Charlie Austin is a pub standard footballer

[MoSe]

Why not use points per minute rather than PPG. PPG is inaccurate when you get players like Aguero who get injured frequently and make a few sub appearances here and there, so i'm sure Aguero will be higher if you use that ratio instead.

• EDIT:
  it's not my habit at all to edit out somethin I had already posted (I think this is only the 2nd or 3rd time I did it in my life)
  In this case tho I regret that I got so heated, and I stooped as low to uselessly argue on the internet, I admit you hit me on a soft spot and succeeded in winding me up
  I'm not receding from my point (nor "fleeing from a fight" (?)), I maintain my strong opposition to your opinion
  I just abridged my post from the most heated up expressions I had used.
  I saved the original post in case someone wants to call me up and object on what I first wrote
  
  ALSO:
  first, when ruudy brought up a comparison to Aguero, you objected him that was not your original point to compare Austin with Aguero
  then, when I try to position Austin FPL performance in relationship to those of all the strikers in the game in 2015, you yourself bring up Aguero as an example, to prove that the stat you used is more accurate in his case than the one I chose???
  I learned that you like to turn the tables (sp?) in a debate as it suits your own convenience
  imho this is not a useful and correct way of debating - and I stress imho of course

____________________________________
abridged post:

please don't get me started on that!!!
I restrained from commenting against your use of minutes per goal in FPL, but now you're directly provoking me on the issue

Minutes per Goal (MpG ?) it's a worthly stat in real life football

MpG, and PP90 wich refers to FPL Pts indeed, are crassly inaccurate when used to evaluate a player in a game like FPL. IMHO
MpG alone can give a measure of the propension for goal of a player, but:
- goals are only a part of a player FPL score, even for a striker
- to be intellectually honest, when mentioning a "per minute" stat (or in this case a minute per item) you must always also reporte his Minutes per Game stat

you say " i'm sure Aguero will be higher if you use that ratio instead."
yes, and that would be a misleading stat in FPL context, and its use maybe even maliciously misleading

• - if I had a rocket in my <behind>, I'd be supersonic
  - coool.... but you DON'T

or

• - if I played always 90' and never get injured, my stat would be better
  - coool.... but you DON'T

[um09a2k]

Cut the pseudo-maths Mose, MPG is useful for assessing impact subs e.g. Remy, Dzeko (of last season), who's data would be skewed if you only calculated their PPG. Surely in these cases I want to know how many points a player can deliver per minute rather than per game.

[Carlos Kickaball]

who's data would be skewed if you only calculated their PPG.

Whose!

Who's is a contraction of who is or who has.

[MoSe]

now that your smokescreen has been fanned away
back to the beef

I called that he wouldn't keep up his form and descend into mediocrity after Christmas.

...
he didn't keep up the SAME form, ok
but "descend into mediocrity"? I think that's a bit harsh, and can be debated
he has the 6th PPG for fwds in GW19-33

Kane 7.643
Giroud 6.417
Murray 6.333
Costa 5.889
Benteke 4.933
Austin 4.857
Agüero 4.750

is that mediocrity?

...
And 4.857 points per game for me is mediocre, not good nor is it poor. So I don't think I gave a misguided opinion there. And in the second half of the season, team value is of less importance so to compare his price to premium strikers is a bit irrelevant, not mentioning that Murray is actually cheaper and has been on better form.

"And 4.857 points per game for me is mediocre, not good nor is it poor"

• well, I can accept if it's a matter of semantics, english is your language (I presume?), not mine, so I just have to take note
  it's true that mediocre comes from medium, being in the middle - but as I had understood it, OK mediocre is not good nor poor, but I thougt it was just a bit worse than average... was I wrong?
  • average = smack in the middle, not good nor poor
    mediocre = not good nor poor, but a bit more on the poor side
  probably it's that it can have more than one acception, and we meant different ones
  • http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mediocre?s=t
    1. of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate
    2. not satisfactory; poor; inferior

anyway, Austin is 6th after Xmas, Benteke is 5th with a very similar yield
by that you imply that only four fwd have been good in FPL in 2015, and all the rest is mediocrity?
OK, it's a way of seeing it, a bit extrem partition of a population imhop, but it's another PoV I can accept and respect. As long as we agree on what we mean.
"So I don't think I gave a misguided opinion there" I don't think I said that, I just found your judgement a bit severe

"And in the second half of the season, team value is of less importance so to compare his price to premium strikers is a bit irrelevant,"
WHAT??? I lost you there mate.
Team value??? who talked about that
you talked about "mediocrity", I compared his 2015 performance with the whole population of FPL Forwards, with ALL of them
And reported the TOP of the list, in order of PPG,
I did NOT compare him to "just premium strikers"
...sooo, let me try to understand your logic: the best 7 performing FPL strikers in 2015 are 6 premium strikers, plus Austin which is mediocre despite being at ther same level of the 5th and the 7th? It looks to me as you're contradicting yourself

You find irrelevant to compare a player performance with the premiium ones, when it's (indeed) "comparable" to them?
OK, as you wish, I'll post the COMPLETE LIST of the FPL forwards who got a score since GW19 (28 Dec)

• FPL FWDS GW19-33.png
  click on it to see full detail
  when a single score is shaded in yellow, the player has played less than 60' in that game

DOU YOU FIND THIS RELEVANT ENOUGH?

Where is Austin placed? Oh, wait, in a mediocre part tof that table

"not mentioning that Murray is actually cheaper and has been on better form."
yes, and what's your point?
I was comparing Austin with ALL the FPL forwards, to support that imho saying he was back to "mediocrity" was a bit too harsh (severe? stern? unfair?)
When ruudy compared him to Aguero, you protested that it was not relevant to what you said

But I never mentioned how he does compared to Aguero. They have both been mediocre in this latter half of the season, that was my original point

Now that I just put him in context in the whole forwards ranking to understand and assess his "mediocrity", you bring up a comparison with a specific one?

I don't understand you, it looks to me like you use one argument, and then when objected you recur to the opposite one, just as it suits your agenda...

in summary, irrelevant to which other striker we could compare him,
Austin performance is in Top 10% of all FPL strikers who played at least half the games "in this latter half of the season" (and this is a FACT),
and being in Top 10% makes him "mediocre , that was [your] original point".

OK, fine by me
anyone can form his free opinion about the reported FACTS
I just wanted to make things clear, for the sake of understanding and precision
not interested in arguing (it's useless on the internet after all )

[MoSe]

Cut the pseudo-maths Mose, MPG is useful for assessing impact subs e.g. Remy, Dzeko (of last season), who's data would be skewed if you only calculated their PPG. Surely in these cases I want to know how many points a player can deliver per minute rather than per game.

I'm taking offense for you use of the word "pseudo"
you're being deliberately derogatory and offensive

I'm also beginning to learn to know that you easily change the point being discussed when it suits your convenience

"MPG is useful for assessing impact subs e.g. Remy, Dzeko (of last season)"
I'm not rigid and stubborn, I can concede it could be useful as a "niche tool" in very specific cases
which are NOT the point we were debating

when comparing the performance in the last half of the season of the top strikers in a game based on Points per Game,
you say a niche tool regarding only one of several scoring items, useful for assessing the pontential performance of impact subs, is more accurate than PPG wich is the cornerstone of the scoring system in the game itself?

OK, whatever floats your boat, I'm not good a playing hide & seek

[um09a2k]

Cut the pseudo-maths Mose, MPG is useful for assessing impact subs e.g. Remy, Dzeko (of last season), who's data would be skewed if you only calculated their PPG. Surely in these cases I want to know how many points a player can deliver per minute rather than per game.

I'm taking offense for you use of the word "pseudo"
you're being deliberately derogatory and offensive

I'm also beginning to learn to know that you easily change the point being discussed when it suits your convenience

"MPG is useful for assessing impact subs e.g. Remy, Dzeko (of last season)"
I'm not rigid and stubborn, I can concede it could be useful as a "niche tool" in very specific cases
which are NOT the point we were debating

when comparing the performance in the last half of the season of the top strikers in a game based on Points per Game,
you say a niche tool regarding only one of several scoring items, useful for assessing the pontential performance of impact subs, is more accurate than PPG wich is the cornerstone of the scoring system in the game itself?

OK, whatever floats your boat, I'm not good a playing hide & seek

I'm doing nothing of the sort, you are trying to intimidate me with all these bro-stats which is only acting to obscure the point we are trying to debate.

My original claim was that Austin would not keep up the same form he was showing before xmas into this part of the season, and I was right (even if you use your PPG). He was averaging almost a goal a game compared to just under an assist a game from GW18.

I never aimed to compare him to Aguero, but my point was that Aguero had a better MPG than Austin since after xmas, as I thought it was unfair to use absolute goals to compare the two when Aguero missed a few games.

[Carlos Kickaball]

bro-stats and pseudo-maths are just statements people make when they don't want facts to be brought into the debate. If something is actually pseudo-maths or suchlike it should be easy for you to tell us why it is not representative or inaccurate rather than just denigrating information on the basis that you don't like it.

Your style of argument very much runs along the lines of - "Well you can prove anything with facts can't you! I'm not interested in facts, I find they tend to cloud my judgement, I prefer to rely on instinct and blind prejudice."

[The Dazzler]

Jesus, what a train wreck of a thread.
If everyone stopped posting in it, the world would be a better place

[MoSe]

Jesus, what a train wreck of a thread.
If everyone stopped posting in it, the world would be a better place

hmmm... or maybe, if you stopped reading in it, the world would be a better place for you?

I admit, in hindsight, I wish I didn't start pointing out the reasoning fallacies in um09a2k posts in the first place,
...although I didn't it to pick on him personally (I've nothing against him),
but just because I thought interesting to enter in the merit of the debate (imho, this thread IS about Austin after all)

would you wish I edit my posts out now???
or would you wish it got locked for everybody because you don't like or appreciate a part of the debate?

with all due respect (you're indeed amongst the poster I most esteem), this time I beg to differ

[MoSe]

replying to the different points separately

I'm doing nothing of the sort, you are trying to intimidate me with all these bro-stats which is only acting to obscure the point we are trying to debate.

I'm sorry if you felt "intimidated", it wasn't my intention.
you and ruudy were already using stats in your discussion,
I jumped in bringin in more accurate and relevant ones (imho) to help assess and verify objectively the accuracy of the opposing opinions you two were hurling at each other

and sorry man, from my PoV it's you yourself who're indeed more "guilty" of what you're accusing me of, that is of obscuring the point
My intent was to clarify the matters indeed, OK it's possible that I've failed
but you continually turning the tables aren't helping much either

[The Dazzler]

Jesus, what a train wreck of a thread.
If everyone stopped posting in it, the world would be a better place

hmmm... or maybe, if you stopped reading in it, the world would be a better place for you?

I admit, in hindsight, I wish I didn't start pointing out the reasoning fallacies in um09a2k posts in the first place,
...although I didn't it to pick on him personally (I've nothing against him),
but just because I thought interesting to enter in the merit of the debate (imho, this thread IS about Austin after all)

would you wish I edit my posts out now???
or would you wish it got locked for everybody because you don't like or appreciate a part of the debate?

with all due respect (you're indeed amongst the poster I most esteem), this time I beg to differ

I wish it got locked as it has no redeeming value, in my opinion.
The 'just don't read it' argument is not valid. It clutters up the forum.
It should have been locked after the opening post, in my opinion. It was not started as a discussion about Austin as the iniital premise is clearly ludicrous. It was started to provoke people, in my opinion.
As you can see, he's not interested in a reasoned debate.

Mods can decide if my view or yours is more valid.

[MoSe]

My original claim was that Austin would not keep up the same form he was showing before xmas into this part of the season,
and I was right (even if you use your PPG).

have you read this? viewtopic.php?p=2694387#p2694387
it was even one of my shortest

I called that he wouldn't keep up his form and descend into mediocrity after Christmas.

...
including his 7p boxing day in it, we get
GW13-18 PPG 8.4
GW9-18 PPG 7.8
GW1-18 PPG 5.9

well, in GW19-33 his PPG is 4.86

he didn't keep up the SAME form, ok

I DID acknowledge you were right,
from the start!

you argue even when one's saying youre right???

[um09a2k]

I'm not arguing. And yes I did notice you pointed it out before, i was just reiterating my original claim as I felt the argument was going off tangent. Don't see why so many people are going in on me, must be due to the widespread anti-Chelsea agenda on the FISO forum.

[MoSe]

Jesus, what a train wreck of a thread.
If everyone stopped posting in it, the world would be a better place

hmmm... or maybe, if you stopped reading in it, the world would be a better place for you?

I admit, in hindsight, I wish I didn't start pointing out the reasoning fallacies in um09a2k posts in the first place,
...although I didn't it to pick on him personally (I've nothing against him),
but just because I thought interesting to enter in the merit of the debate (imho, this thread IS about Austin after all)

would you wish I edit my posts out now???
or would you wish it got locked for everybody because you don't like or appreciate a part of the debate?

with all due respect (you're indeed amongst the poster I most esteem), this time I beg to differ

I wish it got locked as it has no redeeming value, in my opinion.
The 'just don't read it' argument is not valid. It clutters up the forum.
It should have been locked after the opening post, in my opinion. It was not started as a discussion about Austin as the iniital premise is clearly ludicrous. It was started to provoke people, in my opinion.

Mods can decide if my view or yours is more valid.

OK, I apologise as I had the presumption to think you were mainly referring to my latest discussion with um09a2k, which I think we're bringing on in a more or less civil way even if from fiercely opposing PoV

I knew it was a weak argume as I was writing it
but come on, really?
it's ONE topic in a forum page listing FIFTY
it's not that hard to avoid it, once you learn you're not interested

I may agree it didn't start in then nicest way, and that the style and the content wasn't always of top quality,
but the fact that it collected almost 300 posts and went on for over 3 months should mean that a large chunk of fiso members find it worth to go on, wouldn't it?
for long stints, I myself didn't bother to read in it, but never in my life it would cross my mind to prevent others to use it, if they so like... with all my efforts I totally fail to understand how it could bother or disturb someone...

[Bergkamp_22]

No way in hell i'm reading through all this but i'll just say that to me PP90 is a pretty good way to analyse players- i use often and within reason. I check their run of form and recent starts when comparing with how they've produced, just to ensure they're not an impact sub etc.

Had this whole debate when i made a topic months ago. Not here to argue or debate, but for me PP90 is solid. Within reason.

[MoSe]

I never aimed to compare him to Aguero, but my point was that Aguero had a better MPG than Austin since after xmas, as I thought it was unfair to use absolute goals to compare the two when Aguero missed a few games.

I was not using absolute goals, I was using points, wich are more relevant in FPL which is not just about goals
and I wasn't using "absolute" (i.e. total), but "per game"
and indeed using Points per Game, is the fairest way to compare a player who missed Games

on the ohter hand I still maintain that using Points per Game is fairer and more accurate in FPL than Minutes per Goal

after boxing day
Aguero played 952 min in 12 games, scoring 57p total
Austing played 1244 min in 14 games, scoring 68p total

using PPG actually HELPS Aguero stat by factoring in that he missed 2 more games!
Aguero 4.75 PPG
Austin 4.86 PPG

Minutes per Game
Aguero 79.33
Austin 88.86

Points per 90' (I don't use "just goals" but their whole performance, as that's what counts in FPL)
Aguero 5.39 PP90
Austin 4.92 PP90

my point indeed is that it's unfair that Aguero FPL Points pontential gets "beefed" up, "just because" he got subbed off earlier sometimes, averaging 10' less than full games.
IT'S NOT as if, had he played those 10' more every game, he'd have actually earned 0.5 more Points per game!
it's not that way FPL works
IMHO


___


PS: seen and noted, Bergkamp
that's one of the first topics I read
I disagreed then, and I still do

[um09a2k]

Mose, I meant Ruudy was using absolute goals not you! In fact I'm not sure why you even got into this debate in the first place

[MoSe]

I'm not arguing. And yes I did notice you pointed it out before, i was just reiterating my original claim as I felt the argument was going off tangent.

your orignal claim was two-pronged
his form waned - I agreed
he turned back to mediocrity - I think that was too hard, I tried to verify and explain, and we found we disagree, partly on the meaning of the word, partly on the metric and the stats used

we most disagreed on our stats tools, and on our debating style tho,
than on Austin himself, where we still disagree but not in such a big way

is that summary correct?

edit / X-post:

Mose, I meant Ruudy was using absolute goals not you! In fact I'm not sure why you even got into this debate in the first place

because I disagreed he was "mediocre"!!!

see above

[um09a2k]

Yeh that's a fair assessment. Mediocre means average, I don't think there is much ambiguity in the meaning.

[MoSe]

FINALLY:

Don't see why so many people are going in on me, must be due to the widespread anti-Chelsea agenda on the FISO forum.

1st: I'm rather viscerally anti-Mou
I actually liked Chelsea some years ago, of course when it was full of italians!

Then:
viewtopic.php?p=2694623#p2694623
[in reply to The Dazzler]

I admit, in hindsight, I wish I didn't start pointing out the reasoning fallacies in um09a2k posts in the first place,
...although I didn't it to pick on him personally (I've nothing against him),
but just because I thought interesting to enter in the merit of the debate (imho, this thread IS about Austin after all)

[MoSe]

Yeh that's a fair assessment. Mediocre means average, I don't think there is much ambiguity in the meaning.

please, not again!

as a foreigner I have to recur to the dictionary
as already posted
viewtopic.php?p=2694577#p2694577

• probably it's that it can have more than one acception, and we meant different ones
  • http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mediocre?s=t
    1. of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate
    2. not satisfactory; poor; inferior

of course live usage takes precedence over a dictionary

[um09a2k]

You're a funny guy Mose No hard feelings.

[Vid]

Don't see why so many people are going in on me, must be due to the widespread anti-Chelsea agenda on the FISO forum.

Anti-Chelsea agenda??? Someone trying to upset ME??????

Not read this thread at all, but have been made aware of it today (although I've known it was here since day 1 and seem to remember posting a youtube thingy early on), seems to be a bit of bickering about something or other which in the grand scheme of things will be fairly unimportant. Threads do go off on tangents from time to time, sometimes minuscule points manage to take over for a few pages, it seems fairly civil so won't be locking the thread as long as it stays that way.

[Mystery]

Threads do go off on tangents from time to time,

No no no. The red line here is a tangent.

uploadfromtaptalk1429294607640.png

This thread is a bit more like this.

uploadfromtaptalk1429294634989.png

[MoSe]

for a moment today it felt like keeping up 3 balls at the same time
but not all the lines in that tangle are mine!!!

[Mystery]

You know that might possibly have been my most artistic post on FISO ever. Quite emotional

[Carlos Kickaball]

I thought a tangent was a cross between a tangerine and a currant.

Learn something new every day.

[Mystery]

Or a bloke who's spent too long on a sun bed

[MoSe]

omigod pubstandard puns

[ruudy]

he has the 6th PPG for fwds in GW19-33

Kane 7.643
Giroud 6.417
Murray 6.333
Costa 5.889
Benteke 4.933
Austin 4.857
Agüero 4.750

is that mediocrity?

Why not use points per minute rather than PPG. PPG is inaccurate when you get players like Aguero who get injured frequently and make a few sub appearances here and there, so i'm sure Aguero will be higher if you use that ratio instead.

And 4.857 points per game for me is mediocre, not good nor is it poor. So I don't think I gave a misguided opinion there. And in the second half of the season, team value is of less importance so to compare his price to premium strikers is a bit irrelevant, not mentioning that Murray is actually cheaper and has been on better form.

His PPG pre and post xmas isn't that much different at all.

How can you say that, he went from averaging almost a goal a game to now getting less than an assist a game

Add it up and see. I think he's dipped by about 0.8pts per game. So he's hardly bombed. As Mose pointed out he's still on par with Sergio.

Also PPM with Sergio.... Well i would assume there have been reasons why he's been taken off early at times. He went through poor form and didnt look like scroring in some matches.

Also by stating that Austin is now mediocre... Are you admitting that he is not pub standard after all? Lol.