Earlier today I posted the people who got mentioned in the Online Analysts of 2016/17 survey, but there’s aspect of work that I haven’t yet mentioned and that’s the actual work. Here are the articles people enjoyed or respected the most this past year (they’re in no particular order, and I believe most or all of the authors should have been mentioned in the Online Analysts post).
Neil Charles’ Opta Pro presentation
“Are we calculating possession all wrong?” by Raven Beale (only fair to say this received a bunch of mentions)
“Why are Real Madrid so good at set pieces?” by Ashwin Raman
“Men on Posts and Starting Fires” by Ted Knutson (who also got mentions for his work in general, or as one responder put it “whenever he unredacts things”)
“Introducing xGChain” by Thom Lawrence
“Time-to-shot from goal kicks and throw ins” by Thom Lawrence
“The Unbearable Likeness of Arsenal” by Ben Torvaney
@fussbALEXperte’s blog Cognitive Football gets mentioned. “I like the design and psychological angle”, such as articles on being wrong and hindsight bias
“Is there a hole in Mesut Ozil” by James Yorke
“Tough times for Paul Pogba?” by James Yorke
“How to build the ideal T20 side” by Jarrod Kimber
“An xG Model for Everyone in 20 minutes (ish)” by Paul Riley
“A deep dive into shot location and placement” by Alex Rathke
“Julian Nagelsmann’s tactical philosophy” by David Selini
“Manchester United is too unlucky to be great” by Mike Goodman
“Finding the best pass in the Bundesliga” by Dustin Ward (who also got mentions for his work in general)
Napoli Team Analysis by Judah Davies
“Clustering shot chains” by Per Linde
A little note on the questions of the survey on what kind of content people like. These will undoubtedly be coloured somewhat by my followers on Twitter, who are edged towards the stats side of things, and sure enough most people say they’re interested in stats content (82% of 51 respondents on this question). Tactical analysis, player analysis, and scouting articles also have demand (in the 60s%).
Player analysis got more demand for more of it from the respondents to that question (53% of 49, the most in demand of the options). Other categories all came in in the 20-40% range, much of a muchness. If it’s good, people will read it, I think.
In terms of how people want to read (or indeed, watch or listen) to things was the subject of the next question. 88% of 50 respondents said they like 700-1000(ish) word articles, 78% said they like tweets, 50% said podcasts. Video only had 38% for clips 0-3 minutes in length, and 14% of other types of video, but again this may be coloured by the respondents. If a decent sized YouTube following came across the survey I imagine the resutls would look different.