I just finished reading Moneyball by Michael Lewis. This book's not available through Amazon.co.uk, but it should be.
Moneyball is about Billy Beane, who runs the Oakland A's, and the methods he uses to succeed despite having a small budget. {For more on the book see here.}
Of course, the book is about baseball, so fans of other sports may not be as interested. But, the concept that you can build a team on a low budget by using sound statistical analysis of what's happening on the field of play is probably transferable, although not as easy to do as it is in baseball. But, if economists can analyze statistics measuring all sorts of activities to try and predict the future, why can't similar methods be used to analyze soccer games and soccer players' performances. (Same goes for basketball or hockey.)
As I read this book I thought to myself, this is what Charlton Athletic, for example, needs to do in order to be competitive - use statistical analysis of player performances to achieve a competitive advantage in player development. {Charlton would be better for Beane to work for than Manchester United, which is his dream. He's also a fan of Dropkick Murphy's, which has been mentioned in the comments section of this blog before.}
There's a part of me that was absolutely fascinated by this book. As a baseball-loving math major, I realize I missed my calling. But, I also recognize that this method of evaluating player talent is completely devoid of the romance and mysticism that is part of baseball. Crusty, middle-aged guys scouting high-school players in mid-western towns is part of baseball.
The A's use stats they find on the internet more than crusty scouts. So, I'm torn between loving this underdog and worrying that baseball might eventually lose more than it gains if this approach becomes standard.
{For more on how people are seeing lessons for other spheres in this book read here, here and here.}
UPDATE 6 AUG 10:20: Just found Moneyball on Amazon.co.uk. It was there all along, but under a different ISBN.
