Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Ekitike didn't outscore his xG that badly, 10 goals from 8.20xG. 

 

xG isn't perfect but it's a great tool in trying to analyse football outside of just the result or how many goals someone scored. I can't find Cisse's numbers for the 5th place season but I'm pretty sure no one in the world thought his finishing was sustainable. He scored 13 goals in 14 appearances, followed by 24 goals in 103 PL appearances for us.

 

Here's a two year old article about finishing, best finishers do outscore their xG but not by that much (Son at the top with 36%, Messi 22% and Ronaldo 5% for example). And even Son has had seasons where his xG is really close to his goals scored (17/18 and 19/20).

 

https://www.infogol.net/en/blog/analysis/hit-or-miss-the-most-clinical-finishers-in-europe-142020

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Pata said:

Ekitike didn't outscore his xG that badly, 10 goals from 8.20xG. 

 

xG isn't perfect but it's a great tool in trying to analyse football outside of just the result or how many goals someone scored. I can't find Cisse's numbers for the 5th place season but I'm pretty sure no one in the world thought his finishing was sustainable. He scored 13 goals in 14 appearances, followed by 24 goals in 103 PL appearances for us.

 

Here's a two year old article about finishing, best finishers do outscore their xG but not by that much (Son at the top with 36%, Messi 22% and Ronaldo 5% for example). And even Son has had seasons where his xG is really close to his goals scored (17/18 and 19/20).

 

https://www.infogol.net/en/blog/analysis/hit-or-miss-the-most-clinical-finishers-in-europe-142020

 

 

Canny article - Cisse's form was never going to be sustainable, but the lad was Pardewed as well - a well-managed Cisse was probably somewhere between a thunderbastard every game and a one-in-four centre forward

Link to post
Share on other sites

xG is pretty useless when analysing a player like, especially over a short period of time (like 1 season).

 

I imagine it's useful for proper stat geeks in the game to look at how teams will create more opportunities playing a certain way (Pep might be told that getting to the byline and putting the ball in across the 6 yard box more leads to a higher xG for example), but as a number for some Twitter 'analyst' to pick out proving X player is scoring more than he should etc? You're not going to find anything out that you wouldn't just watching him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, LFEE said:

 Work rate possibly but Bellamy’s play was very unselfish whereas with Richarlison it seems all about him.

 

It seems like many might not be match goers according to you and therefore their opinions are wrong.  Yet, you can come with opinions about someone you've clearly not watched enough, evident by that statement alone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Xg is a useful stat. 
 

It tells a story.  Slightly over performing it like 10 goals to 8. Something Xg is minor. And it’s clear that some players like Mason Greenwood are very composed finishers with great technique who will likely outwxore Xg throughout their careers. 
 

 

The eye test indicated Cisse’s run was unsustainable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't tell you anything that you cannot tell already by just watching a few games and a highlight reel though. And it'll be deceptive when it comes to players who have a tendency to score from range or have the ability to sneak goals in from daft angles. Only time will tell you whether or not that is luck, not an xG stat.

 

I've no doubt it has a lot of uses in high level data analysis but for the layman you're better off just going off what you've seen/heard from people you trust.

 

 

Edited by Hanshithispantz

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a useful stat over a longer period (for ex. a season) when comparing teams. In single matches or even when comparing players don't see the point. xG should take into account if player has good long shots anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

xG is very useful, however I feel the role of striker (and keeper to be fair) is the most confidence based position on the entire pitch. Things like a players confidence, or overall general mentality, can be really hard to quantify with raw data. 

 

Now xA on the other hand, there is a useful stat. Pascal Gross at Brighton was the best example of club looking past initial numbers to find a real bit of diamond in the rough. He never posted huge assist numbers at Ingolstadt, however his xA was consistently through the roof. He was constantly creating good chances, they just weren't being finished. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So with the window opening 10th June and Ashworth just getting his feet under the table, do you think we'll be working on deals up until then, to announce after?

 

Or do you reckon we'll potentially announce deals at any time, like some other clubs have so far?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anytime.

 

I'd say summer targets have been worked on for months in advance anyway as soon as it looked very likely we'd stay up - don't think Ashworth appointment will have an immediate effect on recruitment.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hanshithispantz said:

It doesn't tell you anything that you cannot tell already by just watching a few games and a highlight reel though. And it'll be deceptive when it comes to players who have a tendency to score from range or have the ability to sneak goals in from daft angles. Only time will tell you whether or not that is luck, not an xG stat.

 

I've no doubt it has a lot of uses in high level data analysis but for the layman you're better off just going off what you've seen/heard from people you trust.

 

 

 

Disagree. It’s always a useful metric. It’s not deceptive - if a player consistently scores from range or daft angles it means you can rely on them to constantly outperform their Xg. 
 

It’s a data point. It’s useful as a data point. Their are many data points. 

I think confidence is also reflected in Xg. Confident players tend to get into better goal scoring positions and have higher Xg.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I think confidence is also reflected in Xg. Confident players tend to get into better goal scoring positions and have higher Xg.

 

True, but some players confidence is more fragile than others, and can vary wildly. Then you have mentality monsters like Ronaldo for whom confidence is never an issue. I do feel confidence/mentality is one of the (only) areas where xG is a little blind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, sushimonster85 said:

 

True, but some players confidence is more fragile than others, and can vary wildly. Then you have mentality monsters like Ronaldo for whom confidence is never an issue. I do feel confidence/mentality is one of the (only) areas where xG is a little blind.

Do you have examples?

 

I look at Lukaku. His overall Xg is low but he spent a lot of time on the bench. I thought Chelsea's style of play doesn't suit his style with the slow build-up. But his overall npxg is fairly high and doesn't line-up with my eye test. He does have a habit of a poor touch often that could lead to a shot that doesn't happen perhaps. I haven't dug deep into his stats though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you’re a great finisher, won’t your xG be naturally lower than actual goals? I know Cisse’s was unsustainable but you could imagine the likes of Fowler & Wright having a much higher goal tally to ‘xG’ for example.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, WillingtonMag said:

Who's been on Lodis Wikipedia 25 feet tall, Shearer as a middle name and born in Brunos back garden apparently. Sign him up.

Screenshot_20220531-112326_Samsung Internet.jpg

 

25'4"? Definitely sign him, the set penis might finally work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Do you have examples?

 

I look at Lukaku. His overall Xg is low but he spent a lot of time on the bench. I thought Chelsea's style of play doesn't suit his style with the slow build-up. But his overall npxg is fairly high and doesn't line-up with my eye test. He does have a habit of a poor touch often that could lead to a shot that doesn't happen perhaps. I haven't dug deep into his stats though.

 

It's a bit of a weird one, because we only have one real example of a dip, but look at Harry Kane, and whatever was going on with him at the start of this season. Whether he was distracted by transfer speculation or just knackered who's to say. But his xG for this season and the season prior are pretty much identical (20.1 this season. 20.5 last season). Yet this season he scored 6 fewer goals. The first time he has under-performed his xG for as far back as fbref have 'expected' data. Kane is a player who, in the past several seasons, has vastly over performed his xG. If you were to look purely at the numbers this season is unexplainable. However anyone who watched Spurs in the first half of the season could tell you straight away that Harry Kane just wasn't with it. 

 

This is what I was referring to, a striker having a dip in confidence can be really hard to forecast, and they're more prone to it than pretty much any other position on the pitch.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe one for the pet hates thread but the editing of wiki pages for footballers are rarely ever funny or clever and ends up being a bit of a bug bear for me (sorry for being a spoilsport)

 

The only one I can remember finding funny was someone editing Papiss Cisse's which said  Place of Birth: Offside,Senegal

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, GeordieDazzler said:

Wonder if we’ve sent our medical team along with the Brazil team just in case.

 

Doubt it. It's not January, there aren't the same kind of time constraints we were under with Bruno. Also, I don't think Paqueta is going happen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...