I think we’re trying to moneyball it again, which is no bad thing.
We’ve never done moneyball, but we are going back to our normal model, which works a treat with a decent manager and we have that.
Get your season ticket again, if situation permits.
It’s going to be exciting.
2 Likes
I may be misunderstanding the term, but I thought moneyball referred to a team with lower resources than the big clubs using a combination of analysis and signings to build an effective team on the cheap.
Isn’t that basically Southampton during most of our good spells? Or do I have my definition wrong?
2 Likes
My understanding of it was that it was a stats based system looking for underrated players.
Sounds similar, but not really. For one it’s based on an American (kind of)sport, so no baring to the realities of football. It’s not about the young potential we look for, just players of any age that have areas of their game that haven’t been used to full potential.
I would call the Ferrari young driver program closer to our normal model than that (although i doubt many would agree).
I think it amounts to the same thing. What was the black box model, if not one for identifying players that other teams weren’t picking up.
Clough probably didn’t have a print-out when he was propelling Derby or Forest up the leagues, and they didn’t call it moneyball either. In essence, that’s what it was. Cloughy just wasn’t as dry as the stats.
I think you can safely add Clasie, Austin, Reed, Gallagher and maybe Stephens to that list too.
1 Like
Yeah if you like, but i still say it’s closer to the Ferrari young driver program.
One important word makes the difference (to me only, possibly).
The main point was, it’s a lazy distinction that could relate to just about any sport or even business.
I think we’ll probably shift Soares pretty easily. There will be plenty of teams prepared to put up with his shortcomings to get what he can provide. Someone will probably think Boufal worth a go too, just as we did.
I can see most of those you’ve mentioned being shuffled out quite quickly and quietly, if only to trouble a first team again.
Clough bought all kinds of players, young and old, as did we during our most successful league period.
Clough? Don’t get the connection.
We have bought older, but generally as a managers choice. That’s not our model though. We try to spot talent before it’s developed, which is the complete opposite of how i see moneyball. That’s a system for finding talent that isn’t being used correctly. Maybe i’m not explaining it correctly, but i think they are hugely different systems on every level.
You’re both wrong about moneyball - you clearly haven’t been listening to Bazza. Moneyball doesn’t require any definition, indeed its definition will vary wildly according to how Baz is feeling at any given moment. What really matters is this:
- Moneyball is what Saints do;
- Moneyball is a load of shit.
And that’s all you need to know really.
13 Likes
If only Baz could have explained it so succinctly…
1 Like
Clough’s teams are perhaps the closest thing English football has seen to “moneyball”.
Baseball is a turn-based game. I don’t think there is direct analogue to precisely what Brad Pitt did in that film (can’t remember what it’s called) in football to be had.
If you want to get close, check out Clough’s Derby and Forest sides. Ok, he had a Peter Taylor and not a laptop full of stats, but it was the same thing. They bought players most other teams considered either finished or not good enough. Derby won the League. Forest won that and the European Cup.
I do accept that we’ve historically had a strong youth component which makes us a little bit less moneyball than that. I wonder how many of them Ralph might fancy using next year.
1 Like
I know all about Clough. Still no relevance to the club system, only the manager picks.
As @Fowlld says, it’s a load of bollocks. Typical Americanisation that means nothing, but covers everything…Brad whoever and baseball(rounders goes steroids)? Like comparing F1 and football?
Ralph’s going for loads of them, could argue he already has. We’re going to be the youngest team in the league this coming season.
Get your season ticket now. They’ll all go when the next two signings are announced.
this film?
2 Likes
I remember being struck by the clear parallels to the Saints of five years ago when I watched the film of the same name. I’d recommend it as compulsory viewing if it weren’t for brad fucking pitt chewing his way through two hours of footage, why does he always spend all his screen time stuffing his fucking face, the greedy cunt.
1 Like
I agree there are parallels, but thought there were some important differences. Never seen the film, so can’t comment on it, but the thought of watching an American chew gum for hours doesn’t appeal.
If the general view is that it’s a fair comparison i’ll go with the majority.
Hooray!
I think Saints are going to moneyball it again, which is no bad thing. Discuss 
It’s more that he is constantly grazing on nuts and popcorn and sunflower seeds throughout the film, I think Billy Beane was a compulsive grazer and Pitt was just method acting. The greedy cunt.
On a side note I always wondered if James Gandolfini came to an early end in part because in almost every scene in The Sopranos he was shoving cannolis and spaghetti down his pie hole, and unless they got every scene in one take that’s alottameataballs 
2 Likes