Tuesday 19 April 2016

The Importance of Youth

There are plenty of sentimental reasons to play academy players at every level of the game, but for teams whose finances aren't entirely secure, there are economic reasons too. For Blues, this means that our young players have to be given game time if we want to progress - which may be slow, but it could be very fruitful.

Look at the last few players Blues have sold for a decent fee - Nathan Redmond went for £2m and is realistically worth a lot more, Demarai Gray went for £3.75m due to some contractual issues when he was realistically worth double that and Jordon Mutch went for an obscenely small fee too, due to some poor management from the board with finances. Now, by all accounts, Blues appear to be in a better place financially and even signed a player for £1.5m.

When you look at that signing, it was a move which was made to strengthen the side - whether that has happened yet I'm not sure - but it was financed by the sale of Demarai Gray. What made Gray worth so much money (relatively) was that he was young, fast, English and in an attacking position. These will always bump up a price, because of the homegrown quota. Attacking players will always cost more than defensive players, whether that be sensible or not. Pace is a quality that is sought after by so many teams and due to the recent rise in counter-attacking sides having success, this is likely to continue.

So what does this mean? Blues have to take advantage of the inflated prices for young English players by giving game time to these young players. At that age, you really only need 5-10 good games before your price rises to around £4-5m, which is gold dust to Blues. Viv Solomon Otabor is the obvious choice for the next player, with his obvious physical attributes and decent chance creation numbers in such a small amount of time. Viv appears to be the archetypal modern counter-attacker due to his incredible pace and willingness to carry the ball, but needs to get into shooting positions more and take more shots. This will come with coaching and game time.

Viv needs to play a lot more next year. He needs to be starting more often, and coming off the bench when he doesn't. His ability will be useful on the break anyway, but more than that, he needs game time. He signed a new deal in January I believe, and if next year he has a decent year, he would be worth circa £5m. £5m would allow Blues to sign two or three players to improve the squad, bring some more youth through and continue the cycle.

If it doesn't work out for Viv, and he doesn't become a Premier League or upper Championship level counter attacker in the next year, then Blues will have a 20-year-old attacker with blistering pace, willingness to carry the ball and hopefully by then a player with decent output. He will still be a threat at this level, meaning we will have to sign one less wide attacker. To me, it's almost a win-win situation.

Who else is there that could be worth giving some game time? Emmanuel Mbende is a name that has been touted around, as a somebody who is very good on the ball, but maybe not as good in the air as his frame would suggest. Ball-playing centre-backs are another sought after commodity (just ask John Stones) because as pressing becomes more commonplace, defenders who can break lines of pressure with a pass are invaluable.

Mbende needs to be given a few games in the cup, or even in games where Blues are expected to dominate, as that passing might come in handy. He may even be moved to defensive midfield, if what I have heard is correct. He might not be worth as much there, in terms of transfer value, but he could fill a much needed gap there - which again, makes economic sense.

Youth is not just a nice idea, for teams of Blues' level it's almost a necessity. Fortunately, Blues have a very good academy and great staff - Kristjaan Speakman seems to be a very good talent spotter and youth coach and Blues need to make use of it.

With the noise coming out of the club, it seems they are looking to the youth teams a bit more, which is a great thing. Alex Jones seems to be scoring goals, and further down, David Popa and Ronan Hale seem to be bagging quite a few. They only need to score a few at a senior level to be worth a decent chunk of money, which has been proven time and time again.

Reece Brown is the interesting one here, for me. Brown has all the talents to be a Premier League playmaker, whether that be as an 8 or a 10. Unfortunately, there is little data about him due to his restricted game time in the last few years, so I can't be certain about this, but Rowett has said as much. How we can sort him out, I really don't know, but there is clearly a problem with Reece that is stopping him from becoming the player we know he can be. It's a shame, because he is another that could be worth a lot of money to Blues.

Blues have to look at the youth, and I think Rowett is smart enough to see that. Young, homegrown players and certain styles of player are worth a lot of money to a club like ours, and that money will help the club compete. We have to take advantage of this by using our academy talents and using the transfer fees to grow.

Thursday 7 April 2016

Progress, Expectations, Fabbrini and Rowett

The last few weeks have been disappointing for Blues fans - there is no doubt about that. However, the backlash has been utterly ridiculous, and anybody who claims that we should be getting in the playoffs is being hyperbolic and revisionist.

As a stats lover, it will come as no surprise that I read and enjoyed Moneyball and Why England Lose - if anyone has any inclination to learn about stats and analytics in football they are fantastic places to start. Anyway, it's estimated that wage bill constitutes at least 75% of variation in league places, and the only way to beat that is to outmanoeuvre the system.

In the Championship top 9, Blues only spend more on wages than Ipswich, who are also massive over-achievers, and reportedly Boro, though that sounds unlikely. Sheffield Wednesday was lower at the start of the year, but they have increased that massively since with big money signings and their transfer expenditure is massive.

(http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/national/146216-championship-club-club)

All of the teams above Blues, bar Ipswich, have a player who cost more than in transfer fees than Blues' entire squad. Boro have Rhodes, Burnley have Gray, Brighton have Hemed, Hull have Hernandez, Wednesday have Hooper, Derby have Ince and Cardiff have Saadi (who I think cost £2.5m, but I may be wrong).

To overhaul those teams, Blues would need to take advantage of what Billy Beane calls market disadvantages. We need to find players whose skills are undervalued and thus are cheaper than they should be. Maikel Kieftenbeld is a fantastic example of this. He isn't the flashiest player, but for £140k he is a very solid midfielder at this level. He was undervalued due to his contract, unfashionable skillset (he isn't a tall, mobile defensive midfielder, or a silky passer) and due to coming from a league that there is a lack of knowledge of from the English leagues.

As much as I love Fabbrini, this might have been a deviancy from that plan. At £1.5m he is Blues' most expensive player and due to his exciting style of play he probably is slightly over-valued in that sense. That said, replacing Toral will be no mean feat given how incredibly good he is at this level. I think it is right to consider this a risky move, but it is not a bad signing. The problem with Fabbrini's signing is that is more of an opportunity cost - Blues needed a defender and a central midfielder at that point in time.

The argument I keep hearing is that because we finished 10th last year, finishing there again is not progress and would be disappointing, but I disagree. I think we were very lucky to finish 10th last year, and progress is not all about league position. We won a few games 1-0 at the end of last year which is often a sign of a bit of luck going your way in terms of conversion. Across the league, there is an average conversion rate (I think it's about 12% in the Premier League, but I may be wrong) and going over that is generally unsustainable, which is why shot numbers and shot on target numbers are so useful when evaluating teams. Consistent 1-0 wins are a good indicator of unsustainable finishing, though that is not always the case. In Blues' case, I think we were slightly fortunate at the end of last year and maybe a 12/13th place would have been fairer.

Blues have taken 463 shots from 39 games, with 43% on target, giving us 199 shots on target, or 5.1 shots on target a game. Last year, we took around 5.7 shots on target a game. So we are taking slightly fewer shots this year, but also, allowing less shots on goal. I only have stats for total shots allowed, which was around 15.5 a game last year and is now 14. This means that we now have a shot difference of -1.6 a game, which is up from -2.3 last year. (thanks to whoscored.com and squawka.com for the data)

Obviously, a negative shot difference is quite a worrying thing, but it is not the whole story. Many 'expected goals' models pin shots coming from counter attacks as more likely to be converted, and as many of Blues' shots come from fast breaks this should mean that Blues will convert shots at a decent rate. We also use a low block defensively - i.e, we sit very deep and allow the opposition to take a lot of shots from poor areas. This often means that conversion drops, which is why we allow 14 shots a game but don't concede loads of goals.

For more on expected goals, check out @MC_of_A or @footballfactman on Twitter for some interesting work on it.

Teams that use a low block tend to have very low goals conceded numbers compared to shots taken - see Atletico Madrid or Leicester for good examples of this. Chelsea did it very well last year, getting bodies between the ball and the goal making it incredibly difficult for the opposition to take clear shots and it also means that save percentages rise. A keeper who is a good shot stopper will be extremely tough to beat and it minimises the flaws they may have.

Blues use this defensive system which amplifies the amount of shots we allow and try and create high quality chances with slightly less frequency. That is why when we are not playing well we look so poor - when we are not creating high-quality chances, we do not create at all.

All in all, Blues are doing just fine at the moment. To say we have not progressed is not, in my eyes, true, though it may seem like I'm talking rubbish because we're only 9th, and we've missed out on the playoffs, but it seems like we are a better side than last year. However, I do think Rowett has missed a trick recruitment wise.

Will Buckley was a gamble, and I spoke about him on an earlier blog post, and it hasn't paid off. Ryan Shotton was theoretically a fine piece of business, but playing him at right back did not work. It seemed as though Rowett thought the problem was Caddis being exploited aerially, but that did not seem to be the case. Caddis has proven to be a fine full back at this level, and Grounds is a decent choice on the other side.

Kyle Lafferty could be a very good piece of business but the worry is that we are paying a lot of money wages wise, which would be a waste, in my eyes, at this point. However, in his last spell at this level, Lafferty was creating 1.76 chances per 90 and taking 3.42 shots, which would be a huge upgrade on Donaldson. However, Blues are a side who consistently fail to create for the centre forward and shots are balanced between the front four, so it is unlikely he will have that many shots.

Chances created is interesting however, because Donaldson, for all his hard work, creates just one chance per 90 minutes, and Lafferty was creating more than that for Norwich. I'd be very optimistic if we could bring in Lafferty permanently in the summer. I am a massive Donaldson fan however, and think the current criticism of him is very unfair.

We really should have signed a centre-back, as I don't think Robinson is good enough any more. I think we need a taller, stronger version of Robinson to help when we deploy this low block. It would help us deal with aerial bombardment and physical strikers better and in turn make us a better defensive unit, in my opinion.

Everything said and done, I'm not too disheartened by this season. We are, in my eyes, a better side, and if we can take advantage of some market flaws we will be a force to be reckoned with. A tall centre-back who is good in backs-to-the-wall situations, a central midfielder who can pass the ball (Gleeson is good, but I feel we can upgrade on him) and Lafferty would be great. We are stocked out wide and we have Fabbrini at number 10 with Shinnie coming back. Some would argue a left back who is good going forward for when we are playing sides who sit back, and I agree, but I think there are more pressing issues.

I think that's everything covered. As always, feel free to contact me at @RYB_BCFC or @ElliottBCFC if you want to discuss anything mentioned, and thanks for reading!