada.jpg

    Thanks for the response, I do disagree though.

    Key pass also has issues with it not being accurate.

    Also I disagree that key passes is the important one. Key passes only tell you that the pass eventually led to a shot. CCC let's us know how creative a player is as it shows how much goal scoring chances a player made.

    So just to be clear a Key Pass doesnt tell us how many dangerous chances a player made, instead CCC tells us that.

     

  3. Thanks for getting back to me. After looking at this I am fairly certain that the difference in Key Passes and Chances Cut Chances is to do with how they are defined, im not sure if this is useful for solving the problem but I thought I'd reiterate it. 

    The 'Analytical Data' screen only shows 'valid' key passes and CCC's (e.g. not from a set piece, didnt lead to an offside) whereas the 'Player Statistics' screen allows any type of key pass and CCC (could have been offside, can be a set piece).

    There is also one oddity: The 'Analytical Data' screen only counts a CCC if it led to a shot that was taken first time (e.g. the shooters first touch of the ball is the shot), whereas the 'Player Statistics' screen doesn't have this rule.

    Similar things can sometimes happen with shots too.

    @Kyle Brown

  4. After looking at this further I can see that the definition of Clear Cut Chances is different for the two screens. For the 'Analytical Data' a clear cut chance is only a clear cut chance if the chance wasn't from a set piece or penalty, didn't lead to a player being offside and also if the player who receives the clear cut chance has a shot as their first touch, on the other hand the 'Player Statistics' screen counts offsides, set pieces, the fouled player leading to a penalty and chances when the player who receives the clear cut chance takes multiple touches before shooting.

    Would you like me to provide examples of this or is this already known? @Abdullah Patel

  5. 6 hours ago, mhaffy said:

    I agree with what you say and scouting on stats can still be effective. The point I was trying to convey is that significant differences between stats produced by FME Vs QME will limit the players that appear (based on your search criteria) who you may then decide to scout further. By way of example, at end of my 21/22 season at Chelsea Pulisic topped Key passes/90 with 4.29 and Callum Hudson Odoi was 2nd with 3.09. Their respective Passes Completed/90 stats were 30.99 and 33.78 based upon FME. If as part of a search for players with similar stats I set Key Passes/90 to be at least 3 and Passes Completed/90 to be at least 30 then only 31 players appeared that met these criteria for possible further scouting. However, only 7 of these 31 possibles were from QME leagues - consistent with my observations at 8) in initial post.

    If the FME/QME stats for Key Passes/90 and Passes Completed/90 were more closely aligned then my search would have produced a larger selection of possibles for me to look into further.

    Yeah that's a really good point, i didnt think of that

  6. @mhaffy slightly off topic but just want to add that you dont need QME and FME values to be the same to make scouting effective. You should only be comparing a player to the league he is in and the quality of the league he is in compared to yours and thankfully when scouting players they give a octagon graph comparison of a player to the rest of their league.

    Even in real life stats vary widely between leagues so you have to look at how a player compares to the rest of the league they are in and take into account the quality of their league.

    Obvs the FME and QME being more consistent would be very good but just remember that your scouting based on stats can still be effective.

×
×
  • Create New...