Joking aside - let's re-write how we measure how good a 'keeper really is - but when we do... let's stick to it.
I couldn't reply in more depth yesterday Diego - I was in a rush to get to work.
First things first "Why should we?" - sorry that's my fault; I should have been a bit clearer. It doesn't matter what the 'rules' are or how flawed they may be, if everyone is using the same set of rules for the duration of the 'game' and they are applied in a consistent manner.
What I meant was: when an individual has decided on a formula they stick to it without flip-flopping between different sets of rules just because one suits their argument better than an other [not that you were tbh]. If one wants to go with shots stopped or variations thereof then lets measure everyone by that and that alone... Until a more accurate method can be used, of course.
Maybe I can illustrate this better by way of example [they are only that, examples, by the way]:
#1: If, for example, I had previously dismissed the clean sheets formula [when used to illustrate that Pepe wasn't in decline] - I can't now use that same criteria to show how well Simon is performing. To do so would be hypocritical.
#2: If, for example, I had previously dismissed the clean sheets formula [when used to illustrate that Agger was a vital element of our defence] - I can't now use the same criteria to show that Mama is now every bit as vital. To do so would be hypocritical.
#3: If, for example, I was signing the praises Mama and using say his, pass accuracy %, aerial prowess, blocked shots, interceptions or clearances to support my argument - I can't then dismiss those stats when it comes to Martin just because they don't suit. And...
#4: If I readily and happily accepted the very valid point that correlation does not [necessarily] imply causation - I can't then, in the next breath [or post
] ignore that rule by saying, for example, that we owe all our success to Brendan or FSG. Again that would be somewhat hypocritical.
What I'm saying is; I genuinely don't care which rule anyone applies as long as they stick with just one, they use it consistently and across the board.
Which brings me on to this...
Maybe I'm missing something or maybe I'm just thick but what I'm reading there is people trying to come up with a formula which isn't quite ready yet. That said: it's very interesting and when their data base becomes available' I'll certainly use it.
Until then... in the absence of an agreed measurement... I guess we will all just have to scramble about, arguing the toss without objective measurement, or use what 'flawed' stats we already have.
Ah well...