| Stat people 15:46 - Nov 26 with 1556 views | chrismakin |
Someone mentioned our goals scored column and I was wandering how ours compares with others..
I know it's easy to say remove games. BUT take away 3 results and we have 20 goals in 16 games... not knowing if those above us have the same '3' high scoring results etc to make their goal scored column look better, BUT is 20 i 16 a good return or have those 3 games, made us appear more exciting than we have been?
I saw earlier someone mention our shots per game is similar to last seasons, so I guess the question is how much more' exciting' are we or are we not and it's moving along at the same pace? and these odd games are papering the cracks? |  |
| |  |
| Stat people on 15:49 - Nov 26 with 1221 views | hoppy |
Why are you taking away results that HAVE happened?
It's almost like you want certain stats to fit some kind of certain agenda?
They happened, they are relevant to any stats to this point in the season. You can't just pick and choose. |  |
| |
| Stat people on 15:53 - Nov 26 with 1192 views | chrismakin |
| Stat people on 15:49 - Nov 26 by hoppy |
Why are you taking away results that HAVE happened?
It's almost like you want certain stats to fit some kind of certain agenda?
They happened, they are relevant to any stats to this point in the season. You can't just pick and choose. |
I appreciate your view, and I did mention that in my OP.
I think it is important personally, depending on the answer to my OP.
We had a similar spell of goals under Jewell and Lambert, but around those fixtures were what we've had around these 3, so it would be nice to know how those 16 games compare to the rest of the league. | |
| |
| Stat people on 17:01 - Nov 26 with 1126 views | DropCliffsNotBombs |
So this is your new thing you're all over this week? Oh yay. Great. |  | | |
| Stat people on 17:04 - Nov 26 with 1115 views | chrismakin |
| Stat people on 17:01 - Nov 26 by DropCliffsNotBombs |
So this is your new thing you're all over this week? Oh yay. Great. |
Whats the answer you would like? | |
| |
| Stat people on 17:06 - Nov 26 with 1106 views | wkj |
| Stat people on 15:53 - Nov 26 by chrismakin |
I appreciate your view, and I did mention that in my OP.
I think it is important personally, depending on the answer to my OP.
We had a similar spell of goals under Jewell and Lambert, but around those fixtures were what we've had around these 3, so it would be nice to know how those 16 games compare to the rest of the league. |
There is no justification whatsoever to taking away goals, points or stats. The second you do that, everything becomes pointless- including what you leave in.
In short, do the EFL discount results to decide who goes up or down? (point deductions obviously exist, but those are sanctions that all teams are subject to) |  |
| |
| Stat people on 17:07 - Nov 26 with 1103 views | Pinewoodblue |
Will each team, come seasons end, be allowed to discount their three worst performances, seems a strange way to go about it.
If they aren’t then surely your question has no relevance. |  |
| |
| Stat people on 17:13 - Nov 26 with 1082 views | chrismakin |
| Stat people on 17:07 - Nov 26 by Pinewoodblue |
Will each team, come seasons end, be allowed to discount their three worst performances, seems a strange way to go about it.
If they aren’t then surely your question has no relevance. |
I think it's relevant. Again depending on the answer to the OP.
We see alot about games being more exciting than previous seasons...is that thought being driven by 3 games.. as someone pointed out shots in games stats aren't to different to previous seasons. | |
| |
| Stat people on 17:15 - Nov 26 with 1071 views | Ftnfwest |
So take out all the exciting bits and we’re less exciting? |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Stat people on 17:18 - Nov 26 with 1065 views | JakeITFC |
However if you only consider those three matches we are scoring on average 4.7 goals a game, so that’s positive. |  | | |
| Stat people on 17:18 - Nov 26 with 1065 views | Swansea_Blue |
Yeah sure, if you take out the games where we've scored most goals it'll lower our 'goals for' tally and we'll look more goal shy. So those high scoring games do skew the figures a bit. Obviously.
You could look at the number of times we've scored more than 1 goal in a game as another indicator. That's 12 out of the first 25 games in all competitions this season. Last season was 11 out of the first 25 games. So not such a different start, yet we were much higher up the table at the same point last year. Again, not surprising as we had a better defensive record.
I don't think there's been much wrong with goals scored in itself. The recent blip of 3 in 6 (all comps) or 0 in 3 (league) is more of a worry. Hopefully we're back in our comfort zone on Sunday against a lowly team. Based on what's happened so far this season we should fancy ourselves for a few. |  |
| |
| Stat people on 17:19 - Nov 26 with 1064 views | footers |
If you take out the number of British casualties, Galipoli wasn't really that bad looking back on it. |  |
| |
| Stat people on 17:20 - Nov 26 with 1056 views | wkj |
| Stat people on 17:13 - Nov 26 by chrismakin |
I think it's relevant. Again depending on the answer to the OP.
We see alot about games being more exciting than previous seasons...is that thought being driven by 3 games.. as someone pointed out shots in games stats aren't to different to previous seasons. |
You addressed the post as "stats people" - As someone who has spent a fair amount of time in statistic analysis - both myself, hoppy and Pinewood are telling you that your logic is flawed.
You're in essence trying to back up the notion that we're not doing much better under Paul Cook. You don't have to discount any stats to do that, just highlight the points column under the league table - boom, job done.
Is the football we play more entertaining to watch? Generally speaking, yes - though there are games where that has not been the case.
The only time you ever discount outliers in statistic analysis is when the outliers are obviously detached from the average cluster - and that is for data that is collected. Our stats are not that kind of data, they are a point and goal tally that is subject to a particular set of rules as stated by a governing body. Yes, we have games that are outliers - but they are tangible data. | |
| |
| Stat people on 17:20 - Nov 26 with 1058 views | chrismakin |
| Stat people on 17:15 - Nov 26 by Ftnfwest |
So take out all the exciting bits and we’re less exciting? |
Do you Judge PC over the total games played or concentrate on the 3 games only? There was a reason for my op and its not twtd related.
As I said in my op it was an open question and SB gave a polite reply which I'm thankful for.
[Post edited 26 Nov 2021 17:24]
| |
| |
| Stat people on 17:22 - Nov 26 with 1049 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Stat people on 17:19 - Nov 26 by footers |
If you take out the number of British casualties, Galipoli wasn't really that bad looking back on it. |
When did we play them? Sounds like quite a match if there were casualties, but then we had a shocking injury record last year so I blame Evans. | |
| |
| Stat people on 17:22 - Nov 26 with 1048 views | chrismakin |
| Stat people on 17:18 - Nov 26 by Swansea_Blue |
Yeah sure, if you take out the games where we've scored most goals it'll lower our 'goals for' tally and we'll look more goal shy. So those high scoring games do skew the figures a bit. Obviously.
You could look at the number of times we've scored more than 1 goal in a game as another indicator. That's 12 out of the first 25 games in all competitions this season. Last season was 11 out of the first 25 games. So not such a different start, yet we were much higher up the table at the same point last year. Again, not surprising as we had a better defensive record.
I don't think there's been much wrong with goals scored in itself. The recent blip of 3 in 6 (all comps) or 0 in 3 (league) is more of a worry. Hopefully we're back in our comfort zone on Sunday against a lowly team. Based on what's happened so far this season we should fancy ourselves for a few. |
Thanks SB | |
| |
| Stat people on 17:23 - Nov 26 with 1045 views | wkj |
| Stat people on 17:20 - Nov 26 by chrismakin |
Do you Judge PC over the total games played or concentrate on the 3 games only? There was a reason for my op and its not twtd related.
As I said in my op it was an open question and SB gave a polite reply which I'm thankful for.
[Post edited 26 Nov 2021 17:24]
|
I don't think anyone has suggested taking away the games outside of the 3 you're talking about - that would be equally stupid to do. | |
| |
| Stat people on 17:54 - Nov 26 with 976 views | Ftnfwest |
| Stat people on 17:20 - Nov 26 by chrismakin |
Do you Judge PC over the total games played or concentrate on the 3 games only? There was a reason for my op and its not twtd related.
As I said in my op it was an open question and SB gave a polite reply which I'm thankful for.
[Post edited 26 Nov 2021 17:24]
|
I guess if as an alternative we concentrate on the last three games we’re probably the lowest scorers in the league with zero, so another reason to sack cook if that’s what you want. Taking all games into account we’re top scorers so it seems a bit odd to look for more negatives around that. | | | |
| Stat people on 17:55 - Nov 26 with 977 views | positivity |
forget about removing games, it's nonsense.
what i think is interesting is that we're the biggest overachievers in the league compared to our xG.
we're also the 2nd biggest underachievers compared to our xgA.
basically, this is saying overall that individual brilliance (and possibly opposition mistakes) has led to us scoring more than we'd expect from our general play.
conversely, our individual mistakes (and possibly opposition brilliance) has seen us let in more goals than we'd expect from our general play.
overall, we're doing worst in the real league cf to the xG table because those mistakes have come in the wrong games.
https://experimental361.com/2021/11/25/expected-goals-table-league-1-23-nov-2021 |  |
| |
| Stat people on 18:49 - Nov 26 with 897 views | HighgateBlue |
| Stat people on 17:55 - Nov 26 by positivity |
forget about removing games, it's nonsense.
what i think is interesting is that we're the biggest overachievers in the league compared to our xG.
we're also the 2nd biggest underachievers compared to our xgA.
basically, this is saying overall that individual brilliance (and possibly opposition mistakes) has led to us scoring more than we'd expect from our general play.
conversely, our individual mistakes (and possibly opposition brilliance) has seen us let in more goals than we'd expect from our general play.
overall, we're doing worst in the real league cf to the xG table because those mistakes have come in the wrong games.
https://experimental361.com/2021/11/25/expected-goals-table-league-1-23-nov-2021 |
And the overachievement on xG is now evening out - a small (hopefully small) lean patch in front of goal.
It's clearly the underachievement in xgA that leaves us in an unacceptable league position. We let in too many goals, and Cook has shown himself entirely unable to sort that. Obviously I am very disappointed by this, but have no sympathy for Cook at all - last year we had a good defence, he ripped it apart because the players were allegedly rubbish and he could do better. If he was right, he would deserve much credit. As it is, he must take all the flak for his massive arrogance. Wilson must be chuckling at Plymouth and he has every right to. Mighty Plymouth. |  | | |
| Stat people on 18:51 - Nov 26 with 890 views | Baker101 |
As most are saying, you have to include all games to get a full flavour of the reality.
I do a bit of "statto" type crunching when im bored.
Reality of this season seems that we have ab enviable shots/goals ratio (13.7%) 3rd best in Lg1.
But we're around mid table for everything else - shots per game, goals per game and shots on target per game.
Implying that we don't actually create that much bur when we do we score around 1 in 8 chances. (inc cup games) | | | |
| Stat people on 19:26 - Nov 26 with 843 views | Keaneish |
| Stat people on 17:13 - Nov 26 by chrismakin |
I think it's relevant. Again depending on the answer to the OP.
We see alot about games being more exciting than previous seasons...is that thought being driven by 3 games.. as someone pointed out shots in games stats aren't to different to previous seasons. |
Personally I judge it on what I’m seeing, not what high-level stats say. Under Cook we get in behind teams and create a much better quality of chance, which is what’s leading to the higher goal return. Tuesday night was an exception but beyond that, I’d d say we’ve actually been a bit unfortunate to have a much higher goal return. We’re definitely more clinical so it matters little if we create the same volume as long as we’re converting enough. |  |
| |
| Stat people on 21:25 - Nov 26 with 766 views | positivity |
| Stat people on 18:49 - Nov 26 by HighgateBlue |
And the overachievement on xG is now evening out - a small (hopefully small) lean patch in front of goal.
It's clearly the underachievement in xgA that leaves us in an unacceptable league position. We let in too many goals, and Cook has shown himself entirely unable to sort that. Obviously I am very disappointed by this, but have no sympathy for Cook at all - last year we had a good defence, he ripped it apart because the players were allegedly rubbish and he could do better. If he was right, he would deserve much credit. As it is, he must take all the flak for his massive arrogance. Wilson must be chuckling at Plymouth and he has every right to. Mighty Plymouth. |
the underachievement in xGA isn't really one you can lay at cook, it shows the essentials are sound, but individual errors have caused the underachievement from what you'd expect.
wilson's a bit of a red herring as he was injured for most of cook's time, the average defence last season was holy/chambers/toto/wolf/ward.
cook's best is walton/donacien/toto/edmundson/coulson. which would you prefer? i'd go cook's every time. it's just a shame he hasn't been able to field it yet! [Post edited 26 Nov 2021 21:33]
| |
| |
| Stat people on 21:45 - Nov 26 with 712 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| Stat people on 17:20 - Nov 26 by wkj |
You addressed the post as "stats people" - As someone who has spent a fair amount of time in statistic analysis - both myself, hoppy and Pinewood are telling you that your logic is flawed.
You're in essence trying to back up the notion that we're not doing much better under Paul Cook. You don't have to discount any stats to do that, just highlight the points column under the league table - boom, job done.
Is the football we play more entertaining to watch? Generally speaking, yes - though there are games where that has not been the case.
The only time you ever discount outliers in statistic analysis is when the outliers are obviously detached from the average cluster - and that is for data that is collected. Our stats are not that kind of data, they are a point and goal tally that is subject to a particular set of rules as stated by a governing body. Yes, we have games that are outliers - but they are tangible data. |
I'm looking at ways of finding an eigenvalue for each team at any given point in the season, using vector analysis and matrix algebra to determine true performance - I'll report back in a couple of years on that one... |  |
| |
| Stat people on 21:50 - Nov 26 with 695 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
Joe tried this on the Blue Monday pod. If we were only slaughtering minnows there would be some point to it, but as well as Donny we've had big wins at Pompey (excellent home record and an expected tough game) and Wycombe (one of the so-called top and in-form teams). So how on earth can you remove those games from the stats? It's almost like punishing the team, and manager, for the games when they really click.
You could also remove our 3 worst results and make a case that we haven't been that bad (apart from them). And that would be equally daft. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
