Other games (2022/23)

[Rich]

But aye, sorry to clog the thread, just had a bit of time while eating lunch and love a bit of xG chat.

 

To sum up, the current models that everyone's being fed by the media are way, way off the stuff being used behind closed doors by clubs/bookies/gamblers for their "edge". That edge (and the sums it involves) is the reason why progression is so, so slow publicly with xG.

 

The current models have got so many glaring weaknesses that they can't be relied upon as a single measure of team or player performance, but from everything we get given by the likes of BBC and Sky, it is still, by far, the best individual measure of judging how a game went without seeing the game for yourself. And it's still definitely a useful barometer to bring into any debate around the quality of a team or player for that reason.

[Wullie]

If Lingard hits the post there then puts the rebound in, does it count double?

 

Or, let's say Bowen, Schmeichel and Lingard are the only people in that shot. Bowen has the ball but Schmeichel is right on him. He has an easy square ball for Lingard to tap in with nobody around him but gets the pass completely wrong and balloons it over his head. How would the xG treat that easy scoring opportunity when the player with the simple chance never receives the ball? Would it count Bowen's tricky chance (if he takes it himself, which he doesn't) as the one for the data and disregard the easy one for Lingard?  

 

I really know nowt about how it works like.

[Kid Icarus]

Similarly players who go through one on one and take a heavy touch so they don't shoot and therefore the xG presumably isn't even counted?

[Rich]

9 minutes ago, Wullie said:

If Lingard hits the post there then puts the rebound in, does it count double?

 

Or, let's say Bowen, Schmeichel and Lingard are the only people in that shot. Bowen has the ball but Schmeichel is right on him. He has an easy square ball for Lingard to tap in with nobody around him but gets the pass completely wrong and balloons it over his head. How would the xG treat that easy scoring opportunity when the player with the simple chance never receives the ball? Would it count Bowen's tricky chance (if he takes it himself, which he doesn't) as the one for the data and disregard the easy one for Lingard?  

 

I really know nowt about how it works like.

 

This was another thing where I felt like we did it better than others, actually, it's a great question. Back then Opta's model and most others would count that Lingard effort as double.

 

However, we used phases of play and only took the best chance from a single phase of play so as not to give double credit for someone missing and then getting the rebound. Again, it was a big step forward for the model when doing that, and I think a much more common sense way of handling those instances. If he scores the first, then the second never happens, so you can't give double xG credit IMO.

 

Because we were using professional analysts who could read the game quite well, we would also apply a bit more subjectivity to your second example so as to better reflect the xG with an adjustment, but other models absolutely didn't do this, and probably still don't. It was always tricky to know how far you could take that, though, because you're getting into the realms of trying to predict player actions and also "knowing better" than the players. Current models would play it safe and just assign a score to Bowen, ignoring Lingard, if they even assign a score at all if no shot is taken.

 

Some models rely on a shot being taken to assign a score at all, which is wild to me. So Bowen could dribble clean through on goal, fall over for some reason, and no score would ever be assigned because he didn't actually shoot.

 

Added: We would assign a score to the "best" point on the pitch when he still had full control of the ball, and it would then go down as a "miss" to the minus value of that score on his individual metrics.

[Wullie]

1 minute ago, Rich said:

 

This was another thing where I felt like we did it better than others, actually, it's a great question. Back then Opta's model and most others would count that Lingard effort as double.

 

However, we used phases of play and only took the best chance from a single phase of play so as not to give double credit for someone missing and then getting the rebound. Again, it was a big step forward for the model when doing that, and I think a much more common sense way of handling those instances.

 

Because we were using professional analysts who could read the game quite well, we would also apply a bit more subjectivity to your second example so as to better reflect the xG with an adjustment, but other models absolutely didn't do this, and probably still don't. It was always tricky to know how far you could take that, though, because you're getting into the realms of trying to predict player actions and also "knowing better" than the players. Current models would play it safe and just assign a score to Bowen, ignoring Lingard, if they even assign a score at all if no shot is taken.

 

Some models rely on a shot being taken to assign a score at all, which is wild to me.

 

Really interesting, cheers.

[Hanshithispantz]

It's also not counted if a player doesn't get a touch, so if a ball is flashed across the goal line and a player misses sliding in by a few inches it wouldn't count (from what I've read before anyway). At least in the free models, I had no idea the behind closed doors models were so much different tbh, I just assumed they had large data analysis teams sorting the data more accurately or something, it's interesting stuff.

 

 

Edited August 16, 2022 by Hanshithispantz

[Kid Icarus]

Did the models you use take the player and their form into account as well?

 

Just thinking off the top of my head, that time Torres missed an open goal during his shocking form at Chelsea vs what he'd have been like at Liverpool.

[Rich]

1 minute ago, Hanshithispantz said:

It's also not counted if a player doesn't get a touch, so if a ball is flashed across the goal line and a player misses sliding in by a few inches it wouldn't count. At least in the free models, I had no idea the behind closed doors models were so much different tbh, I just assumed they had large data analysis teams sorting the data more accurately or something, it's interesting stuff.

 

Aye that was always a really tricky situation, because you're getting into the realms of player positioning and anticipation, which is a nightmare to quantify. If the player got close enough (again subjective) then it might be assigned a score.

 

Our approach towards the end of my time was to start grading chance-creating passes like the one you mention as their own significant action, and trying to apply that as a weighting on a final xG score, and it also had the handy effect of allowing us to better judge the value of creative players who don't necessarily score many themselves.

[Rich]

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Did the models you use take the player and their form into account as well?

 

Just thinking off the top of my head, that time Torres missed an open goal during his shocking form at Chelsea vs what he'd have been like at Liverpool.

 

No, never. The data itself would tell you whether a player was in form or not, as you could look at similar instances for Torres ~2/3 years prior where he'd probably be outscoring his xG in most situations. His regression was quite easy to see in the data.

 

We would also produce match reports on hundreds of games a weekend where this sort of stuff would be discussed, to add some context to everything like you just did above.

[Pata]

Very interesting stuff @Rich, cheers!

[Guest HTT II]

Fucking nerds!

[Pata]

I remember Bruno getting over 2xG for his three shots against Leicester inside few seconds when he ended up scoring. The free models can have flaws like that but it’s still better than anything else. I still don’t understand KI’s argument but there are more qualified people in the thread now.

 

 

Edited August 16, 2022 by Pata

[Guest HTT II]

1 hour ago, Vinny Green Balls said:

TCD is an arrogant, bloviating nob, HTT. He may not be an idiot, but he certainly isn’t nearly as intelligent as he thinks he is.  He has been wrong on so many occasions, but appears to be too much of a pussy to hold his hands up when he is. No wonder so many people have blocked him. Kaka is right to challenge him and his constant stream of horse shit.

I wouldn’t go that far like 

 

I just think he has an abrasive confrontational style of posting that rubs people up the wrong way, I like both him and Kaka but their arguments are circular and boring.

[Kid Icarus]

12 minutes ago, Rich said:

 

No, never. The data itself would tell you whether a player was in form or not, as you could look at similar instances for Torres ~2/3 years prior where he'd probably be outscoring his xG in most situations. His regression was quite easy to see in the data.

 

We would also produce match reports on hundreds of games a weekend where this sort of stuff would be discussed, to add some context to everything like you just did above.

 

Ah shit sorry I meant like for a team's xG in a match rather than a players, but presumably the answer's the same anyway and wouldn't be all that useful overall. 

 

Cheers for that and the other posts, really interesting

 

 

Edited August 16, 2022 by Kid Icarus

[Rich]

Just now, Kid Icarus said:

 

Ah shit sorry I meant like for a team's xG rather than a players, but presumably the answer's the same anyway. 

 

Cheers for that and the other posts, really interesting

Ah, it would be the same aye.

[Vinny Green Balls]

Just now, HTT II said:

I wouldn’t go that far like 

 

I just think he has an abrasive confrontational style of posting that rubs people up the wrong way, I like both him and Kaka but their arguments are circular and boring.

Yeah you are probably right, man. I just get irritated with the arrogance and near constant negativity, which often overshadows some very salient points he has made in the past (and sometimes makes it challenging to see in the context of everything else).

[Mike]

14 hours ago, KaKa said:

 

Man City have had a game against Ben Johnson at centre back for West Ham and then Bournemouth who were just trying to keep the score down.

 

Let's see what happens when they start facing a bit better competition. Not convinced yet they'll be as good this year.

 

We'll hang this post in the Louvre after they fucking ruin us.

[Village Idiot]

On 13/08/2022 at 22:26, Flip said:

Neymar is back. 

 

Raphinha might have made a mistake going to Barcelona if he's going to be played out of position in favour of Dembele who does nothing. @Village Idiot is the plan to play Raphinha on the left? Takes away his best trait. Pointless.

 

He's played both wings during preseason. We'll see but I agree with you that he should be on the right.

[The College Dropout]

Really good discussion.

 

I've seen models online that would count both shots as @Wullie described which is a definite weakness. I've seen some FPL stats like that. Counting a penalty and a rebound as 2 Big Chances and an Xg over 1. whatever. 

[Guest]

Hull leading at Burnley. Cracking start to the season.

[BGRM]

That Sangare for PSV looks good, just scored against Rangers.

[toon25]

25 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

Hull leading at Burnley. Cracking start to the season.

They've got some cracking players in over the summer somehow. Hull is an absolute shithole 

[joeyt]

Atmosphere looks class at Ibrox

[Disco]

6 minutes ago, Caleb70 said:

That Sangare for PSV looks good, just scored against Rangers.

Was highly rated (I’ve heard of him so he must have been) from Toulouse. Didn’t know he was at PSV, enjoyed our bouts with them over the years.

[joeyt]

4 minutes ago, toon25 said:

They've got some cracking players in over the summer somehow. Hull is an absolute shithole 

 

Got a mad loaded Turkish owner I think