Popular Post areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted December 16, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted December 16, 2021 All of this is lifted straight from experimental361.com, which is definitely worth a browse if you're into your stats or just like looking at nicely-shaded graphs: https://experimental361.com/2021/12/14/scatter-graphics-league-1-14-dec-2021/ None of it is particularly surprising from a Wednesday perspective, with our defence ranking among the top 10% of the division, our 'shot dominance' (I'll let the bloke who makes the website explain that in a moment) being in the top 25%, and our attacking effectiveness ranking only in the top 50% as things stand. The only really noteworthy thing I picked out is that our expected goals against is a fair bit worse than our actual goals against (only three teams have a larger gap between expected goals against and actual goals against than us), and would have seen us slip a couple of places down the table had those chances been scored, so credit to Peacock-Farrell for pulling us through some games where your average 'keeper probably wouldn't have. As for the rest of the division, Rotherham are looking very strong. Barring a disastrous January window, you'd think they should be going up as champions. And Donny are looking dreadful in attack - they create hardly any chances and they're the worst at converting shots into goals when they do. It's rare to see a team so distant from the rest of the division on one of these charts. Anyway, here are some colourful charts to feast your eyes on... Shot dominance First of all, here is how the number of shots taken by each club compares with those they face in return. The average number of shots taken per match is on the horizontal and the average number faced is on the vertical, so bottom right (take plenty, allow few in return) is good while top left (take few, allow plenty) is bad. The stripes are like contours: the greener the stripe, the better the performance (and vice versa for red). Attacking effectiveness Now let’s look at attacking alone. The horizontal axis stays the same as in the graphic above, but now the vertical shows the average number of shots needed to score each league goal. Therefore bottom right is good (taking lots of shots and needing fewer efforts to convert) and top left is bad: Defensive effectiveness Next let’s look at the defensive situation – basically take the above chart and replace the word “taken” for “faced” on both axes. Now top left is good – facing fewer shots and able to soak up more per goal conceded – and bottom right is bad: 4 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted December 16, 2021 Share Posted December 16, 2021 Goals for…goals against and points they are the stats you need to concern yourself with the rest are just noise 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted December 16, 2021 Author Popular Post Share Posted December 16, 2021 2 minutes ago, Ian said: Goals for…goals against and points they are the stats you need to concern yourself with the rest are just noise Yeah alright, grandad. 11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silkstone Owl Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 the defensive effectiveness graph concerning us - ‘formidable’ and in top 10% - doesn’t ‘feel’ right when you look at where we are. We have managed to draw the most in the league in matches played to date (10); that is between 1.6 times more (Portsmouth / Oxford with 6 draws) and 3.33 times more (Wigan with 3 draws) than the other teams around us on the graph....so how are we apparently in the top 10% of the league ?? These draws are why we aren’t higher up the table, where we’ve been in winning positions so chucked 2 points away (e.g Ipswich Cheltenham etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwë Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Interesting stats and Rotherham clearly doing something right, but I can't see the value of adjusting the real league table for and "expected goals" league table. Perhaps going forward it's of some use, but retrospectively very little use (except Xg table changes over half the teams actual position, therefore showing detachment from realism). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted December 17, 2021 Author Share Posted December 17, 2021 11 minutes ago, Manwë said: Interesting stats and Rotherham clearly doing something right, but I can't see the value of adjusting the real league table for and "expected goals" league table. Perhaps going forward it's of some use, but retrospectively very little use (except Xg table changes over half the teams actual position, therefore showing detachment from realism). The explanation from the website itself: The idea behind this is that it gives a potentially fairer assessment of how each team is doing, based on how a hypothetical average team would have fared from the chances they created and allowed. As the expected goals model isn’t perfect, we can’t use these tables to say with certainty that a given team has been lucky (or unlucky) but it’s safe to say that significant differences tend not to be sustainable over the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted December 17, 2021 Author Share Posted December 17, 2021 19 minutes ago, Silkstone Owl said: the defensive effectiveness graph concerning us - ‘formidable’ and in top 10% - doesn’t ‘feel’ right when you look at where we are. We have managed to draw the most in the league in matches played to date (10); that is between 1.6 times more (Portsmouth / Oxford with 6 draws) and 3.33 times more (Wigan with 3 draws) than the other teams around us on the graph....so how are we apparently in the top 10% of the league ?? These draws are why we aren’t higher up the table, where we’ve been in winning positions so chucked 2 points away (e.g Ipswich Cheltenham etc) Only Rotherham and Wigan have conceded fewer goals than us, so we must be doing something right defensively. We're currently facing fewer than 11 shots per game, which is the 5th lowest in the division, and it takes more than 11 shots on average to score against us, which is slightly behind just Rotherham and Wycombe so far. Combining those two factors puts us in the top 10% of the division for defensive effectiveness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pieman Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 This is over the course of the whole season. I would like to see the last 10 games, where it feels like we have improved markedly and should continue to do so. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted December 17, 2021 Author Share Posted December 17, 2021 50 minutes ago, Pieman said: This is over the course of the whole season. I would like to see the last 10 games, where it feels like we have improved markedly and should continue to do so. Yeah, that would be interesting to see. Things have definitely picked up 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Rimmer Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 very interesting thankyou I just can't wrap my brain around with our players why we find it so difficult to break the opposites down it just seems like we have a much more talented group of players but we don't really see the rewards from that- I'm putting it down to the manager and tactics than the players 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveyboy66 Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Lies, damn lies, and statistics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sham67 Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Man City’s xg against Leeds was 2.58. Just saying like… 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtawnyowl Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 11 hours ago, Ian said: Goals for…goals against and points they are the stats you need to concern yourself with the rest are just noise 11 hours ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said: Yeah alright, grandad. I don't think your dismissive comment of "Yea alright, grandad" was really called for. At the end ofthe day @Ianis absolutely right. It doesn't matter how many pretty graphs and charts you post on here showing "attacking or defending effectiveness"" or "expected goals for or against" etc, the only chart that matters is the league table. So @Ian is correct:- Goals for, goals against and points are the only stats that really matter. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcs1987 Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Football is a simple game. It's this kind of nonsense that overcomplicates it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted December 17, 2021 Author Share Posted December 17, 2021 1 hour ago, oldtawnyowl said: I don't think your dismissive comment of "Yea alright, grandad" was really called for. At the end ofthe day @Ianis absolutely right. It doesn't matter how many pretty graphs and charts you post on here showing "attacking or defending effectiveness"" or "expected goals for or against" etc, the only chart that matters is the league table. So @Ian is correct:- Goals for, goals against and points are the only stats that really matter. Soz, dad. Seriously, though - we get that kind of inane comment every time anybody posts any kind of statistical analysis on here. Nobody's claiming that the league table is anything other than the most important metric by which teams are judged. And for those who are happy to focus solely on the headline figures, that's fine. But for those who want to dig a bit deeper and look at the game in a bit more detail, these kind of charts offer a simple, yet interesting enough way to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pughies Jockstrap Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Thankyou Professor Whitty. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nero Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Im with the OP on this. Its a guide to what we need to do to improve. Looking at another stat site FBRef, i came to the same conclusion and started a topic saying we need strikers not defenders. This backs that up. Rotherham are miles in front of any other team and will probably win the league by a distance. Unless other teams improve. One thing i do think is that we are (or were) improving while some teams might stagnate or fall away. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzamk2 Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Geeky. But I like geeky. And It does correlate to league position as well if you compare the charts to the actual standings 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtawnyowl Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 (edited) 7 hours ago, areNOTwhatTHEYseem said: Soz, dad Seriously, though - we get that kind of inane comment every time anybody posts any kind of statistical analysis on here. Nobody's claiming that the league table is anything other than the most important metric by which teams are judged. And for those who are happy to focus solely on the headline figures, that's fine. But for those who want to dig a bit deeper and look at the game in a bit more detail, these kind of charts offer a simple, yet interesting enough way to do so. Again the dismissive comment. You do know what "inane" means? I don't consider that preferring to concentrate on the headline figures is "stupid, imbecilic,unintelligent" (definition of "inane" according to the dictionary). Anyway, I prefer to go along with Bill Shankley who said "Football is a simple game............. Edited December 17, 2021 by oldtawnyowl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
areNOTwhatTHEYseem Posted December 17, 2021 Author Share Posted December 17, 2021 5 minutes ago, oldtawnyowl said: Again the dismissive comment. You do know what "inane" means? I don't consider that preferring to concentrate on the headline figures is "stupid, imbecilic,unintelligent" (definition of "inane" according to the dictionary). Anyway, I prefer to go along with Bill Shankley who said "Football is a simple game............. Yes, I know what 'inane' means, ta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now