| XG PL teams on 22:41 - Sep 23 with 1391 views | Garv |
We must be the only team not named in that article.
If we're going to achieve anything this year, will we have done it under the radar? We don't have Frank Lampard and we haven't had the explosive start Hull had, no one seems particularly interested in us. Not necessarily a bad thing. |  |
|  |
| XG PL teams on 22:44 - Sep 23 with 1382 views | ZapatasMoustache |
| XG PL teams on 22:41 - Sep 23 by Garv |
We must be the only team not named in that article.
If we're going to achieve anything this year, will we have done it under the radar? We don't have Frank Lampard and we haven't had the explosive start Hull had, no one seems particularly interested in us. Not necessarily a bad thing. |
Yeah, us and Everton are the only teams that are about 'par', which for journalists is boring. Which is also good for season-long prognosis! |  | | |
| XG PL teams on 23:24 - Sep 23 with 1314 views | TractorWood |
'it shows that the table shouldn't be taken too seriously this early on'
So here is hundreds of words of waffle about XG at the exact same early part of the season. |  |
| |
| XG PL teams on 00:44 - Sep 24 with 1236 views | Cotty |
The only reason that people don’t like it is because they don’t understand it. Which isn’t a particularly good reason. |  | | |
| XG PL teams on 07:22 - Sep 24 with 1013 views | NthQldITFC |
| XG PL teams on 00:44 - Sep 24 by Cotty |
The only reason that people don’t like it is because they don’t understand it. Which isn’t a particularly good reason. |
They'll be descending on the factories wherein lie the powered looms which fabricate this fearful xG cloth next.
But the AI robot guards will shoot them dead with laser rifles and feed them into the crucible whence come the rare earth metals, recoverable from all animal tissue waste.
So it all turned out alright in the end. |  |
| |
| XG PL teams on 08:55 - Sep 24 with 919 views | dirtyboy |
In addition to XG, I think Ipswich seem to pass the 'eye test' early on for me too.
We look dangerous and the goals we've conceded aren't solely because we're poorly organised. Yes, we've made mistakes, but there's absolutely a team there that looks more than capable of taking points off teams, certainly at home.
Look, i'm not saying we'll be comfortable, but am confident we've got the tools to survive. It'll be a different ride to last time! |  | | |
| XG PL teams on 09:15 - Sep 24 with 878 views | _CliveBaker_ |
| XG PL teams on 00:44 - Sep 24 by Cotty |
The only reason that people don’t like it is because they don’t understand it. Which isn’t a particularly good reason. |
I like it in principle, in the past I've questioned how accurate it is, but does seem to be improving. Xg was routinely lower than actual goals scored when looking at it over a reasonable sample size, which suggested to me it systematically underestimated scoring probability.
I understand teams can under or over perform XG game to game, but a couple of years ago in the Championship I think 23 teams outscored their Xg, and on balance over the season (1,100 games) it was something like 10% more goals actually scored vs. expected, which suggested an issue with the X to me.
Seems to be a much better metric now though. |  | | |
| XG PL teams on 10:42 - Sep 24 with 792 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| XG PL teams on 09:15 - Sep 24 by _CliveBaker_ |
I like it in principle, in the past I've questioned how accurate it is, but does seem to be improving. Xg was routinely lower than actual goals scored when looking at it over a reasonable sample size, which suggested to me it systematically underestimated scoring probability.
I understand teams can under or over perform XG game to game, but a couple of years ago in the Championship I think 23 teams outscored their Xg, and on balance over the season (1,100 games) it was something like 10% more goals actually scored vs. expected, which suggested an issue with the X to me.
Seems to be a much better metric now though. |
I get your point, and like any system based on statistics, it will improve with more data.
However, many people just look at xG, and compare it with goals, when highlighting discrepancies, when xGOT is a much better metric for that comparison.
People also assume that xG and xGOT is intended as a score predictor. It isn't! It's a measure of what might reasonably have been expected in a given situation, and highlights under or over performance. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| XG PL teams on 11:06 - Sep 24 with 765 views | _CliveBaker_ |
| XG PL teams on 10:42 - Sep 24 by SuffolkPunchFC |
I get your point, and like any system based on statistics, it will improve with more data.
However, many people just look at xG, and compare it with goals, when highlighting discrepancies, when xGOT is a much better metric for that comparison.
People also assume that xG and xGOT is intended as a score predictor. It isn't! It's a measure of what might reasonably have been expected in a given situation, and highlights under or over performance. |
That's fair, but ultimately over a sample size of 1,100 matches, over the course of a full season, you wouldn't expect Xg and actual goals scored to diverge so drastically. If they do it has to point to an issue with the Xg assumption, surely?
As I said, certainly improving and last season in the PL the Xg and Actual goals scored, over the course of the season were very close, which is a good result for Xg. | | | |
| XG PL teams on 12:39 - Sep 24 with 642 views | ITFC_Essex |
| XG PL teams on 23:24 - Sep 23 by TractorWood |
'it shows that the table shouldn't be taken too seriously this early on'
So here is hundreds of words of waffle about XG at the exact same early part of the season. |
Football is fairly simple. If you are an average team, say you play the 5 worst teams at the start of the season, your going to be near the top having won/drawn most of your games and all the XG and stats are pointing at Europe next season. If you then play the 5 hardest teams, you will have lost/drawn more than you have won, putting you in the middle of the table, and the stats/xg and all that will reflect exactly that. [Post edited 24 Sep 12:40]
|  |
| |
| XG PL teams on 12:40 - Sep 24 with 631 views | HighgateBlue |
| XG PL teams on 00:44 - Sep 24 by Cotty |
The only reason that people don’t like it is because they don’t understand it. Which isn’t a particularly good reason. |
That is definitely part of it.
It's clearly an interesting statistic, but like any, it has its limitations, and can't really be used in isolation. Also, it is important to interpret the data carefully and logically, even though I accept that there is rarely one single 'correct' interpretation or conclusion you can draw from the raw data.
For example, the OP's BBC article, interesting though it is, has headings like "Arsenal have been the best defensively...". Particularly after such a small number of games, but also generally:
- what indicates "best defensively"? is it a low xGA or a low GC minus xGA?
- not allowing shots is of course part of defending, but so is putting an attacker off when they are taking a high value shot, and blocking that shot, or saving that shot (for a keeper)
- if you take the lowest xGA as meaning "best defensively" then you may be giving a team credit when the opposition decides to take a shot from distance that is low value, and misses. At this stage of the season it is also skewed by whether they have played particularly attacking teams yet, or not.
- if you take a low GC minus xGA as being best defensively, then you are giving credit for the saves, blocks and 'putting off', but you are not giving credit for preventing shooting chances in the first place
- also there is the more fundamental point that xGA does not generate any value (as i understand it) when a shot is not attempted. It is a huge part of defending to prevent shots. But it's also an important part to stop attackers from getting into positions where they might make a decision whether to shoot in the first place. In basing Team A's defensive value on Team B's /actual/ shots, you're only getting a limited picture.
One example: Team A's defence and keeper defend a corner terribly. Possible outcomes:
1) Team B's attacker gets a head on it. Ball goes wide. Team A has conceded xGA, but no GC.
2) Team B's attacker gets a head on it. Ball goes in the top corner. Team A has conceded xGA, and GC.
3) Team B's attacker can't get a head on it. As I understand it, no xGA and no GC.
There is also the point that mere mortals can't interrogate what value is given to each shot. No two situations (other than penalties I suppose) have ever been totally identical, due to the relative positions of different players, so how does the underlying data (or subjective opinion?) adjust for that?
Another point is that xG and xGA over a season essentially compares goal difference with expected goal difference. We know that goal difference does not determine the league table, even at the end of the season. Breaking xG and xGA down into individual games and getting xPoints is an interesting one, but again it has advantages and disadvantages that are different from the above. Large differences in points can be determined by the big moments, just as a tennis player can win a match easily despite winning fewer individual points. In football a team may lose 6-0 to the top teams, but manage to grind out enough 1-0 or 2-1 wins against weaker teams, and the fact that a win gives you 3 times as many points for a win as a draw really magnifies the influence of those individual goals or goal preventions. Yet the defensive (and offensive) stats overall will look really poor.
Anyhoo, this is probably all really obvious stuff. Personally I welcome the advent of all of these stats, and I am sure that they bring an awful lot to the table that was overlooked or incorrectly analysed based on biases and prejudices and indeed incorrect assumptions and ignorance. It also has given some smaller sides like Brighton the chance to break the big time without having the international fanbase or budget of the very biggest. But whether that kind of advantage lasts is a different question. |  | | |
| XG PL teams on 12:47 - Sep 24 with 607 views | ITFC_Essex |
| XG PL teams on 08:55 - Sep 24 by dirtyboy |
In addition to XG, I think Ipswich seem to pass the 'eye test' early on for me too.
We look dangerous and the goals we've conceded aren't solely because we're poorly organised. Yes, we've made mistakes, but there's absolutely a team there that looks more than capable of taking points off teams, certainly at home.
Look, i'm not saying we'll be comfortable, but am confident we've got the tools to survive. It'll be a different ride to last time! |
It's the poor organisation and the sloppy mistakes that is the problem, we wouldn't have got away with some of those against Middlesbrough, let alone the teams in this league.
We do have some bright sparks, when Enciso is playing as part of a team, he's the best signing this club has had in a long time, when he reverts to trying to play the game for himself, it's the same issue we had with him in 24/25. Emersonn looks like he has some potential, going forward Davis has improved no end, even if at the back he sometimes offers up too much space to the other sides. In the middle looks okay at times, we are very blessed on the left but frankly our right side, for a Premier League team, is way below what we need for this level.
The thing that will likely see us drop if anything is how weak our bench is at this level. Nunez and co. are just not Premier League players. | |
| |
| XG PL teams on 13:50 - Sep 24 with 519 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| XG PL teams on 11:06 - Sep 24 by _CliveBaker_ |
That's fair, but ultimately over a sample size of 1,100 matches, over the course of a full season, you wouldn't expect Xg and actual goals scored to diverge so drastically. If they do it has to point to an issue with the Xg assumption, surely?
As I said, certainly improving and last season in the PL the Xg and Actual goals scored, over the course of the season were very close, which is a good result for Xg. |
Well, that will depend on where the divergence is - do you have a specific recent example? xG and xGOT in the PL for last season was pretty much aligned at an individual striker level.
If you look beyond strikers there can be higher divergence, due to chances falling to players who are not natural finishers e.g. a defender. This can then distort results if you look at club level - it's necessary to delve in deeper and understand more about the chances.
Like all stats, headline numbers are often misleading without going into the detail. | | | |
| XG PL teams on 13:57 - Sep 24 with 514 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| XG PL teams on 22:41 - Sep 23 by Garv |
We must be the only team not named in that article.
If we're going to achieve anything this year, will we have done it under the radar? We don't have Frank Lampard and we haven't had the explosive start Hull had, no one seems particularly interested in us. Not necessarily a bad thing. |
I’m not sure about the under the radar comment personally. Perhaps MSM, but social media was all over how much we spent, and in particular the breaking of the record for a promoted team. Plenty of non Town fans have mentioned our spending to me.
That said, weird it hasn’t translated into peoples expectations in respect of us staying up. I guess the most common view is that Sunderland was a bit of a one off. However I look at our squad and barring a big injury crisis it’s certainly competitive once they find some traction. I’ve certainly enjoyed the start of this season much more than our last PL one.
Wish international football would get in the bin! | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
