The numbers must be lying then. They've scored 7 goals since the restart from an Xg of 16.
Metrics of change
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
Because those stats are a pretty crappy way to assess how well teams are playing?
Yes they are scoring below Xg. Thats not the same as them not playing poorly or poor performances being overblown.
If they took more of their chances the perception of their performances would be a lot different. Defensively they are pretty good.
XG must be the most boring and pointless stat ever.
At best it should only be used as an individual stat for strikers to show their efficiency in front of goal.
For teams who honestly cares.
At best it should only be used as an individual stat for strikers to show their efficiency in front of goal.
For teams who honestly cares.
Because it shows the quality of chances you’re creating and conceding, over time you usually regress to the mean so it’s a very useful stat and one that clubs value.
Despite all our obvious progress I would like to see the stats reflect it a bit more. Right now it feels like performing over our level which isn’t a good sign for sustaining it. It’ll come I’m sure.
The actual professional football clubs and analysts care, for one... Which says a lot of their usefulness
Their xG has also been terrible as has their finishing.
Barely above 1xg per game is very bad. But yeah of course their finishing has also been fluke levels of bad. Nobody thinks Chelsea is actually relegation standard which is what their results have been for months. But they are not a top 6 club either.
A graph that absolutely does not tell you who the best teams are (despite what his comment says), and takes 0 opposition difficulty into account. A simple xG diff/90 since the restart would give a better ranking. Though Brighton are still class.
- City - 1.452
- Brighton - 1.042
- United - 0.981
- Arsenal - 0.733
- Chelsea - 0.588
- Brentford - 0.573
- Newcastle - 0.483
- Liverpool - 0.452
- Spurs - 0.003
Agree but the good sign is that's it's improving for example:
We currently are not a title challenging level side in the analytics, but are clearly the 3rd best side when you take it all into account. City and Arsenal are well clear of us. That's pretty fair? I mean nobody should expect our team to be top 2 without luck considering our lack of attacking output aside from Rashford. You can't carry passengers if you want to be a top team and we still have players who aren't performing as you should for a top team, consistently. We are improving loads under Ten Hag and all the stats point to this, but you also can't coach someone like weghorst to be a title challenging capable #9. Antony, martial and Sancho have all be absent for a lot of games, and have been inconsistent when fit and aren't close to what you'd expect from them. So it really is basically just Rashford.
Defensively our metrics are elite when we are fully fit but when Casemiro is absent then yeah we are not the same side, obviously.
Well I'd say those stats do reflect the game pretty well. We're definitely overperforming in terms of converting chances.
However, take under consideration we've not been forced to chase games recently, firstly because of fantastic defence, and secondly because we've been scoring 1-2 goals early what gives us possibility to see the game out. Chelsea and Arsenal have been chasing games meaning they accumulated higher xG.
I also think we've not been chasing xG because we play every 3/4 days and we can barely find 3 fit attacking players. We can definitely do it, just see what happened when we went a goal down last game vs West Ham.
The stat to look at is the xGA/goals conceded recently. This is where the progress is.
They have been decent defensively of recent having faced no one special well done
Watching games tells you they have not been playing that good at all.
You sound annoyed about some statistics. Odd.
Annoyed that someone is insisting statistics tell the full story
Quote one post or combination of posts that show I'm 'insisting' no less that "statistics tell the full story". I'll wait.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 18,325
- Supports
️
@sifi36 how have you not been promoted yet? So many quality posts.Whilst it's not a metric, pass maps are interesting ways of looking at a team's play.
Pass map and comparison with City last season:
- Size of circles represent number of passes
- Colour of lines represent how much threat comes from that link
- Position of circles represent average position passes for a specific position are made from and received
- Little to no threat from the right
- Do not play out from the back and centre backs do very little meaningful progression
- No width high up the pitch
- Play much further from opponent's goal
- Do not stretch the pitch at all, all players within the middle third in possession
Same for this season (scales are different so compare to City rather than last season):
We actually look like a modern team! Not quite an elite one, as can be seen in the comparison, but getting there.
Things that still need work:
- Wide players get much higher and wider
- Goalkeeper now involved in build-up
- Players are much further apart, we stretch the pitch in possession much better
Thoughts?
- Someone to create from the right half space, Eriksen and Bruno both spend most of their time towards the left
- More threat from the right hand side (this may be linked to the previous point)
- A strong passing pivot player, we still build through the wings mostly (this is risk management, losing the ball out wide in build up is less risky when the ball turns over). This doesn't necessarily mean Casemiro is an issue. At Madrid, this was Kroos in early build-up, Casemiro would push further forward, and they'd swap once the ball had progressed into the middle and final third.
- Centre-backs more likely to go wide rather than through the middle, again this links to the previous point
@Damien can we fast track this poster?
They'd be probably promoted soon if they posted a bit more frequently.
In the meantime, promotion doesn't make a difference cause they don't hit the daily post limit anyway!Goal difference of 6 after 25 games.
2.68 to 0.88 xG today, get in
We conceded 32 goals in our first 25 league games of the previous season, an absolute horror show under Ole and Rangnick.
In our new golden age, we have now conceded 35 goals in 25?! A bit flummoxed by this.
In our new golden age, we have now conceded 35 goals in 25?! A bit flummoxed by this.
Last season we lost 0-9 on aggregate to Liverpool, this year it was 2-8
#progress
#progress
It’s pretty obvious no? We conceded in literally every game we played last season. Big team, small team, good team, shit team.
This year when we lose, we lose big. 17 of the goals we’ve conceded have come in 3 games. 20 in 4 if you include Villa. Not that hard to understand.
Quite a mad stat considering how badly we struggled to score earlier in the season.
Thank you! Though I can't take credit for those graphics, they were robbed from a paywalled site
They'd be probably promoted soon if they posted a bit more frequently.
I avoid posting unless I have something meaningful to say. I'm one away now and that means being able to make threads as well as removing the limit (which I've hit today for the first time). So if you fancy doing me a favour....
Our home record is truly fantastic, we've created plenty in every game and have got better defensively once Casemiro had been integrated (his first home game was Newcastle, first away was Everton).
Away on the other hand is not fantastic. We don't create anywhere near as much, though it does seem to be trending up since the World Cup. The amount of xGA we conceded against Arsenal, City and Liverpool is concerning. You could argue Casemiro wasn't playing in the first two, but he was for the third. The only reason the Arsenal scoreline wasn't as bad as the other two was they weren't as clinical. This is something that needs to be addressed, we cannot go toe-to-toe against those three sides yet, we win when we don't and we get battered when we do.
The season as a whole with a rolling 10 game average applied:
Our attack is definitely improving (2 xG and 0.7 xGA, would be title winning) though defensively we are regressing after improving from the start of the season. How much of the latter is due to Casemiro's suspension and how much is due to the fixture list is difficult to define in my view.
Thank you! Though I can't take credit for those graphics, they were robbed from a paywalled site
I avoid posting unless I have something meaningful to say. I'm one away now and that means being able to make threads as well as removing the limit (which I've hit today for the first time). So if you fancy doing me a favour....
Our home record is truly fantastic, we've created plenty in every game and have got better defensively once Casemiro had been integrated (his first home game was Newcastle, first away was Everton).
Away on the other hand is not fantastic. We don't create anywhere near as much, though it does seem to be trending up since the World Cup. The amount of xGA we conceded against Arsenal, City and Liverpool is concerning. You could argue Casemiro wasn't playing in the first two, but he was for the third. The only reason the Arsenal scoreline wasn't as bad as the other two was they weren't as clinical. This is something that needs to be addressed, we cannot go toe-to-toe against those three sides yet, we win when we don't and we get battered when we do.
The season as a whole with a rolling 10 game average applied:
Our attack is definitely improving (2 xG and 0.7 xGA, would be title winning) though defensively we are regressing after improving from the start of the season. How much of the latter is due to Casemiro's suspension and how much is due to the fixture list is difficult to define in my view.
Yeah this shows that bar Fulham and Wolves away from home we haven't created much
Yeah, why would anyone be interested in a measure that combines the volume and quality of scoring chances created. What could that possibly say about anything.
Disgraceful