W 2-0 vs Gillingham (H) - League Two - Sat 18th March, 3pm

His age sticks out there, vast majority doing decent numbers are mid-twenties upwards. Impressive stats for a player in his first full season.


Intrigued re our other midfielders, have you got another stat that’ll bring Comsella into play?

Definitely NOT looking to poke a wasps nest :innocent:


And there’s only another 2 in the top ten not with teams at least challenging for the play-offs.

1 Like

I can take a look later once I’m home as I need to do it on the laptop not the App.

But kins will be high up on the interceptions / tackles for sure.

1 Like

Just in terms of the Walsall squad this is :-



1 Like


So basically Hutchinson is our best all round midfielder.

It’s also an interesting insight to the differences between the quantitative and qualitative side of perceptions of players.

I don’t think anyone would be surprised the defenders and Comsella would be up there in our side for tackles and interceptions - but be interesting to see in comparison to the division. But given we have such poor possession statistics, I’d expect those numbers to be inflated in comparison to teams who have more of the ball.

But then again… Hutch’s numbers has people saying he isn’t good enough, which is that qualitative impression of players we were discussing last night taking over.

It really is quite interesting from a psychological perspective.

For me, and I’m sure most would agree, that the best way to judge a player is a bit of the stats, a bit of the ‘feel’ and qual interpretation, and other factors such as position, style of play, current form, tactics, etc.

All in all, interesting! I may get an account :smile:


I’ll take a look later :+1:

Yes I imagine that could be the case.

Stats are interesting and I do understand how or why people are sceptical and many things can be interpreted / misinterpreted if context isn’t taken into consideration.

Defending / Goals conceded stats are a prime example. Our goals against column is very good. So are Orients. But for two very different reasons……

Ours are good (imo) due to 1. how we set up 2. how we play (low risk in our third) 3. physically strong defenders who’s priority is to defend first and foremost

Orients are good (again imo) because they dominate possession and have the ball more than their opponents. They effectively defend for large periods of games with the ball rather than without it.

As you say, a combination of stats, watching, perception, feel etc etc is always important. As well as that people will always have personal favourites and favoured styles of player.

1 Like

Kinsella was leading the division pre injury tbf …

Like I’ve said before, watching a game behind a matrix screen of stats and figures is all well and good, but there’s nothing like actually watching the game itself. Very few have said Hutchinson (who seems to be at the centre of this ridiculously long screed of number wang) is a bad player. They’ve said he’s not consistent enough (YES EVEN FOR A YOUNG PLAYER).

On his day he’s the best player in the team. When he’s not he’s indecisive, and sometimes slow witted and gets caught out very easily. Like I said earlier in the thread, ups his consistency from 1 in 4 to 2 in 3 and we have a play off quality player, maybe even better.

1 Like

Look at the current top 7 and you only have Orient (4) and Salford (5) with more than two midfielders on the list @CompletelySaddled shared. Both possession based teams on the slow and intricate scale, neither with a centre forward in the top ten scorers. Sharing the goals about.

The rest are building a promotion push on a more direct style and having one or two creative players supplementing a stand-out striker in the top five of the scoring charts or a couple of strikers in the top 20. Really believe this is where we were heading before we lost DJ, and the stats for Hutchinson and Knowles indicate we were finding success in that approach. The drop off since January is telling.


Thanks for posting that. Interesting that Knowles is high in the table as well as Hutchinson. Two players who should improve with time.Add in Riley and we are not far off a decent midfield with Comley acting in a more defensive role. One quality addition and a couple of strikers and we will be ok as long as our out of contract defenders are signed up.

1 Like

Imho Hutch is the best attacking,goalscoring midfielder we have had for years.His fitst too lets him down but he always wants the ball,actually moves to find space and is young with bags of potential


The formation we have will have a strong effect on the midfield. Saturday saw a back 4, which meant that having Kinsella and Comley in the team did not mean that we lost attacking options. If we play a back 5, then playing both of them is too defensive unless the wing backs have a lot of attacking impact.

Our our problem at the moment is that a back 4 seems to involve Monthe at left back, which is not ideal. The obvious back 4 is White, Daniels, Monthe and Gordon but I am not sure Flynn trusts Gordon enough defensively.

On the stats, one thing that is hard to capture is spirit and commitment. There was one Gillingham attack where Kinsella was on the floor but still managed 2 blocks and a deflection over the bar. I am not sure any of the other midfielders would do the same.


Looking at these stats its wing backs and strikers we need?

Going on past history if we did manage to keep Stevens to play alongside Matt I’d start with just wing backs first and see how many they can score with good service.


Key areas of recruitment for me are striker, no 8, holding player, wing backs (if Flynn is set on 352).

1 Like

Definitely wing backs for me

1 Like

Nah :joy: you’ve already lost me on that one.

I hate all this rubbish.
Algorithm’s for something we can all look at with our eyes and tell if they were above or below a 5/10 :man_facepalming:t2:
Football’s a simple game, I don’t need someone’s algorithm to tell me my opinion on a footballer. Any human opinion is far greater than an algorithm.

1 Like

After reading all of this, even i am now converted.

Hutchinson the messiah :rofl:

I think you’re missing the point a little.

Someone asked what the instat index was and I explained as best I could. No one least of all me was saying if it was accurate or binary.

No one is telling you what your opinion is at all. Your opinion is your opinion, all the stats are, are a tool to use or not use to help form, substantiate or debunk an opinion. Your eyes are one form of this, a conversation in a pub is another and a match report is another….they can all contribute to someone forming an opinion and stats are just another tool.

What I would say is, the most well informed opinions are just that. Well informed. If you have an opinion on politics or a person, you’d do well to read up or watch more informative programmes on that subject to gain a more informed opinion.

No one has ever looked at stats and become LESS informed after reading them. How much notice you take is down to an individual, or the subject or whether you want to be swayed from your preconceived opinion in the first place.

Ultimately it’s still just your opinion though