Squad Ages

[Davefevs]

Starting Line-up Saturday:

Bentley 26

Pereira 21 | Moore 22 | Williams 35 | Rowe 31

Eliasson 22 | Brownhill 23 | Massengo 18 | O’Dowda 24

Weimann 28 | Diedhiou 26

If Williams and Rowe were Kalas (26) and Dasilva (21) that’s one seriously young squad.  Nagy only 24 too.

Add to that the subs - Palmer (22), Semenyo (19) and Hunt (28)!!

[Guest]

Only three or four of those players are unlikely to improve. However good a player is now, they're going to most likely be even better in a year or two. Or maybe even become a far better player during this season. Really exciting.

[David Brent]

Easy to forget that Pereira is just 21

[maxjak]

Yet LJ states post match on the BBC site........."We had a very young side out there today.  I was very proud of my young pups"  That's not strictly true is it boss?

[forbespm]

Average age of first 11 is 25. Not that young is it?

[cidered abroad]

19 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Yet LJ states post match on the BBC site........."We had a very young side out there today.  I was very proud of my young pups"  That's not strictly true is it boss?

But the majority of the match day squad are novices compared with some of the top championship clubs.

AD had a similar squad of young players while we were trying to get promotion and brought in old heads like Ernie Hunt to help guide them through matches. That is why Ashley Williams and Tommy Rowe are good recruits. Also good to see Moore, giving "advice" to Williams.

[Dr Balls]

55 minutes ago, forbespm said:

Average age of first 11 is 25. Not that young is it?

Wrong statistical method. Average is raised by Ashley Williams and Rowe both being quite a bit older. The median is more accurate and that’s 24, which is not super young, but shows that there is room for development in many of the players.

[Sturny]

9 hours ago, David Brent said:

Easy to forget that Pereira is just 21

It's the hairline, poor lad

[Fatalist]

Rather than just age, look at the experience of that starting line up (games played) - from Wiki, hope its right:

Bentley 275

Pereira 54 (in Italy) + 2 (England) = 56 ;  Moore 44 (France) + 106 (England) = 150 ;   Williams 481 + 86 Full International = 567 ; Rowe 416

Eliasson 90 (Sweden) + 52 (England) = 142 ; Brownhill 198 ; Massengo 3 (France) + 8 (England) = 11 ; O'Dowda 185 + 15 Full International = 200

Weimann 292 + 14 Full International = 306 ; Diedhiou 168 (France) + 79 (England) + 6 Full International = 253

Only 2 players have under 100 appearances and 7 have at least 198.

Still plenty of room to develop, but not really pups?

[Dullmoan Tone]

1 hour ago, Dr Balls said:

Wrong statistical method. Average is raised by Ashley Williams and Rowe both being quite a bit older. The median is more accurate and that’s 24, which is not super young, but shows that there is room for development in many of the players.

But that is exactly what an average is - so I would have to argue it's statistically correct.

Perhaps mode suits your theory better?

But surely the average shows that the experienced players help out the young-uns

 

[CyderInACan]

2 hours ago, maxjak said:

Yet LJ states post match on the BBC site........."We had a very young side out there today.  I was very proud of my young pups"  That's not strictly true is it boss?

Mind games I think. He's playing it down and trying not to attract attention. He also mentioned in his interview something along the lines of Reading being "richly assembled" in the summer whilst conveniently forgetting we probably spent the most in that transfer window that we ever have. 

 

[Nathandao]

11 minutes ago, CyderInACan said:

Mind games I think. He's playing it down and trying not to attract attention. He also mentioned in his interview something along the lines of Reading being "richly assembled" in the summer whilst conveniently forgetting we probably spent the most in that transfer window that we ever have. 

 

think he said net spend which suggests they are negative. We brought in a lot of money to spend a lot of money.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, maxjak said:

Yet LJ states post match on the BBC site........."We had a very young side out there today.  I was very proud of my young pups"  That's not strictly true is it boss?

It is in the context of the Champ.  Average 25.1....Champ average (18/19) 26.7.  That 1.6 might not seem much, but it would be 2nd youngest compared to last season.

 

[Alessandro]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

It is in the context of the Champ.  Average 25.1....Champ average (18/19) 26.7.  That 1.6 might not seem much, but it would be 2nd youngest compared to last season.

 

I guess the comparison is the more important factor when discussing team age/experience. Second youngest is pretty young then.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, CyderInACan said:

Mind games I think. He's playing it down and trying not to attract attention. He also mentioned in his interview something along the lines of Reading being "richly assembled" in the summer whilst conveniently forgetting we probably spent the most in that transfer window that we ever have. 

 

1 hour ago, Nathandao said:

think he said net spend which suggests they are negative. We brought in a lot of money to spend a lot of money.

Yes, he qualified with net spend, which according to Transfermarkt was indeed correct.

Digressing slightly, most teams in the Champ make a decent profit (positive net spend) from Transfers - which proves that everyone is pretty much running at a loss and selling more than you buy offsets the losses.  We are no different.

[BobBobSuperBob]

1 hour ago, Nathandao said:

think he said net spend which suggests they are negative. We brought in a lot of money to spend a lot of money.

Yes - Fevs posted the transfermarket figures

Its somewhat misleading though as they only bought two players (Puskas And Joao) for a combined £10/11 million

They simply didn’t sell or have any players in demand to sell of value 

(I still think Lees sell of Reading as big spenders was a bit naff @Davefevs , yes we’ve traded well in last 2 years but he’s certainly been backed with £££j 

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

I guess the comparison is the more important factor when discussing team age/experience. Second youngest is pretty young then.

Also as eluded to by @Fatalist, age isn’t necessarily a barometer of experience, but Brentford at 24.7 and Bolton at 28.9 is 4.2 years difference.  That could equate to 150-200 games difference!

@Fatalist wiki won’t be very accurate, but Taylor Moore only played 10 times in France (9+1 sub)....but your point stands.

[maxjak]

40 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Yes - Fevs posted the transfermarket figures

Its somewhat misleading though as they only bought two players (Puskas And Joao) for a combined £10/11 million

They simply didn’t sell or have any players in demand to sell of value 

(I still think Lees sell of Reading as big spenders was a bit naff @Davefevs , yes we’ve traded well in last 2 years but he’s certainly been backed with £££j 

I believe thet have quite a few on loan.......that midfielder, who's name escapes me, from Liverpool must be worth a few shekels??

[BobBobSuperBob]

3 minutes ago, maxjak said:

I believe thet have quite a few on loan.......that midfielder, who's name escapes me, from Liverpool must be worth a few shekels??

Ejaria 

Yes , But you can say the same about Afobe & Pedro !

[Dr Balls]

4 hours ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

But that is exactly what an average is - so I would have to argue it's statistically correct.

Perhaps mode suits your theory better?

But surely the average shows that the experienced players help out the young-uns

 

Nope. Sorry to be the statistics bore but I do a lot if this at work. 

Median would only be the same as the average (mean) if it was a perfect normal distribution. Few things are (including the ages of our line up) in which case median (the middle number of the distribution from lowest to highest or vice versa) is more accurate.

[Davefevs]

34 minutes ago, Dr Balls said:

Nope. Sorry to be the statistics bore but I do a lot if this at work. 

Median would only be the same as the average (mean) if it was a perfect normal distribution. Few things are (including the ages of our line up) in which case median (the middle number of the distribution from lowest to highest or vice versa) is more accurate.

18, 21, 22, 22, 23, 24, 26, 26, 28, 31, 35

[BS4 on Tour...]

6 hours ago, Fatalist said:

Rather than just age, look at the experience of that starting line up (games played) - from Wiki, hope its right:

Bentley 275

Pereira 54 (in Italy) + 2 (England) = 56 ;  Moore 44 (France) + 106 (England) = 150 ;   Williams 481 + 86 Full International = 567 ; Rowe 416

Eliasson 90 (Sweden) + 52 (England) = 142 ; Brownhill 198 ; Massengo 3 (France) + 8 (England) = 11 ; O'Dowda 185 + 15 Full International = 200

Weimann 292 + 14 Full International = 306 ; Diedhiou 168 (France) + 79 (England) + 6 Full International = 253

Only 2 players have under 100 appearances and 7 have at least 198.

Still plenty of room to develop, but not really pups?

That’s weird - wiki actually shows Williams as making 624 league appearances for clubs and 698 in all club competitions - as well as his 86 international appearances as you say. 

Even though, your point still stands (the same point I made to Robbored recently) if you look at total appearances, we’ve got a pretty experienced squad...

[cityexile]

4 hours ago, Dr Balls said:

Nope. Sorry to be the statistics bore but I do a lot if this at work. 

Median would only be the same as the average (mean) if it was a perfect normal distribution. Few things are (including the ages of our line up) in which case median (the middle number of the distribution from lowest to highest or vice versa) is more accurate.

Equally to be a stats bore...kind of?

Median is the same as mean indeed if it is a normal distribution, but there are other examples where the two could match, certainly in a distribution of 11. 

Its not that the median is more accurate, it just may be in this case the more useful (which actually on balance I do agree). The mean and median are both totally accurate, for what they measure. A distribution of 18, 19, 22, 23, 23 has a median of 22 as does 22, 22, 22, 34, 34, although one team clearly has more experience than the other. Simply comparing medians here would give you little insight.

Equally, the average person in the UK has 1.99 legs, so mean does not always work either!

I would possibly summarise our team as having a median age of 24, with a range of 17 years, which gives some idea of the spread of the ages as well. When I taught stats at A Level I might also expect them to start knocking off outliers like Williams who does distort the distribution as well.

Sod it. I am droning on. Sorry!

edit...also getting a slightly nervous tick reading Daves averages.

One for you from  the new GCSE curriculum.

Q (at its simplist) Three players, ages 24, 25, and 26. Estimate their mean age.

A 25.5

Yea.

 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, cityexile said:

Equally to be a stats bore...kind of?

Median is the same as mean indeed if it is a normal distribution, but there are other examples where the two could match, certainly in a distribution of 11. 

Its not that the median is more accurate, it just may be in this case the more useful (which actually on balance I do agree). The mean and median are both totally accurate, for what they measure. A distribution of 18, 19, 22, 23, 23 has a median of 22 as does 22, 22, 22, 34, 34, although one team clearly has more experience than the other. Simply comparing medians here would give you little insight.

Equally, the average person in the UK has 1.99 legs, so mean does not always work either!

I would possibly summarise our team as having a median age of 24, with a range of 17 years, which gives some idea of the spread of the ages as well. When I taught stats at A Level I might also expect them to start knocking off outliers like Williams who does distort the distribution as well.

Sod it. I am droning on. Sorry!

edit...also getting a slightly nervous tick reading Daves averages.

One for you from  the new GCSE curriculum.

Q (at its simplist) Three players, ages 24, 25, and 26. Estimate their mean age.

A 25.5

Yea.

 

You sound like a standard deviant

Guessing the GCSE answer is because the ave / mean of 24 year olds is 24 1/2, as some will be 24, some 24 + 364 days.

I do think that is an awful curriculum question if true.  If it was worded as “why might the estimated mean age of 3 players 24, 25 and 26 equal 25.5” and give you the chance to explain i could understand it.

[cityexile]

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You sound like a standard deviant

Guessing the GCSE answer is because the ave / mean of 24 year olds is 24 1/2, as some will be 24, some 24 + 364 days.

I do think that is an awful curriculum question if true.  If it was worded as “why might the estimated mean age of 3 players 24, 25 and 26 equal 25.5” and give you the chance to explain i could understand it.

Full marks.

In complete fairness, it does not come up in the way I framed. It comes up more when they have to work out a mean from a frequency table, and they are expected to remember if it is ‘age in years’ they have to treat 24 as 24.5 etc to multiply across. Just about every bugger gets it wrong.

Not doing it now, but whenever my A Level maths and stats classes would moan, I used to bring in my old log books and slide rule to show them how I used to have to work it all out. Now it’s all about methodology because every stats calculator can work out the whole blessed lot! 

[Lanterne Rouge]

OTIB never ceases to amaze! The depth of knowledge on here is incredible sometimes!

[Davefevs]

13 minutes ago, cityexile said:

Full marks.

In complete fairness, it does not come up in the way I framed. It comes up more when they have to work out a mean from a frequency table, and they are expected to remember if it is ‘age in years’ they have to treat 24 as 24.5 etc to multiply across. Just about every bugger gets it wrong.

Not doing it now, but whenever my A Level maths and stats classes would moan, I used to bring in my old log books and slide rule to show them how I used to have to work it all out. Now it’s all about methodology because every stats calculator can work out the whole blessed lot! 

I did A level Maths and Stats.

My teacher loved his sport, so we’d get sports related questions like:

- if England’s touring squad is made up of 7 batsman, 2 wicket keepers and 7 bowlers, work out how many permutations there are  if you have to pick 5 batsman, 1 wicket keeper and 5 bowlers.  And for a bonus name all 16 in the touring party!

We had to do some correlations for coursework and I remember one of mine was goalkeeper height versus league position.

Most of the girls just rolled their eyes whenever sport came up!

[reddoh]

36 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I did A level Maths and Stats.

My teacher loved his sport, so we’d get sports related questions like:

- if England’s touring squad is made up of 7 batsman, 2 wicket keepers and 7 bowlers, work out how many permutations there are  if you have to pick 5 batsman, 1 wicket keeper and 5 bowlers.  And for a bonus name all 16 in the touring party!

We had to do some correlations for coursework and I remember one of mine was goalkeeper height versus league position.

Most of the girls just rolled their eyes whenever sport came up!

circa 1979 if a train left temple meads at 07:15 to paddington and two men were trying to fill a bath but had forgotten to to the plug in  who would complete the task first?

[Davefevs]

54 minutes ago, reddoh said:

circa 1979 if a train left temple meads at 07:15 to paddington and two men were trying to fill a bath but had forgotten to to the plug in  who would complete the task first?

Were there leaves on the line?

[reddoh]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Were there leaves on the line?

no but after 15 minuets the train broke down , slogan around the time "Let the train take the strain" yer right but history shows I got the job and I lived hapilyish ever after.