Points per game per player

[Eric the Half a Bee]

This is a table of the average number of points won by each player this season during the time they have played. So, if a player plays 45 minutes and we lose that segment of the game, they get 0 points. If a super sub comes on with us and the match score changes while they've been on the pitch and their involvement has been crucial, they get the points for that section (so Pilkington's late equaliser against Sheff Utd would give him 3 points, those who played 90 minutes gets 1 while Zohore got 0 points as he was replaced by Pilkington).

This isn't a definitive list of who is the best, it's meant more as a bit of statistical fun! Given the number of late goals we score and games we've rescued, those substitutes have benefited. I think that's testament to Warnock's use of subs and our never-say-die attitude.

Players have needed to have played at least 5 times while substitute appearances less than 20 minutes long are not counted (unless that player has produced a match changing moment i.e. goal, own goal, assist etc), neither are stats for players who went off injured early on.

Hoilett's stats suffer from being replaced by Feeney, who has produced some moments as a sub to rescue us (for instance Fulham, when we were 1-0 down while Hoilett played, but we won the segment that Feeney played 1-0).

I'm aware that this is a heavily flawed table, but like I said, it's just a bit of statistical jiggery-pokery!

Here's the table (points per game):

Pilkington 3.00
Grujic 2.45
D Ward 2.22
Feeney 2.20
Ethridge 2.05
Morrison 2.00
Bamba 2.00
Manga 1.97
Zohore 1.96
Paterson 1.95
Ralls 1.94
Damour 1.91
Hoilett 1.88
Mendez-Laing 1.87
Bryson 1.82
Tomlin 1.82
Bennett 1.79
Peltier 1.67
Gunnarsson 1.58
Bogle 1.17

[Rjk]

Interesting, I guess you would expect a higher degree of variance with the players who have a low number of games.
Perhaps using an empirical Bayes estimation could be interesting to take account of this