Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can see which teams are developing players the right way in MLS/Taka's eyes.

Teams that are doing better in the standings than in the QoS Rankings are winning through size, physicality, kickball approach.

Some teams may not be winning but are developing players the "right" way.

I think you are reading too much into the QoP ratings. Maybe if a team performs poorly, but has a few good players, the QoP ratings will be higher, but that doesn't mean that the club is doing a good job of developing kids. There are too many variables regarding why some individual players perform well. Of course, the club will be happy to claim that their great coaching developed the kid.

Not to be a pessimist here (especially because I believe a QoP would indeed be better for development sake), but this would involve a comprehensive assessment throughout the game. Someone will have to watch the whole game and go through all of the player actions and assess whether their actions qualify as "making the correct runs", whether a pass was truly an "assist", whether or the defenders' positioning caused the offense to redirect, etc. This would likely required dedicated staff. This would likely require higher fees for parents. See what I'm getting at?

From what the links (goal.com) above say, there are people watching the videos. Apparently some people in Eastern Europe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can see which teams are developing players the right way in MLS/Taka's eyes.

Teams that are doing better in the standings than in the QoS Rankings are winning through size, physicality, kickball approach.

Some teams may not be winning but are developing players the "right" way.

I think you are reading too much into the QoP ratings. Maybe if a team performs poorly, but has a few good players, the QoP ratings will be higher, but that doesn't mean that the club is doing a good job of developing kids. There are too many variables regarding why some individual players perform well. Of course, the club will be happy to claim that their great coaching developed the kid.

Not to be a pessimist here (especially because I believe a QoP would indeed be better for development sake), but this would involve a comprehensive assessment throughout the game. Someone will have to watch the whole game and go through all of the player actions and assess whether their actions qualify as "making the correct runs", whether a pass was truly an "assist", whether or the defenders' positioning caused the offense to redirect, etc. This would likely required dedicated staff. This would likely require higher fees for parents. See what I'm getting at?

Anonymous wrote:You can see which teams are developing players the right way in MLS/Taka's eyes.

Teams that are doing better in the standings than in the QoS Rankings are winning through size, physicality, kickball approach.

Some teams may not be winning but are developing players the "right" way.

I think you are reading too much into the QoP ratings. Maybe if a team performs poorly, but has a few good players, the QoP ratings will be higher, but that doesn't mean that the club is doing a good job of developing kids. There are too many variables regarding why some individual players perform well. Of course, the club will be happy to claim that their great coaching developed the kid.

Anonymous wrote:While it could be helpful with development at the younger years, longer term this system can be used to screen your kid out for recruiting purposes based on some stats determined by the system.

People learn how to manipulate systems. If stats are being publicly posted, I'd worry. I am sure there is a reason they are starting it at U-13-14. I'm wary unless there is a way to better understand data privacy.

I honestly respect this opinion. But I have a different view:

1) If individual and team stats are not shared with anyone and are not actionable, then they cannot improve development. Right now all Taka is doing is saying that Team 1 plays a more attractive style than Team 2, even though their records (W-D-L) might disagree. But if you ask Taka to explain why they reached their conclusion, their response is basically "trust me bro". I don't find this approach very satisfying.

2) If these stats are useful then players and teams should 100% try to manipulate them! Because it should mean that improving these stats results in better players and better teams! If they do not, then it means that these stats do not translate into on field performance and they should be revised. The whole point of measuring something is that you can work to change those measurements.

I understand and agree that it would be wrong to have the individual stats of a 13 year old publicly available. But it would be useful to see the stats for MY 13 year old, and to see how they compare against the average player in his position, and more importantly what parts of his game are good and bad based on their rating.

You can see which teams are developing players the right way in MLS/Taka's eyes.

Teams that are doing better in the standings than in the QoS Rankings are winning through size, physicality, kickball approach.

Some teams may not be winning but are developing players the "right" way.

Anonymous wrote:While it could be helpful with development at the younger years, longer term this system can be used to screen your kid out for recruiting purposes based on some stats determined by the system.

People learn how to manipulate systems. If stats are being publicly posted, I'd worry. I am sure there is a reason they are starting it at U-13-14. I'm wary unless there is a way to better understand data privacy.

Individual Stats aren’t public and there are no immediate plans to do so according to Taka (I asked). Taka staff can see them though.

But i should have asked further to see if coaches and scouts are privy to those stats as well.

While it could be helpful with development at the younger years, longer term this system can be used to screen your kid out for recruiting purposes based on some stats determined by the system.

People learn how to manipulate systems. If stats are being publicly posted, I'd worry. I am sure there is a reason they are starting it at U-13-14. I'm wary unless there is a way to better understand data privacy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:in MidAtlantic U13
Achilles is 18th in standings and 9th in QoP (+9)
TSF Academy is 5th in standings 10th in QoP (-5)

Does this track for people who have watched these teams?

Any other outliers?

So what does this mean? According to QoP, Achilles team performs poorly as a team, but there are some players who individually perform better than the team as a whole?

And opposite for TSF Academy, the team performs well together, but individually performances are not very good?

Not sure where this leaves us. Soccer is a team sport, so looks like TSF Academy has done a good job of getting kids to work as a team, even beyond the individual performances of the players.

Ever see a team scouted or drafted or sign a contract?
It's primarily about individual development and performance

Team stuff is nice too

Anonymous wrote:in MidAtlantic U13
Achilles is 18th in standings and 9th in QoP (+9)
TSF Academy is 5th in standings 10th in QoP (-5)

Does this track for people who have watched these teams?

Any other outliers?

So what does this mean? According to QoP, Achilles team performs poorly as a team, but there are some players who individually perform better than the team as a whole?

And opposite for TSF Academy, the team performs well together, but individually performances are not very good?

Not sure where this leaves us. Soccer is a team sport, so looks like TSF Academy has done a good job of getting kids to work as a team, even beyond the individual performances of the players.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your DC is a booter of the ball and focused on being a physical player, then their rankings used for evaluations and scouting will be extremely low

Do you think the scores of individual players are being looked at by scouts?

How do you see your kid's or team's QoP scores on Taka?

The team’s score is on the MLSNext website .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your DC is a booter of the ball and focused on being a physical player, then their rankings used for evaluations and scouting will be extremely low

Do you think the scores of individual players are being looked at by scouts?

How do you see your kid's or team's QoP scores on Taka?

Taka has a subscription service for individuals.
Not sure how the teams use it

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your DC is a booter of the ball and focused on being a physical player, then their rankings used for evaluations and scouting will be extremely low

Do you think the scores of individual players are being looked at by scouts?

Scouts can use the combination of what they see, hear and the performance ratings on the software

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your DC is a booter of the ball and focused on being a physical player, then their rankings used for evaluations and scouting will be extremely low

Do you think the scores of individual players are being looked at by scouts?

How do you see your kid's or team's QoP scores on Taka?

You cannot. But based on the articles posted, I imagine they have the ability to do this. The qop is based on individual plays so they must have this data. In addition, they release top % plays monthly so again, I imagine the data can be mined to get this info.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your DC is a booter of the ball and focused on being a physical player, then their rankings used for evaluations and scouting will be extremely low

Do you think the scores of individual players are being looked at by scouts?

How do you see your kid's or team's QoP scores on Taka?

in MidAtlantic U13
Achilles is 18th in standings and 9th in QoP (+9)
TSF Academy is 5th in standings 10th in QoP (-5)

Does this track for people who have watched these teams?

Any other outliers?