Jagten

I think because most xG is used as the objective function for modelling player performance, with deriving stuff like "on ball value". At a micro level individual chance creation is maybe more important, but there are differing views.

Most public models do this, correct, but for results analysis it should really be one minus sum of prob of not scoring in continuous passage, i.e. two 0.7xg chances in the same passage gives 1 - (0.3 * 0.3) = 0.91xG.

The numbers have, until now, supported him, but that expected goal diff is as bad as it will get for any team in the league in basically any season.

It could have been 10. Probably a record xG conceded this season.

Approx 3.5 xG vs our 0.1, for fans of violence.

Well, that was mostly horrific.

But he was also complicit in his signing at 85, and he’s not worth 40m either. I’d sack everyone involved tbh.

But that’s not inferring chance quality. Anyway, this is all an approximation.

Fair enuf. I think most of our season’s underlying performances have been mostly good (and better than sentiment), but we’re starting to concede a high volume of good goal scoring opportunities.

Maybe of some interest - a ten game rolling (exponential) moving average of our xG for and against over the last three seasons. You can almost see the moment Bruce was sacked.

Fair to question whether there’s value in buying from Arsenal. Your reply was weirdly aggressive.

Wut

Extremely difficult to extract value prices from Arsenal players - see Balogun for 30-40m.

Consensus was we overpaid

I interpret the Barnes criticism as frustration that we didn't buy elite upside, and that we concentrated the skillset of our wingers, i.e. none of them are very good in 1v1s. Tonali was/is, for me, the greater question, re profile and value.

Agreed. I think he knows what he's good at.

Nothing new, but limitations obvious

Decisions with respect to personnel to maximise the probability of ultimately winning the Champions League vs being a functional Premier League team are very different and possess entirely different risk profiles, especially in the context of KSA funding. Margins are smaller, downside tail risk is less. If we went too early on Howe, would it even matter?

Which one is a massive underperformance? Forest gave accumulated that level of expected goals once this season, which was at home to Luton.

His influence has certainly grown. His nephew is "head of first team technical scouting".

Is this from Wikipedia?

His whole thing is a fairly complex pressing structure so inevitable it took time

If you're going to pull the trigger (I would not, right now) you ideally do it in the summer.

Fair enough. I have uncertainty, and I hope the outcome is positive. Re: talent ID, I don't think the r/r in 150m on Tonali, Barnes and Gordon is great, despite how little the former have played. I appreciate my apathy on Gordon is not popular.

It's not clear whether his tactical strategy is sustainable, and to what extent it has made us especially vulnerable to fatigue + injury. If our press doesn't work, we're liable to be comfortably beaten. It is not clear whether he can, or will try, to manifest an evolution. I think as his influence has grown our talent ID has become worse, and we have evidenced a doubling down on his approach here. With respect to the champions league, we were not great throughout (I suspect this is unpopular but whatever). We should have lost to Milan away, and, despite the unfortunate nature of our PSG draw, they smashed us. Our 4-1 reverse against them flattered us, with respect to quality and volume of chances created. We were probably the weakest member of the group over the games played. To be clear, I like Howe and many of our outcomes right now could not be any better