Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How did all the teams do this weekend. Arlington results against Lehigh Valley

04 tie 1-1
05 win 6-0
06 win 3-1

You realize the scores are posted online and this question does not need to be asked every friggin week.

Anonymous wrote:How did all the teams do this weekend. Arlington results against Lehigh Valley

04 tie 1-1
05 win 6-0
06 win 3-1

Anonymous wrote:How did all the teams do this weekend. Arlington results against Lehigh Valley

04 tie 1-1
05 win 6-0
06 win 3-1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'll go a step further. At U-15, Spirit didn't start their best striker, best midfielder, best defender, or best goalie. Make of that what you will, but I'd propose that winning games may not be their top priority.

That is a great theory, except Tom told the girls he wants wins. Also, best players according to you, I'm assuming?

Of course Tom "wants" to win, but with the 2004 team's cumulative record sitting at something like 2-27-3, I don't think he's ever prioritized winning over getting playing time for some of his "developing players".

Yes, best players according to me. Simply my opinion. Feel free to share yours.

NOT PP here
So how to you quantify "best" for each player you mention? Best striker - would that assume that she scores the most, creates the most scoring opportunities, what? Just trying to understand how you quantify best at striker - goals scored would be a leading indicator in my book, so then how many goals did your "best striker" score last year assuming she was with the Spirit (if not then looking at last year's stats is a moot point) Best mid fielder - this one could be a bit more subjective, but I would leverage assists as one of my indicators, unfortunately I do not think DA registers assists, so that may be a bit harder to track. With that being said, I would also look at the midfielder in terms of how she controls the mid field, does she win most tackles, does she have a high % of completed passes? Again, since DA does not track that it would be hard to tell unless you keep track of those stats yourself. Best defender - Again, going to be hard to track stats for this position as DA does not keep track of them, but much like midfielder, I would look at how she controls the center above, at, and in the 18. Does she win most of her tackles, what is her % of completed passes. Keeper - this one is a little easier, I would look at shots saved versus goals given up. Of course some of those numbers may be off if her D gives up on her and she is left out to dry, but still the shot/save % should be a good indicator of how good she is. I do not know enough about the team to give any opinions of who is "best" on that team at each position, but this is just my two cents on how I would go about quantifying best at each position if I did know enough.

This is soccer. You can't always "quantify" everything. Everyone can have an opinion. Those who know more about the game - because they've played, coached, watched, studied, lived & breathed it for years, tend to have better opinions than those who haven't.

For someone with a lot of expertise about the game, stats can be a valuable tool, because that person will know how to interpret them in the context of what they can see with their own eyes. For a novice, stats are worse than useless.

I agree, everyone can have an opinion, but they are usually grounded in fact (or in some cases, perception). Without fact, one's opinion is more emotional response than anything. With that being said, I think stats are a starting point for formulating opinions about what is best. And as you pointed out, someone with knowledge of the game - living/breathing, playing, coaching, watching, those things combined with the stats helps you formulate more educated opinions about players.

So then when you made the previous statement about best striker, midfielder, defender and keeper playing up and therefore not helping at age, how were you defining what best is? I am just truly trying to understand how you arrive at what you feel who is best at each position on the team.

Stats are the worst possible starting point for formulating opinions.

Qualified opinions are not based on "emotional responses." Qualified opinions are based on observation and understanding.

The best starting point for formulating opinions is to increase your understanding.

Put away the stats and pick up the remote. Use your DVR. Watch a lot of matches. Watch the best teams in the world. They often have the best players. Observe. Try to notice all of the little details that make them the best players. After a couple of years, you may start to have a rudimentary understanding of what makes some players objectively better than others.

You are assuming the original poster has a qualified opinion, and he/she has yet to articulate how they deem someone is the best. I agree years of watching, observing, playing and or coaching affords you the ability to judge players with a more qualified opinion over others that simply look at stats to determine who is best. But, let’s make no mistake about it, certain positions have very specific roles, striker for example - to score goals. I do not think that you will find anyone that would say the best striker in the world is someone who does not score any goals, or is not at least on average scoring asmany as the rest that would be in consideration.
For someone to come on here and say that the best striker did not start, or the best mid fielder and defender and keeper did not start and that is why they lost and provide no insight in to how they determine someone to be the best is just silly.

I made no such assumptions. If I had made any assumptions at all, it would have been that the original poster was wrong, since the alternative assumption would be that the WS coach had left the three best players at three key positions on the bench in the opening league game. Incompetence at that level would not be surprising to me, but that level of incompetence would be.

So I think you were right to challenge their assertion and ask for them to explain the basis of their opinion.

I chimed in because your post implied that for their opinion to be valid, they'd have to be able to back it up with statistics.

Giroud didn't score a single goal in the WC, yet he kept his starting spot through the final. Was that wrong? Was it Deschamps "emotion" that kept him in the starting lineup?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'll go a step further. At U-15, Spirit didn't start their best striker, best midfielder, best defender, or best goalie. Make of that what you will, but I'd propose that winning games may not be their top priority.

That is a great theory, except Tom told the girls he wants wins. Also, best players according to you, I'm assuming?

Of course Tom "wants" to win, but with the 2004 team's cumulative record sitting at something like 2-27-3, I don't think he's ever prioritized winning over getting playing time for some of his "developing players".

Yes, best players according to me. Simply my opinion. Feel free to share yours.

NOT PP here
So how to you quantify "best" for each player you mention? Best striker - would that assume that she scores the most, creates the most scoring opportunities, what? Just trying to understand how you quantify best at striker - goals scored would be a leading indicator in my book, so then how many goals did your "best striker" score last year assuming she was with the Spirit (if not then looking at last year's stats is a moot point) Best mid fielder - this one could be a bit more subjective, but I would leverage assists as one of my indicators, unfortunately I do not think DA registers assists, so that may be a bit harder to track. With that being said, I would also look at the midfielder in terms of how she controls the mid field, does she win most tackles, does she have a high % of completed passes? Again, since DA does not track that it would be hard to tell unless you keep track of those stats yourself. Best defender - Again, going to be hard to track stats for this position as DA does not keep track of them, but much like midfielder, I would look at how she controls the center above, at, and in the 18. Does she win most of her tackles, what is her % of completed passes. Keeper - this one is a little easier, I would look at shots saved versus goals given up. Of course some of those numbers may be off if her D gives up on her and she is left out to dry, but still the shot/save % should be a good indicator of how good she is. I do not know enough about the team to give any opinions of who is "best" on that team at each position, but this is just my two cents on how I would go about quantifying best at each position if I did know enough.

This is soccer. You can't always "quantify" everything. Everyone can have an opinion. Those who know more about the game - because they've played, coached, watched, studied, lived & breathed it for years, tend to have better opinions than those who haven't.

For someone with a lot of expertise about the game, stats can be a valuable tool, because that person will know how to interpret them in the context of what they can see with their own eyes. For a novice, stats are worse than useless.

I agree, everyone can have an opinion, but they are usually grounded in fact (or in some cases, perception). Without fact, one's opinion is more emotional response than anything. With that being said, I think stats are a starting point for formulating opinions about what is best. And as you pointed out, someone with knowledge of the game - living/breathing, playing, coaching, watching, those things combined with the stats helps you formulate more educated opinions about players.

So then when you made the previous statement about best striker, midfielder, defender and keeper playing up and therefore not helping at age, how were you defining what best is? I am just truly trying to understand how you arrive at what you feel who is best at each position on the team.

Stats are the worst possible starting point for formulating opinions.

Qualified opinions are not based on "emotional responses." Qualified opinions are based on observation and understanding.

The best starting point for formulating opinions is to increase your understanding.

Put away the stats and pick up the remote. Use your DVR. Watch a lot of matches. Watch the best teams in the world. They often have the best players. Observe. Try to notice all of the little details that make them the best players. After a couple of years, you may start to have a rudimentary understanding of what makes some players objectively better than others.

You are assuming the original poster has a qualified opinion, and he/she has yet to articulate how they deem someone is the best. I agree years of watching, observing, playing and or coaching affords you the ability to judge players with a more qualified opinion over others that simply look at stats to determine who is best. But, let’s make no mistake about it, certain positions have very specific roles, striker for example - to score goals. I do not think that you will find anyone that would say the best striker in the world is someone who does not score any goals, or is not at least on average scoring asmany as the rest that would be in consideration.
For someone to come on here and say that the best striker did not start, or the best mid fielder and defender and keeper did not start and that is why they lost and provide no insight in to how they determine someone to be the best is just silly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'll go a step further. At U-15, Spirit didn't start their best striker, best midfielder, best defender, or best goalie. Make of that what you will, but I'd propose that winning games may not be their top priority.

That is a great theory, except Tom told the girls he wants wins. Also, best players according to you, I'm assuming?

Of course Tom "wants" to win, but with the 2004 team's cumulative record sitting at something like 2-27-3, I don't think he's ever prioritized winning over getting playing time for some of his "developing players".

Yes, best players according to me. Simply my opinion. Feel free to share yours.

NOT PP here
So how to you quantify "best" for each player you mention? Best striker - would that assume that she scores the most, creates the most scoring opportunities, what? Just trying to understand how you quantify best at striker - goals scored would be a leading indicator in my book, so then how many goals did your "best striker" score last year assuming she was with the Spirit (if not then looking at last year's stats is a moot point) Best mid fielder - this one could be a bit more subjective, but I would leverage assists as one of my indicators, unfortunately I do not think DA registers assists, so that may be a bit harder to track. With that being said, I would also look at the midfielder in terms of how she controls the mid field, does she win most tackles, does she have a high % of completed passes? Again, since DA does not track that it would be hard to tell unless you keep track of those stats yourself. Best defender - Again, going to be hard to track stats for this position as DA does not keep track of them, but much like midfielder, I would look at how she controls the center above, at, and in the 18. Does she win most of her tackles, what is her % of completed passes. Keeper - this one is a little easier, I would look at shots saved versus goals given up. Of course some of those numbers may be off if her D gives up on her and she is left out to dry, but still the shot/save % should be a good indicator of how good she is. I do not know enough about the team to give any opinions of who is "best" on that team at each position, but this is just my two cents on how I would go about quantifying best at each position if I did know enough.

This is soccer. You can't always "quantify" everything. Everyone can have an opinion. Those who know more about the game - because they've played, coached, watched, studied, lived & breathed it for years, tend to have better opinions than those who haven't.

For someone with a lot of expertise about the game, stats can be a valuable tool, because that person will know how to interpret them in the context of what they can see with their own eyes. For a novice, stats are worse than useless.

I agree, everyone can have an opinion, but they are usually grounded in fact (or in some cases, perception). Without fact, one's opinion is more emotional response than anything. With that being said, I think stats are a starting point for formulating opinions about what is best. And as you pointed out, someone with knowledge of the game - living/breathing, playing, coaching, watching, those things combined with the stats helps you formulate more educated opinions about players.

So then when you made the previous statement about best striker, midfielder, defender and keeper playing up and therefore not helping at age, how were you defining what best is? I am just truly trying to understand how you arrive at what you feel who is best at each position on the team.

Stats are the worst possible starting point for formulating opinions.

Qualified opinions are not based on "emotional responses." Qualified opinions are based on observation and understanding.

The best starting point for formulating opinions is to increase your understanding.

Put away the stats and pick up the remote. Use your DVR. Watch a lot of matches. Watch the best teams in the world. They often have the best players. Observe. Try to notice all of the little details that make them the best players. After a couple of years, you may start to have a rudimentary understanding of what makes some players objectively better than others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'll go a step further. At U-15, Spirit didn't start their best striker, best midfielder, best defender, or best goalie. Make of that what you will, but I'd propose that winning games may not be their top priority.

That is a great theory, except Tom told the girls he wants wins. Also, best players according to you, I'm assuming?

Of course Tom "wants" to win, but with the 2004 team's cumulative record sitting at something like 2-27-3, I don't think he's ever prioritized winning over getting playing time for some of his "developing players".

Yes, best players according to me. Simply my opinion. Feel free to share yours.

NOT PP here
So how to you quantify "best" for each player you mention? Best striker - would that assume that she scores the most, creates the most scoring opportunities, what? Just trying to understand how you quantify best at striker - goals scored would be a leading indicator in my book, so then how many goals did your "best striker" score last year assuming she was with the Spirit (if not then looking at last year's stats is a moot point) Best mid fielder - this one could be a bit more subjective, but I would leverage assists as one of my indicators, unfortunately I do not think DA registers assists, so that may be a bit harder to track. With that being said, I would also look at the midfielder in terms of how she controls the mid field, does she win most tackles, does she have a high % of completed passes? Again, since DA does not track that it would be hard to tell unless you keep track of those stats yourself. Best defender - Again, going to be hard to track stats for this position as DA does not keep track of them, but much like midfielder, I would look at how she controls the center above, at, and in the 18. Does she win most of her tackles, what is her % of completed passes. Keeper - this one is a little easier, I would look at shots saved versus goals given up. Of course some of those numbers may be off if her D gives up on her and she is left out to dry, but still the shot/save % should be a good indicator of how good she is. I do not know enough about the team to give any opinions of who is "best" on that team at each position, but this is just my two cents on how I would go about quantifying best at each position if I did know enough.

This is soccer. You can't always "quantify" everything. Everyone can have an opinion. Those who know more about the game - because they've played, coached, watched, studied, lived & breathed it for years, tend to have better opinions than those who haven't.

For someone with a lot of expertise about the game, stats can be a valuable tool, because that person will know how to interpret them in the context of what they can see with their own eyes. For a novice, stats are worse than useless.

I agree, everyone can have an opinion, but they are usually grounded in fact (or in some cases, perception). Without fact, one's opinion is more emotional response than anything. With that being said, I think stats are a starting point for formulating opinions about what is best. And as you pointed out, someone with knowledge of the game - living/breathing, playing, coaching, watching, those things combined with the stats helps you formulate more educated opinions about players.

So then when you made the previous statement about best striker, midfielder, defender and keeper playing up and therefore not helping at age, how were you defining what best is? I am just truly trying to understand how you arrive at what you feel who is best at each position on the team.

Stats are the worst possible starting point for formulating opinions.

Qualified opinions are not based on "emotional responses." Qualified opinions are based on observation and understanding.

The best starting point for formulating opinions is to increase your understanding.

Put away the stats and pick up the remote. Use your DVR. Watch a lot of matches. Watch the best teams in the world. They often have the best players. Observe. Try to notice all of the little details that make them the best players. After a couple of years, you may start to have a rudimentary understanding of what makes some players objectively better than others.

You still never answered how you came to the conclusion of who the best striker is.

Anonymous wrote:
I agree, but I'm not talking so much about stats collection as the posters who are scrutinizing the game reports available on the Academy website to blame or praise kids or a club based on who or didn't start or get rostered or how many minutes kids played.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^Agree. Also, I can pretty much guarantee that anyone who is obsessing over individual game reports like the crazy posters on this thread are not the parents whose kids will go on to be great players. Kids need a lot of things to go right if they are going to fully develop their talents, including parents who understand soccer and can take the long view.

Development is certainly multi-factorial. That being said, there are measurables that can aid in assessing the process that US Soccer even uses. This includes how many times a player gets tripped of the ball, turns it over to the other team and does or does not complete a pass. These are documented in scouts' reports on players and are part of their assessment of a player's ability.

it is well known that there is a sweet spot in terms of giving a player the right amount of challenge in their environment. A player that is in an environment where they can hardly ever hang onto the ball - when they ever actually get to it - is overchallenged.

Anonymous wrote:^^Agree. Also, I can pretty much guarantee that anyone who is obsessing over individual game reports like the crazy posters on this thread are not the parents whose kids will go on to be great players. Kids need a lot of things to go right if they are going to fully develop their talents, including parents who understand soccer and can take the long view.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'll go a step further. At U-15, Spirit didn't start their best striker, best midfielder, best defender, or best goalie. Make of that what you will, but I'd propose that winning games may not be their top priority.

That is a great theory, except Tom told the girls he wants wins. Also, best players according to you, I'm assuming?

Of course Tom "wants" to win, but with the 2004 team's cumulative record sitting at something like 2-27-3, I don't think he's ever prioritized winning over getting playing time for some of his "developing players".

Yes, best players according to me. Simply my opinion. Feel free to share yours.

NOT PP here
So how to you quantify "best" for each player you mention? Best striker - would that assume that she scores the most, creates the most scoring opportunities, what? Just trying to understand how you quantify best at striker - goals scored would be a leading indicator in my book, so then how many goals did your "best striker" score last year assuming she was with the Spirit (if not then looking at last year's stats is a moot point) Best mid fielder - this one could be a bit more subjective, but I would leverage assists as one of my indicators, unfortunately I do not think DA registers assists, so that may be a bit harder to track. With that being said, I would also look at the midfielder in terms of how she controls the mid field, does she win most tackles, does she have a high % of completed passes? Again, since DA does not track that it would be hard to tell unless you keep track of those stats yourself. Best defender - Again, going to be hard to track stats for this position as DA does not keep track of them, but much like midfielder, I would look at how she controls the center above, at, and in the 18. Does she win most of her tackles, what is her % of completed passes. Keeper - this one is a little easier, I would look at shots saved versus goals given up. Of course some of those numbers may be off if her D gives up on her and she is left out to dry, but still the shot/save % should be a good indicator of how good she is. I do not know enough about the team to give any opinions of who is "best" on that team at each position, but this is just my two cents on how I would go about quantifying best at each position if I did know enough.

This is soccer. You can't always "quantify" everything. Everyone can have an opinion. Those who know more about the game - because they've played, coached, watched, studied, lived & breathed it for years, tend to have better opinions than those who haven't.

For someone with a lot of expertise about the game, stats can be a valuable tool, because that person will know how to interpret them in the context of what they can see with their own eyes. For a novice, stats are worse than useless.

I agree, everyone can have an opinion, but they are usually grounded in fact (or in some cases, perception). Without fact, one's opinion is more emotional response than anything. With that being said, I think stats are a starting point for formulating opinions about what is best. And as you pointed out, someone with knowledge of the game - living/breathing, playing, coaching, watching, those things combined with the stats helps you formulate more educated opinions about players.

So then when you made the previous statement about best striker, midfielder, defender and keeper playing up and therefore not helping at age, how were you defining what best is? I am just truly trying to understand how you arrive at what you feel who is best at each position on the team.

Stats are the worst possible starting point for formulating opinions.

Qualified opinions are not based on "emotional responses." Qualified opinions are based on observation and understanding.

The best starting point for formulating opinions is to increase your understanding.

Put away the stats and pick up the remote. Use your DVR. Watch a lot of matches. Watch the best teams in the world. They often have the best players. Observe. Try to notice all of the little details that make them the best players. After a couple of years, you may start to have a rudimentary understanding of what makes some players objectively better than others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'll go a step further. At U-15, Spirit didn't start their best striker, best midfielder, best defender, or best goalie. Make of that what you will, but I'd propose that winning games may not be their top priority.

That is a great theory, except Tom told the girls he wants wins. Also, best players according to you, I'm assuming?

Of course Tom "wants" to win, but with the 2004 team's cumulative record sitting at something like 2-27-3, I don't think he's ever prioritized winning over getting playing time for some of his "developing players".

Yes, best players according to me. Simply my opinion. Feel free to share yours.

NOT PP here
So how to you quantify "best" for each player you mention? Best striker - would that assume that she scores the most, creates the most scoring opportunities, what? Just trying to understand how you quantify best at striker - goals scored would be a leading indicator in my book, so then how many goals did your "best striker" score last year assuming she was with the Spirit (if not then looking at last year's stats is a moot point) Best mid fielder - this one could be a bit more subjective, but I would leverage assists as one of my indicators, unfortunately I do not think DA registers assists, so that may be a bit harder to track. With that being said, I would also look at the midfielder in terms of how she controls the mid field, does she win most tackles, does she have a high % of completed passes? Again, since DA does not track that it would be hard to tell unless you keep track of those stats yourself. Best defender - Again, going to be hard to track stats for this position as DA does not keep track of them, but much like midfielder, I would look at how she controls the center above, at, and in the 18. Does she win most of her tackles, what is her % of completed passes. Keeper - this one is a little easier, I would look at shots saved versus goals given up. Of course some of those numbers may be off if her D gives up on her and she is left out to dry, but still the shot/save % should be a good indicator of how good she is. I do not know enough about the team to give any opinions of who is "best" on that team at each position, but this is just my two cents on how I would go about quantifying best at each position if I did know enough.

This is soccer. You can't always "quantify" everything. Everyone can have an opinion. Those who know more about the game - because they've played, coached, watched, studied, lived & breathed it for years, tend to have better opinions than those who haven't.

For someone with a lot of expertise about the game, stats can be a valuable tool, because that person will know how to interpret them in the context of what they can see with their own eyes. For a novice, stats are worse than useless.

I agree, everyone can have an opinion, but they are usually grounded in fact (or in some cases, perception). Without fact, one's opinion is more emotional response than anything. With that being said, I think stats are a starting point for formulating opinions about what is best. And as you pointed out, someone with knowledge of the game - living/breathing, playing, coaching, watching, those things combined with the stats helps you formulate more educated opinions about players.

So then when you made the previous statement about best striker, midfielder, defender and keeper playing up and therefore not helping at age, how were you defining what best is? I am just truly trying to understand how you arrive at what you feel who is best at each position on the team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'll go a step further. At U-15, Spirit didn't start their best striker, best midfielder, best defender, or best goalie. Make of that what you will, but I'd propose that winning games may not be their top priority.

That is a great theory, except Tom told the girls he wants wins. Also, best players according to you, I'm assuming?

Of course Tom "wants" to win, but with the 2004 team's cumulative record sitting at something like 2-27-3, I don't think he's ever prioritized winning over getting playing time for some of his "developing players".

Yes, best players according to me. Simply my opinion. Feel free to share yours.