[Albion] The Alternative Giraffe Tracker

[Swansman]

I'll do it [MENTION=38333]Swansman[/MENTION]

We reached 40 points. Ergo I was wrong.

The other point remains - we beat many sides we weren't supposed to and dropped many points that looked like certainties on the actual tracker.

Still a chance to get our best ever points total. I said on another thread I thought we had a chance to beat City with fans in the ground. Getting a point at Arsenal doesn't seem unrealistic even though that's a 0 on the tracker.

I do think that having something that just tracks us surviving next season is aiming far too low. I know that thread is almost universally adored on here but with a good summer window we really should be tracking progress against at least 50 points and beating Palace in the table next season. That's the next step.

Still think you are kind of trying to rewrite history here by turning this thread more into "could we?" kind of thread than the "we're loose!" thread it really was at the time (since you had about five threads in the end of December containing the message 'all you happy clappers enjoying the football and believing things will turn out ok in the end are probably wrong')... similar to a lot of the other "nothing matters but the league table" threads you've done. But the thing is that there's more than that to it - if you play like Brighton have done throughout the season, you're very unlikely to go down whatever the league table says in December.

Anyway, I agree that the target next year should be around 50 pts.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Still think you are kind of trying to rewrite history here by turning this thread more into "could we?" kind of thread than the "we're loose!" thread it really was at the time (since you had about five threads in the end of December containing the message 'all you happy clappers enjoying the football and believing things will turn out ok in the end are probably wrong')... similar to a lot of the other "nothing matters but the league table" threads you've done. But the thing is that there's more than that to it - if you play like Brighton have done throughout the season, you're very unlikely to go down whatever the league table says in December.

Anyway, I agree that the target next year should be around 50 pts.

In December we'd won one game at home in the calendar year of 2020, were the last elite side to register any kind of win in 2020 and had just failed to beat 10 man Sheffield United, one of the worst sides ever to play Premier League football. We were only just above Fulham and a game from slipping into relegation for the first time. I obviously saw that as a problem and you didn't. Fair enough.

 

[Machiavelli]

I'll do it [MENTION=38333]Swansman[/MENTION]

We reached 40 points. Ergo I was wrong.

The other point remains - we beat many sides we weren't supposed to and dropped many points that looked like certainties on the actual tracker.

Still a chance to get our best ever points total. I said on another thread I thought we had a chance to beat City with fans in the ground. Getting a point at Arsenal doesn't seem unrealistic even though that's a 0 on the tracker.

I do think that having something that just tracks us surviving next season is aiming far too low. I know that thread is almost universally adored on here but with a good summer window we really should be tracking progress against at least 50 points and beating Palace in the table next season. That's the next step.

I have a few problems with the tracker:
-- it engrains the view that we need to get to 40 points to survive. This season 30 will probably be enough (a point that I've been stating for about six months, not that anyone else seems to have agreed, and instead allowed their nervous disposition to take over). In the three other seasons that we've been in the PL, with a decent enough goal difference (like we have), it was 33 (17/18), and 34 (18/19 and 19/20) ...
-- ... and, as a result, it becomes less important as the season progresses
-- you're right on your point about the tracker being less effective of matching predictions with results. Our points gained tended to be predictable under Hughton, and just are not under Potter.
-- I'm concerned with the raised expectation of 50 points you're expressing, and you're by no means alone in this. It is simply more difficult to haul yourself up continuously, and the challenge to rise up the PL ranks is unforgiving. Football fans always want more, but there is a remorseless logic at play at the higher echelons -- player wages is the most accurate metric in determining league position, and we are and in all probability will in the bottom third of that metric
-- for next season, the three promoted clubs will all struggle to a greater or lesser extent, and then we're in there with a few other teams that have pretty similar points totals: Southampton (especially if they lose Ings), Burnley, Newcastle, Palace (big disruptions this summer, and even bigger decisions to make) and Wolves. Leeds too if they lose Bielsa.

 

[Swansman]

I have a few problems with the tracker:
-- it engrains the view that we need to get to 40 points to survive. This season 30 will probably be enough (a point that I've been stating for about six months, not that anyone else seems to have agreed, and instead allowed their nervous disposition to take over). In the three other seasons that we've been in the PL, with a decent enough goal difference (like we have), it was 33 (17/18), and 34 (18/19 and 19/20) ...
-- ... and, as a result, it becomes less important as the season progresses
-- you're right on your point about the tracker being less effective of matching predictions with results. Our points gained tended to be predictable under Hughton, and just are not under Potter.
-- I'm concerned with the raised expectation of 50 points you're expressing, and you're by no means alone in this. It is simply more difficult to haul yourself up continuously, and the challenge to rise up the PL ranks is unforgiving. Football fans always want more, but there is a remorseless logic at play at the higher echelons -- player wages is the most accurate metric in determining league position, and we are and in all probability will in the bottom third of that metric
-- for next season, the three promoted clubs will all struggle to a greater or lesser extent, and then we're in there with a few other teams that have pretty similar points totals: Southampton (especially if they lose Ings), Burnley, Newcastle, Palace (big disruptions this summer, and even bigger decisions to make) and Wolves. Leeds too if they lose Bielsa.

The Giraffe tracker is based on a model - "To get these the easiest way is beat the bottom ten teams at home and draw with them away (bottom ten defined as lowest seven not relegated last season plus three promoted, meaning all the way up to Burnley (as we don't play ourselves unfortunately), but not Sheff Utd or above". It doesnt really take other things into consideration. As a 40 pt tracker its just fine. And holy.

If someone wants to build a 50pt tracker it would be interesting to follow as well but I see no reason to get rid of the 40pts one and I see no "problems" with it.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I have a few problems with the tracker:
-- it engrains the view that we need to get to 40 points to survive. This season 30 will probably be enough (a point that I've been stating for about six months, not that anyone else seems to have agreed, and instead allowed their nervous disposition to take over). In the three other seasons that we've been in the PL, with a decent enough goal difference (like we have), it was 33 (17/18), and 34 (18/19 and 19/20) ...
-- ... and, as a result, it becomes less important as the season progresses
-- you're right on your point about the tracker being less effective of matching predictions with results. Our points gained tended to be predictable under Hughton, and just are not under Potter.
-- I'm concerned with the raised expectation of 50 points you're expressing, and you're by no means alone in this. It is simply more difficult to haul yourself up continuously, and the challenge to rise up the PL ranks is unforgiving. Football fans always want more, but there is a remorseless logic at play at the higher echelons -- player wages is the most accurate metric in determining league position, and we are and in all probability will in the bottom third of that metric
-- for next season, the three promoted clubs will all struggle to a greater or lesser extent, and then we're in there with a few other teams that have pretty similar points totals: Southampton (especially if they lose Ings), Burnley, Newcastle, Palace (big disruptions this summer, and even bigger decisions to make) and Wolves. Leeds too if they lose Bielsa.

You need 40 to survive comfortably. You're right about how many are needed actually. The problem is that will vary from season to season. This season has seen three incredibly poor sides in the bottom three. A mid-table Championship squad quality side who lost their talismanic manager, a bang average WBA who couldn't even snide their way to a second season under Big Sam and a side full of loans who had bigger finishing problems than us.

The three who come up - I'm assuming Plucky will win the playoffs here but Brentford also fits this narrative - will be better overall but will, ironically, suit us better. I can't see any of them parking the bus and we should be confident of wins against them. Palace look shot. A season rebuilding an aging squad with a new manager may not go well. Burnley will be Burnley.

So, to get to 50 against that lot requires just three more wins than we got this season, even if we don't win on Sunday. If we do it's two. I think you're setting your sights far too low and I don't think TB will be joining you in that. Besides, the whole point of getting Potter in was for him to start nudging up results compared to budget. We looked at the miracle of Ostersunds and the season with a rebuilt Swansea in order to progress towards the stated dream of being a regular top ten side - not some additional investment and a big name.

 

[Hugo Rune]

There is a target position, a par position and a bad position to finish in the EPL.

The board’s dullard will tell you that 90% of the time, teams finish in the table according to budget. So that should be our ‘par’ position.

Setting a challenging target might be good for some but I’d prefer the tracker to run on this ‘par’ position, I’d prefer it to the annual relegation avoiding metric. I suspect that 35-45 points is par for our budget but I suppose you don’t really know until the annual accounts have been published?

 

[Guinness Boy]

There is a target position, a par position and a bad position to finish in the EPL.

The board’s dullard will tell you that 90% of the time, teams finish in the table according to budget. So that should be our ‘par’ position.

Setting a challenging target might be good for some but I’d prefer the tracker to run on this ‘par’ position, I’d prefer it to the annual relegation avoiding metric. I suspect that 35-45 points is par for our budget but I suppose you don’t really know until the annual accounts have been published?

I wouldn't doubt the dullard for a second - he knows his onions. But, again, you missed the point that Project Potter and Ashworth seeks to break that rule.

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

The tracker was never there to mark success, it was to stop bed wetting if a few results went the wrong way.

The tracker should stay exactly where it is. Then when you are +4, +6, +10 or whatever, the success is marked by your performance over and above the minimum required.

Even when Arsenal were winning titles and competing at the top of the league, George Graham would still crack open the champagne when 40 points was reached. The earlier that was done the better they were doing. Same principle with the tracker right?

 

[El Presidente]

The board’s dullard will tell you that 90% of the time, teams finish in the table according to budget. So that should be our ‘par’ position.

You rang?

 

[Machiavelli]

There is a target position, a par position and a bad position to finish in the EPL.

The board’s dullard will tell you that 90% of the time, teams finish in the table according to budget. So that should be our ‘par’ position.

Setting a challenging target might be good for some but I’d prefer the tracker to run on this ‘par’ position, I’d prefer it to the annual relegation avoiding metric. I suspect that 35-45 points is par for our budget but I suppose you don’t really know until the annual accounts have been published?

Am I the board's dullard or, reading that, is it you? Perhaps it's both of us

Edit: been beaten to it

 

[Bry Nylon]

I wouldn't doubt the dullard for a second - he knows his onions. But, again, you missed the point that Project Potter and Ashworth seeks to break that rule.

“Never Doubt The Dullard” would be a great title for the sequel to “The Price of Football.”

(Available from all good bookshops).

 

[El Presidente]

I wouldn't doubt the dullard for a second - he knows his onions. But, again, you missed the point that Project Potter and Ashworth seeks to break that rule.

It seeks to break the rule on a long term basis, we are in year two of the project, so too early to reasonably assess. The benefits of a consistent approach implemented across all ages will take the best part of a decade to bear fruit. In the meantime enjoy the ride, we are now in the top flight for a record time in the club's history, could be relegated next season of course, but that is a risk with our budget.

The alternative is to take the Palace approach and play a style of football that gets victories against the bottom half of the division (Saturday's win against Villa was the first time they have beaten a side who were above them in the table for 18 months).

This season Palace have done it again, having done the double over West Brom and Sheffield United, and four points against Fulham, making 16 points in total and scoring 11 goals.

As we know only too well, the Albion picked up 4 points from the relegated clubs and scored 2 goals, one of which was an OG and we played against Sheffield United for 50 minutes against 10 men.

If we can address this issue then progress can't be made, but remember that if we spend money in the market so will other clubs too, so it is a case of running to stand still to a degree.

 

[Guinness Boy]

It seeks to break the rule on a long term basis, we are in year two of the project, so too early to reasonably assess. The benefits of a consistent approach implemented across all ages will take the best part of a decade to bear fruit. In the meantime enjoy the ride, we are now in the top flight for a record time in the club's history, could be relegated next season of course, but that is a risk with our budget.

The alternative is to take the Palace approach and play a style of football that gets victories against the bottom half of the division (Saturday's win against Villa was the first time they have beaten a side who were above them in the table for 18 months).

This season Palace have done it again, having done the double over West Brom and Sheffield United, and four points against Fulham, making 16 points in total and scoring 11 goals.

As we know only too well, the Albion picked up 4 points from the relegated clubs and scored 2 goals, one of which was an OG and we played against Sheffield United for 50 minutes against 10 men.

If we can address this issue then progress can't be made, but remember that if we spend money in the market so will other clubs too, so it is a case of running to stand still to a degree.

All accepted.

The point of my reply to [MENTION=28490]Machiavelli[/MENTION] - ironically the one thing Swanny agreed with me on - was that a modest increase in points target by two or three wins over this season really shouldn't be beyond us.

 

[El Presidente]

All accepted.

The point of my reply to [MENTION=28490]Machiavelli[/MENTION] - ironically the one thing Swanny agreed with me on - was that a modest increase in points target by two or three wins over this season really shouldn't be beyond us.

Agreed, this season probably would have achieved that under normal circumstances. Luck has in the main (United at home, Palace at home, West Brom away) cost us quite a few points…and the finishing has been poor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 2719]

*makes note to bounce this when we don't get the seven home wins it predicts in 2021*

Hands up GB yet another wrong prediction, my question is are you just unlucky? Or maybe do you not take an overview of the situation.

I suppose we will have to add it to the list of:
Brexit - Wrong
Tories losing - Wrong
and with the not making 40pts - Wrong, you are on a roll, just maybe Starmer going, is still up for grabs, you might make it 3-1 or it could be a 4-0.

Good luck.

*makes note to bounce giraffes tracker when it proves to be accurate over the season in 2021

**makes a second note to demote GB off my favourite mod list.

Done.

 

[Goldstone1976]

There is a target position, a par position and a bad position to finish in the EPL.

The board’s dullard will tell you that 90% of the time, teams finish in the table according to budget. So that should be our ‘par’ position.

Setting a challenging target might be good for some but I’d prefer the tracker to run on this ‘par’ position, I’d prefer it to the annual relegation avoiding metric. I suspect that 35-45 points is par for our budget but I suppose you don’t really know until the annual accounts have been published?

Given any tracker needs a specific number to track against for ease of interpretation, shall we set the par target at 40 points then?

 

[Hugo Rune]

You rang?

Yes. I was referring to the bit on a recent (& very informative) pod about the league position of clubs being decided '90%' by budget. I was also interested in the '5%' manager effect aspect of that conversation too.

Is there a league table based on budgets we could access to see where we should be are on 'par'?

To me, this would be a better way to judge our season rather than getting upset about short-term progression on a long-term aspiration such as being a top ten team as well as changing the narrative on survival being our aim year in and year out.

Thanks.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Hands up GB yet another wrong prediction, my question is are you just unlucky? Or maybe do you not take an overview of the situation.

I suppose we will have to add it to the list of:
Brexit - Wrong
Tories losing - Wrong
and with the not making 40pts - Wrong, you are on a roll, just maybe Starmer going, is still up for grabs, you might make it 3-1 or it could be a 4-0.

Good luck.



Done.

Do bounce my "Tories losing" post won't you? I made quite a nice tidy sum of money on Boris's seat margin. It was bloody obvious they's win the 2019 election.

And while we're talking football predictions:

Yep. Three meaningless games coming up. No relegation fears. Worst case scenario is 17th on 37 points, best 46 and somewhere mid table, likely finish somewhere in between.

West Ham really need the points and we don't. I can see them dropping deep, us having 20 or so poor quality shots and getting done 1-0 on the break. But it'll be a minor annoyance on the weekend rather than anything devastating if they do. The proverbial fly in my tea.

Weirdly I can see much more chance of points in the two games after, even though the "big six" (in ESL terms) are involved. City will surely make a few changes to rest players ahead of the Champions League and we'll have our biggest crowd for over a year. I really can see us pushing them hard. And we always seem to do well at Arsenal recently.

Meanwhile you have been factually wrong about Lewis Hamilton (where you claimed you had an impeccable source), 7 year olds free shirts (where you all but slandered the club) and morally wrong about stalking and branding Jews.

And your sign off is wrong.

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Do bounce my "Tories losing" post won't you? I made quite a nice tidy sum of money on Boris's seat margin. It was bloody obvious they's win the 2019 election.

And while we're talking football predictions:



Meanwhile you have been factually wrong about Lewis Hamilton (where you claimed you had an impeccable source), 7 year olds free shirts (where you all but slandered the club) and morally wrong about stalking and branding Jews.

And your sign off is wrong.

I can't be arsed to hunt down all you wrong stuff, but there is a pretty big pile building now.

Your main football prediction/viewpoint has been Potter out, although you back-peddled a bit when things looked different. But Albion not getting to 40 points was clear and loud, which of course was wrong.

Where was I wrong about Hamilton? He is now struggling because a red bull is at the gate, and prepared to break it down, I await to see a meltdown or two.
His public persona has changed, but any man who takes a century-old company to court over using the Hamilton brand on their own watches still has a deplorable ego.

Shirt gate was a principle of rudeness by a staff member, and you know it.

Please read and re-read my post, it was NOT about Jews specifically and again you know it, but it suits your agenda to continually undermine me, with the power to ban me also, Harry says jump and off you go.


I actually think the sign off is quite accurate, but it was deleted by someone, but after my ban it magically re-appeared I did not re-post it, so someone else must-have.
I just feel a level playing field is good for everyone, isn't that what you are after, as you do swing a long way to the left?

Anyway, I have said my bit on this, just celebrate the 41 points so far and maybe we can be friends.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I can't be arsed to hunt down all you wrong stuff, but there is a pretty big pile building now.

In other words you don't have it and are guessing.

Your main football prediction/viewpoint has been Potter out, although you back-peddled a bit when things looked different. But Albion not getting to 40 points was clear and loud, which of course was wrong.

I've predicted loads of stuff, some right and some wrong. Happy to admit I was wrong on this now it's actually happened. Which it hadn't after Leeds.

Where was I wrong about Hamilton? He is now struggling

Laughable. He's had three wins, got to 100 poles and is leading the Championship. But in case you forgot you insisted to the whole F1 thread that he wasn't going to re-sign for Mercedes and your source was impeccable. And that's the difference. I made an incorrect prediction. Humans do that all the time which is why bookies are rich. You insisted you were ITK on something that didn't happen. Everyone on the F1 thread will remember it.

Shirt gate was a principle of rudeness by a staff member, and you know it.

No, it would have been funny if it wasn't so fist eatingly cringe. And wrong.

Please read and re-read my post, it was NOT about Jews specifically and again you know it, but it suits your agenda to continually undermine me, with the power to ban me also, Harry says jump and off you go.

But this is where I have the biggest issue, both as a moderator and a post writer. You push these things deliberately right to the edge (or are too thick to understand the implication of what you've typed to rile "lefties") and then play the victim when you're called out.