Statistically... Things are Heading in the Right Direction (Nerd Alert)

[frastheowl]

 

Update:

 

Rotherham 2.61xG - 1.42xG Sheff Wed

 

Iorfa's last minute equaliser, unsurprisingly, statistically the best chance of the game, with a 0.6 xG. Forestieri's goal had a xG of only 0.1, however the only two other chances with a higher xG than Forestieri's goal fell to Reach when he hit the post (0.31xG) and Morgan Fox's chance from Bannan's free kick just after half time, when he scuffed a volley at the back post (0.13xG). 

 

Rotherham's xG is impressively high, and that's down to the sheer number of shots on goal they had (25 in total) and a few high value chances that they created. Rotherham's 1st goal from Taylor had an xG of 0.46, whilst Towell's goal in the 2nd half only had a 0.07xG. Rotherham were guilty of missing a number of good quality chances however, Smith's free header in the 80th minute (0.4xG), Semi Agayi's free header which was cleared off the line (0.26xG) and the double chance in the 1st half when Westwood save Forde's effort when Hector was at fault, which was closely followed by Smith scuffing his shot wide had a combined xG of (0.48). 

 

It doesn't really tell us anything we didn't know already...we were REALLY fortunate to come away with something from the game. Defensively we were awful. 

 

Sheff Wed 1.84xG - 1.53xG Swansea

 

Slightly closer xG than you'd have thought, considering our dominant display. But our tiredness in the 2nd half allowed Swansea to create two really high value xG chances. The goal, from McBurnie, had a 0.51 value and Celina's chance at the back post when he blazed high and wide had a 0.47 xG value. 

 

That said, our first half performance created an xG of 1.43, a very impressive amount, and our clinical finishing ensured we overachieved our xG significantly. Reach's first goal had a 0.28xG, his second just 0.07 and Fletcher's overhead kick a 0.61xG. 

 

It was a definite game of two halves. Wednesday created 1.43xG, and limited Swansea to 0.05 in the first half. As one sided a game you'll see. After the break though, Swansea outperformed Wednesday, created 1.48xG, whilst we only mustered 0.41xG in the 2nd period. 

 

Sheff Wed 2.19xG - 0.38xG Brentford

 

Our best performance of the season in terms of xG diff, and the 2nd best attacking performance. It was the Swansea performance sustained over 90 minutes. 

 

Perhaps most interesting is the fact our goals came from fairly low xG chances. Fletcher's first goal had only a 0.05xG, and his second 0.25xG. Our best three chances fell to Tom Lees (0.37xG - the free header from Lazaar's corner in the 17th minute), Fletcher (0.52xG - the chance on the stroke of half time following Iorfa's burst down the right which he skied high and wide when 8 yards out) and Aarons (0.44xG - the chance when through on goal, which Bentley came out quickly and saved well). 

 

 

The improvement in performances is now being sustained. Since Gameweek 26 (Birmingham at home) our xG difference has remained positive over a 5 game rolling average, with the Hull and Rotherham games, the anomalies.

 

More impressively, four of our best five xG difference performances of the season have come in those nine games since GW26. 

 

 

[Doghouse Daz]

COME ON YOU BLUE AND WHITE xG WIZARDS !!! 

 

Pile up the xG on Monday. 

[Colinwestzicoest]

The stats don't work, they just make things worse but I know we'll see the premier League again. 

[Colinwestzicoest]

8 minutes ago, Colinwestzicoest said:

The stats don't work, they just make things worse but I know we'll see the premier League again. 

No Verve fans? No? Anybody.......

[shandypants]

On 28/02/2019 at 21:04, frastheowl said:

 

Update:

 

Rotherham 2.61xG - 1.42xG Sheff Wed

 

Iorfa's last minute equaliser, unsurprisingly, statistically the best chance of the game, with a 0.6 xG. Forestieri's goal had a xG of only 0.1, however the only two other chances with a higher xG than Forestieri's goal fell to Reach when he hit the post (0.31xG) and Morgan Fox's chance from Bannan's free kick just after half time, when he scuffed a volley at the back post (0.13xG). 

 

Rotherham's xG is impressively high, and that's down to the sheer number of shots on goal they had (25 in total) and a few high value chances that they created. Rotherham's 1st goal from Taylor had an xG of 0.46, whilst Towell's goal in the 2nd half only had a 0.07xG. Rotherham were guilty of missing a number of good quality chances however, Smith's free header in the 80th minute (0.4xG), Semi Agayi's free header which was cleared off the line (0.26xG) and the double chance in the 1st half when Westwood save Forde's effort when Hector was at fault, which was closely followed by Smith scuffing his shot wide had a combined xG of (0.48). 

 

It doesn't really tell us anything we didn't know already...we were REALLY fortunate to come away with something from the game. Defensively we were awful. 

 

Sheff Wed 1.84xG - 1.53xG Swansea

 

Slightly closer xG than you'd have thought, considering our dominant display. But our tiredness in the 2nd half allowed Swansea to create two really high value xG chances. The goal, from McBurnie, had a 0.51 value and Celina's chance at the back post when he blazed high and wide had a 0.47 xG value. 

 

That said, our first half performance created an xG of 1.43, a very impressive amount, and our clinical finishing ensured we overachieved our xG significantly. Reach's first goal had a 0.28xG, his second just 0.07 and Fletcher's overhead kick a 0.61xG. 

 

It was a definite game of two halves. Wednesday created 1.43xG, and limited Swansea to 0.05 in the first half. As one sided a game you'll see. After the break though, Swansea outperformed Wednesday, created 1.48xG, whilst we only mustered 0.41xG in the 2nd period. 

 

Sheff Wed 2.19xG - 0.38xG Brentford

 

Our best performance of the season in terms of xG diff, and the 2nd best attacking performance. It was the Swansea performance sustained over 90 minutes. 

 

Perhaps most interesting is the fact our goals came from fairly low xG chances. Fletcher's first goal had only a 0.05xG, and his second 0.25xG. Our best three chances fell to Tom Lees (0.37xG - the free header from Lazaar's corner in the 17th minute), Fletcher (0.52xG - the chance on the stroke of half time following Iorfa's burst down the right which he skied high and wide when 8 yards out) and Aarons (0.44xG - the chance when through on goal, which Bentley came out quickly and saved well). 

 

 

The improvement in performances is now being sustained. Since Gameweek 26 (Birmingham at home) our xG difference has remained positive over a 5 game rolling average, with the Hull and Rotherham games, the anomalies.

 

More impressively, four of our best five xG difference performances of the season have come in those nine games since GW26. 

 

 

What are the xG rates (stats, projections or whatever they’re called) for us and the piggies on Monday? 

[shandypants]

1 minute ago, Colinwestzicoest said:

No Verve fans? No? Anybody.......

Maybe not. They’re ok, I suppose. 

[Colinwestzicoest]

5 minutes ago, shandypants said:

Maybe not. They’re ok, I suppose. 

Thank you that man. I'm available for weddings, funerals & barnitzvas.

[frastheowl]

2 hours ago, shandypants said:

What are the xG rates (stats, projections or whatever they’re called) for us and the piggies on Monday? 

 

Infogol predicts a United win (51%), and only a 22% chance of a Wednesday victory.

 

No surprise really. United are top of the xG standings, and have been impressive throughout. They create high value chances, regularly, and limited their opposition to a very low value xG. Statistically, they've been remarkable. 

 

United's last six games:

 

WBA 0 (0.82xG) - 1 (0.44xG) Sheff U

Sheff U 4 (2.27) - 0 (0.45) Reading

Sheff U 1 (2.01) - 0 (0.33) Boro

Aston Villa 3 (1.4) - 3 (2.31) Sheff U

Sheff U 2 (1.13) - 0 (0.63) Bolton

Norwich 2 (0.69) - 2 (1.96) Sheff U

 

Only once have they come out of one of those games with a negative xG, and that was, in truth, a fairly comfortable performance against WBA, there they got an early goal and stifled WBA from then on. 

 

To put it into perspective how impressive they've been. They have created more than 2xG in three of those six games (and another creating 1.96xG...so essentially four out of the six). We've only created an xG of more than 2 on three occasions all season. 

 

If you're wanting to look for some hope on Monday...let's concentrate on our improving and potentially sustainable form...rather than United's...because there's not much to get encouraged about. 

 

Seriously impressive...and during a really difficult run of games. 

[shandypants]

1 hour ago, frastheowl said:

 

Infogol predicts a United win (51%), and only a 22% chance of a Wednesday victory.

 

No surprise really. United are top of the xG standings, and have been impressive throughout. They create high value chances, regularly, and limited their opposition to a very low value xG. Statistically, they've been remarkable. 

 

United's last six games:

 

WBA 0 (0.82xG) - 1 (0.44xG) Sheff U

Sheff U 4 (2.27) - 0 (0.45) Reading

Sheff U 1 (2.01) - 0 (0.33) Boro

Aston Villa 3 (1.4) - 3 (2.31) Sheff U

Sheff U 2 (1.13) - 0 (0.63) Bolton

Norwich 2 (0.69) - 2 (1.96) Sheff U

 

Only once have they come out of one of those games with a negative xG, and that was, in truth, a fairly comfortable performance against WBA, there they got an early goal and stifled WBA from then on. 

 

To put it into perspective how impressive they've been. They have created more than 2xG in three of those six games (and another creating 1.96xG...so essentially four out of the six). We've only created an xG of more than 2 on three occasions all season. 

 

If you're wanting to look for some hope on Monday...let's concentrate on our improving and potentially sustainable form...rather than United's...because there's not much to get encouraged about. 

 

Seriously impressive...and during a really difficult run of games. 

Thanks. Sorry to ask a question that may be hard to answer but do xG stats hold true in derby games or do they go out of the window?

[frastheowl]

3 hours ago, shandypants said:

Thanks. Sorry to ask a question that may be hard to answer but do xG stats hold true in derby games or do they go out of the window?

 

Not sure. I haven't got a sample size big enough to say with any clarity either way.

 

In terms of our own Derby games this season...you'd say, xG has been fairly reflective of the teams form and positions. Both Leeds and Sheff Utd created the better xG in our games with them, and in the Rotherham games...the home game was very tightly contested, and the recent reverse fixture, although an anomaly in our recent upturn in form, Rotherham do create a high number of xG in their games, which they did against us. 

 

Interestingly enough, a Sheff Utd stats page recently did a great piece on the old adage..."Form goes out of the window" when it comes to Derby games. In fact, they found that form doesn't go out of the window, and the team with significantly better form, more often than not, comes out in top during the Steel City derbies. 

 

 

[shandypants]

Thanks Fras. That’s an interesting read   

[frastheowl]

 

Update:

 

Sheff Wed 0.84 (0) - (0) 0.6 Sheff Utd

 

A game of real low quality, with only two chances registering an xG of more than 0.1. Madine's header (0.33 xG) in the 1st half provided United with their best chance, and Hutchinson squandered the best chance of the game, which had an xG of 0.53. Other that than, a small smattering of low percentage chances. Doesn't tell us anything we didn't already know...it was an awful game, and 0-0 was a justified result, with Wednesday the slightly better side of the two. 

 

A game best forgotten. 

 

Frank Lampard's Derby County 0.37 (1) - (1) 1.16 Sheff Wed

 

Missed opportunity this one. Derby continued their recent trend of struggling to create any clear cut chances, and Wednesday failing to capitalise on a couple of decent chances take all three points. Johnson's goal only had an xG of 0.04, a 4% chance of scoring, but was actually Derby's 3rd best chance of the game, with only Jozefzoon's effort in added time (0.06xG) and Marriot's volley in the 88th minute which Westwood saved well (0.05xG) with statistically higher xG's. 

 

Wednesday on the other hand, got their goal through Iorfa's header, a fairly low percentage chance of 0.06xG, which I think is a tad on the low side. However, we had four chances all higher xG than Derby's best: Fletcher's volley on 24 minutes after nicking possession off Derby's centre half (0.08xG), Reach's scuffed volley at the back post (0.09xG), Nuhiu's blocked shot after chesting down Reach's cross into the box (0.18xG) and our best chance, 0.52xG, was Fletcher's volley over the bar from about 8 yards out following Bannan's ball into the box. 

 

Based on xG, this should've been three points, despite Derby's late period of pressure. 

 

Bolton 0.81 (0) - (2) 0.92 Sheff Wed

 

Another game with very few quality chances. The best chance of the match was our 1st goal. Fletcher's finish following Bannan's through ball had an xG of 0.33. The only other chances of our own with an xG >0.10 consisted of Hector's mishit volley from a corner straight after half time (0.11xG), and Matias' turn and shot in the 90th minute (0.11xG). Aaron's 2nd half goal only had a 5% chance of a goal.

 

Bolton on the other hand, failed to create any chance with a more than 15% chance of scoring. There best chance fell to Craig Noone, 0.15xG, when his shot beat Westwood but was blocked by Winnall following a free kick. Clayton Donaldson's attempted near post overhead kick had an xG of 0.13, and Josh Magennis' blocked shot on the stroke of half time had an xG of 0.11. 

 

A tight affair, but Wednesday's ability to create the big chance of the game, in addition to our superior quality to convert a low xG chance, ensured we came away with a perhaps just deserved three points. 

 

Sheff Wed 2.19 (4) - (2) 0.64 Blackburn

 

Without doubt, a deserved three points...although Blackburn can feel slightly unfortunate to have conceded four goals. 

 

This was our 4th best attacking display of the season, and our 2nd most dominant performance of the season (after Brentford at home). 

 

We created four chances of real high value yesterday, scoring three of them. The goal's themselves had a combined xG of 1.6 (an average of 0.4/goal); Fletcher's 0.6, Nuhiu's 0.4, Iorfa's 0.56 and Matias' 0.04xG. The other high value chance we created was Hector's free header which hit the post in the 1st half (0.38xG). We were clinical yesterday, hence the reason we outscored our already very impressive xG.

 

Blackburn on the other hand, despite a lot of fine play, only created one chance with a reasonably high xG, which was Graham's free header which he put wide on 53 minutes (0.23xG). Blackburn's goals both had a 0.07xG, and so Blackburn were fairly clinical also. Bradley Dack had three efforts with a combined xG of 0.2 (0.66xG average), but failed to convert any of them. 

 

Graph time...

 

 

This shows our defensive performances. So this is purely focussing on how xG we have conceded, compared to how many actual goals we've conceded. 

 

First of all, it just demonstrates how poor we were in the 1st quarter of the season. In only one of the first 18 games, did we concede an xG of less than 1.0. Was it any wonder it took until GW17 to keep our 1st clean sheet?

 

Secondly, just look at the almost immediate improvement in defensive performance once Luhukay was sacked. Under Luhukay our 5 game rolling average of xG conceded (and actual goals conceded) never fell below 1.0, and infact rose above 2.0xG at two points during his reign. *Gulp*

 

Under Bruce, we've only conceded an xG above 1.0 twice...Rotherham and Swansea. And as a result, our rolling average has remained under 1.0xG for 13 games now (a quarter of a season). 

 

As a quick reference, here is the remarkable differences between Luhukay and Bruce's performances (with Bullen and Agnew/Clemence short stints included also).