Friday, August 1, 2014

A Southampton FC Focused Discussion of Soccernomics by Kuper and Szymanski


Ever since I read A Thinking Man’s Guide to Pro Football by Paul Zimmerman (a book about the NFL) in the early ‘70s, my perspective on sports has been somewhat different from the average fan.  Specifically, I recognized that as a fan I didn’t really know what I was talking about.  It didn’t stop me from talking about sports but I often exercised caution in asserting that I knew what I was talking about.  This qualifies me to write a blog about a sport I have only followed seriously for four years.

In the early ‘80s, I starting reading the annual Bill James Baseball Abstract and I realized that it was not just fans that didn’t know things.  Much of what the experts who played, coached, and ran Major League Baseball believed to be true simply was not true.  Given the vast amount of detailed statistics extending back over a hundred years, it was virtually inevitable that baseball would be the first sport subject to intense statistical analysis.  The fact that football lacked such statistics meant that it would be one of the last sports to submit to such analysis.  Yet one thing was clear to me—given what Bill James was writing—the less a sport was subject to statistical analysis, the more certain it  was that even the experts did not know what they were talking about.  It was certain that some players and their skill sets were overvalued while other players and their skill sets were undervalued.  (Using this type of analysis to run a team is often referred to by the term “Moneyball” from the book Moneyball by Michael Lewis. Moneyball did not originate this type of analysis.  It merely reported on what was going on with the Oakland A’s.)

Of course, that is no longer entirely true.  Football is counting many more statistics these days including dribbles, interceptions, shots on target, and so forth.  Very likely some teams have partially cracked the code and are taking advantage of this knowledge in the transfer market or in training methods. However, unlike baseball with its surprisingly simple, yet strong, mathematical relationship between on-base percentage, slugging percentage, and runs created no such similar relationship is yet (publically?) known in football.  No one can say that, for example, each successful dribble creates .09 goals.

Nevertheless the questions are being asked. I have read two books that address these kind of  issues:  The Numbers Game:  Why Everything You Know About Soccer is Wrong by David Sally and Chris Anderson and Soccernomics:  Why England Loses, Why Germany and Brazil Win, and Why the U.S., Japan, Australia, Turkey—and Even Iraq—Are Destined to Become the Kings of the World’s Most Popular Sport by Simon Kuper and Stefan Szymanski.  (If anyone knows of other similar books, please let me know.)  In this post I will focus on a few interesting issues raised in Soccernomics and relate them back—a little bit--to Southampton FC today.

Soccernomics has a significant discussion of transfers, their relative importance, and the types of  mistakes that are commonly made.  The most interesting conclusion to me from this part of the book is that relative transfer spending only accounted for 16% of the variation in league position for English clubs from 1978 through 1997.  Salary spending accounted for 92% of the variation.  In the BPL from 1998 through 2007 salary spending accounted for 89% of the variation.

Given the discussion in my last post, this point is critical to Southampton’s chances of progressing into the upper echelons of the BPL.  According to The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/01/premier-league-accounts-club-by-club-david-conn) in 2012-2013 Southampton’s wages were 47 million pounds.  Manchester City’s wages were the highest in the league at 233 million pounds.  Given the strong correlation between pay and performance challenging ManCity seems pretty hopeless.  However, if Southampton can take steps to increase the salary it can afford to pay and is legally permitted to pay, it can ensure its safety and, perhaps progress further up the table.  Of course, this correlation isn’t perfect.  QPR was relegated with wages of 78 million pounds--the seventh highest in the league.  It does matter who you pay, not just how much.

This correlation can be seen in action this summer.  If Southampton could have legally given all its players the kind of salary increases they could get elsewhere, maybe fewer of them would have wanted to leave.  Perhaps they would have viewed these pay raises as demonstrating the club’s ambition. Then a few high quality players could have been added—again without worrying about any salary limits—demonstrating even more ambition.  However, the lack of such pay raises did not reflect a lack of ambition.  No matter how much money Katharina Liebherr might have wanted to spend, the salary cap rules would not permit her to increase the total salary spending by very much without a lot of positive net transfer income. 

One of the stupider transfer inefficiencies discussed in Soccernomics is the way new transfers are treated upon their arrival.  Even though teams spend Millions of Pounds to bring in new players, they seem willfully foolish in their failure to help them to settle into a new town or country.  (Very likely this has changed for some clubs since Soccernomics was published in 2009.)   Southampton should probably have someone fluent in Serbian on call to assist Dusan Tadic and someone fluent in Italian to assist Graziano Pelle.  It doesn’t matter how good their English might be.  The players would do better with someone to talk to in their own language and who was familiar with the Southampton area.  It would also be useful if the team helped all new transfers to find a place to live.  When a player with a family is transferred to a new city, the team should help the family move in since the player will almost certainly be too busy to do the job himself.  Assistance in picking out good schools for any children would also no doubt be appreciated.  Quite possibly, this type of help would increase future loyalty to the team, but perhaps that is too much to expect.

Soccernomics also analyzed racism in football, penalty kicks, the relative popularity of football in various countries, fan loyalty and happiness, the effects of poverty on football players and nations, and why is it is “absurd” to expect England to win the World Cup.    It is well worth reading if you want a new perspective on football and if you want to learn what things you have always believed about football were not true.  On the other hand, it may also cause you to wonder how other fans can be so stupid and ignorant.  And after all, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

No comments:

Post a Comment