| We should be third... 11:08 - Oct 23 with 3407 views | BlueSince93 |
Thoughts? |  | | |  |
| We should be third... on 11:11 - Oct 23 with 2917 views | Bellevue_Blue |
It means nothing really besides it should in theory turn good before long.
I assume its just based on XG so it shines a light on quite how poorly the players are doing re conceding awful goals and not scoring decent chances. [Post edited 23 Oct 2025 11:11]
|  | | |
| We should be third... on 11:11 - Oct 23 with 2911 views | Herbivore |
Probably about right. Some of our performances have been very frustrating but there have been plenty of games this season we should have picked up more points on the balance of play and chances created. We're not executing well enough in both boxes though and that needs to change. |  |
| |
| We should be third... on 11:11 - Oct 23 with 2910 views | SamWhiteUK |
Kind of tells us what we already know -- we don't score chances we should, and we concede goals that we shouldn't. To me, it simultaneously feels close and at the same time miles away. |  | | |
| We should be third... on 11:16 - Oct 23 with 2858 views | Herbivore |
| We should be third... on 11:11 - Oct 23 by SamWhiteUK |
Kind of tells us what we already know -- we don't score chances we should, and we concede goals that we shouldn't. To me, it simultaneously feels close and at the same time miles away. |
The good news is that it's unusual for these massive outliers to exist over the course of a season. It can happen, Plymouth managed it in their promotion season, but usually sides don't finish too far off where their underlying stats show they should be finishing. And we've not played very well yet really, other than in short spells. If we can sharpen up a bit in both boxes and get some more cohesion, we should still have a good season. Needs to start happening soon though, not necessarily because of the gap to the top but more because we're starting to see the fans lose faith and when that happens it's bad news. | |
| |
| We should be third... on 11:21 - Oct 23 with 2814 views | IP1Blue |
From what I’ve seen, we’re where we should be!
The data may suggest one thing but the eye test for me certainly shows we shouldn’t be 3rd! Think we’ve been pretty poor all season apart from Shef Utd and maybe Norwich but was that because we were good or they were poor?
Pompey I thought we were ok but not great.
Derby, Preston, Blackburn, Boro, Birmingham, Southampton and Bristol City - been pretty poor in all of them apart from a few spells in some of them! | | | |
| We should be third... on 11:22 - Oct 23 with 2798 views | Ralphinho |
"Third in the Opta Expected Points Table, you'll never sing that..." |  |
| |
| We should be third... on 11:28 - Oct 23 with 2735 views | hammo56 |
| We should be third... on 11:21 - Oct 23 by IP1Blue |
From what I’ve seen, we’re where we should be!
The data may suggest one thing but the eye test for me certainly shows we shouldn’t be 3rd! Think we’ve been pretty poor all season apart from Shef Utd and maybe Norwich but was that because we were good or they were poor?
Pompey I thought we were ok but not great.
Derby, Preston, Blackburn, Boro, Birmingham, Southampton and Bristol City - been pretty poor in all of them apart from a few spells in some of them! |
Spot on. Even the Sheffield United game until we got the 2nd goal and their heads really dropped I thought we looked average. As for the game against that lot from up the A140 I don’t think we were that brilliant and it was more a case of them being the worst Norwich side I’ve seen in years. | | | |
| We should be third... on 11:33 - Oct 23 with 2666 views | Herbivore |
| We should be third... on 11:21 - Oct 23 by IP1Blue |
From what I’ve seen, we’re where we should be!
The data may suggest one thing but the eye test for me certainly shows we shouldn’t be 3rd! Think we’ve been pretty poor all season apart from Shef Utd and maybe Norwich but was that because we were good or they were poor?
Pompey I thought we were ok but not great.
Derby, Preston, Blackburn, Boro, Birmingham, Southampton and Bristol City - been pretty poor in all of them apart from a few spells in some of them! |
But most of those teams have been as poor or poorer. The xP table isn't suggesting we've played amazingly, it's just showing that on the balance of good chances for and against, we should be third. It can be true that we've not played well AND that we should have more points than we currently do. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| We should be third... on 13:11 - Oct 23 with 2315 views | Smoresy |
My thoughts are that it's possible to outperform or underperform xG by a significant margin in a season, but it's more difficult to do so the longer a period extends. xG provides the best summary available to us of the quality and quantity of chances that occur in a game, after all, so to wildly deviate from that in the longer term would require something exceptional from shooters and stoppers (positive or negative).
Biggest "expected table" outliers in the PL last season:
Forest: 15 points gain, expected finish 14th
Spurs: 12 points loss, expected finish 13th
Saints: 11 points loss, expected finish 20th
Man Utd: 10 points loss, expected finish 12th
Bournemouth: 9 points loss, expected finish 3rd
We've seen notable corrections at the start of the new season for the above four clubs which survived, all in accordance with last season's xG. Two have had new managers and one lost significant playing staff, which had the potential to unsettle this of course.
I can't source an equivalent table for the Championship last season, but the best average xG performers per game were:
Leeds: +0.88 (expected GD per game)
Burnley: +0.38
Boro: +0.28
Coventry: +0.22
Sunderland: +0.20
Sheff Utd: +0.20
West Brom: +0.16
Wednesday: +0.12
Bristol City: +0.09
The two with greatest xG headroom went up automatically, while 6 of the best 7 made up the top 6. The one to miss out, Boro, has started the new season well.*
Our xGD this season is +0.59, better than it was in 23/24 (0.41). Class of the field Coventry are ahead (+0.75), Southampton (+0.57) and Leicester (+0.30) below.
If we maintain that healthy imbalance in chances created then top 6 should be a formality, because we would need to wildly underperform in both boxes to miss out on at least 6th. We would smash xGD records if we didn't finish in the top 6 with +0.59 come the end of the season.
The highest xGD in recent years that didn't result in promotion, automatically or through the playoffs: Leeds, +0.68, 18/19 season, and Leeds, +0.51, 23/24 season. They had the best xGD both seasons and finished 3rd both seasons.
*Edit sorry Bristol City were the other team in the playoffs weren't they, so 5 of the top 6 made the playoffs alongside the 9th best xG performer. [Post edited 23 Oct 2025 13:30]
| | | |
| We should be third... on 13:32 - Oct 23 with 2177 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
Another good measure is xGD, which puts us 2nd in the table. This says that we are not scoring from positions that we should be managing more often, and we're also conceding more often than would be expected from the various opportunities against us.
So we're doing a lot right in our games, but not clinical enough and also having lady luck work against us a bit.
Now, before anyone else says it, stats don't win/lose games, goals for/against do.
Over the course of a season, you'd expect the 'chance' factor to even itself out, so if we keep a good xGD, we'll begin winning more.
However, as others have said, there is also the phycological side too it - and the longer it continues as it is, the more winning becomes difficult. Our errors are also making it more challenging - had we converted our early dominance into goals on Tuesday, the less likely and impactful later mistakes may have been.
I came away from Tuesday night frustrated as much as disappointed - frustrated because I see what we're trying to do (in a positive way), but frustrated by us not turning the opportunities into goals and silly mistakes turning the momentum of the game. | | | |
| We should be third... on 13:36 - Oct 23 with 2129 views | Trequartista |
This seems to translate to the "Apart from both boxes" table? Not sure how useful that is. |  |
| |
| We should be third... on 13:43 - Oct 23 with 2076 views | Swansea_Blue |
Who doesn’t like a nice game outcome simulation? Things like this make good discussion points and are interesting in some way, but ultimately meaningless. We’ve come a long way since statistical analysis meat pouring over the tables in the Sunday paper trying to manually work out permutations. |  |
| |
| We should be third... on 14:05 - Oct 23 with 1999 views | Exiled2Surrey |
Four observations:
1. assume that in this table we have a game in hand as well
2. note Leicester's position - I had assumed they were seeing the same effect as we are, but seemingly they are just a bit rubbish, but have an amazing player to eke out marginal gains
3. we are in this position despite playing 4 of the top 6 on this measure - now we haven't beaten any of them, drawn 3 of the 4, but 3 were away games where the XG numbers were even and in the home game against Southampton we were significantly better than them (according to the BBC)
4. looks like the Budgies are exactly where they should be | | | |
| We should be third... on 14:32 - Oct 23 with 1906 views | Chrisd |
If you defend the way we do, you deserve to be where we currently find ourselves. | |
| |
| We should be third... on 14:45 - Oct 23 with 1859 views | WestSussexBlue |
That’s complete pony, it’s like saying if my aunty had balls then she’d be my uncle.
We are where we are because of what we’ve done and how we’ve done it.
If’s and but’s have no meaning, it’s up to us to turn the so called unlucky into luck. | | | |
| We should be third... on 15:14 - Oct 23 with 1753 views | Smoresy |
| We should be third... on 13:43 - Oct 23 by Swansea_Blue |
Who doesn’t like a nice game outcome simulation? Things like this make good discussion points and are interesting in some way, but ultimately meaningless. We’ve come a long way since statistical analysis meat pouring over the tables in the Sunday paper trying to manually work out permutations. |
"ultimately meaningless" imo equates to when one thing bears very little connection to another, but the correlation is actually strong. 30 teams have recorded >0.29 xGD per game in a Championship season since this stat was created in 2016/17. 24 of those finished in the top 6, which is a strike rate of 80%. 1 has finished in the bottom half, Sunderland in 23/24, and they delivered their underlying numbers the following year.
Opta's xG table works with the same data but on a per game calculation, as opposed to an accumulating average. Correlation to actual tables is similarly strong by the end of any season, which is intuitive given what it's doing.
https://understat.com/league/E | | | |
| We should be third... on 15:29 - Oct 23 with 1708 views | Bramidan |
| We should be third... on 15:14 - Oct 23 by Smoresy |
"ultimately meaningless" imo equates to when one thing bears very little connection to another, but the correlation is actually strong. 30 teams have recorded >0.29 xGD per game in a Championship season since this stat was created in 2016/17. 24 of those finished in the top 6, which is a strike rate of 80%. 1 has finished in the bottom half, Sunderland in 23/24, and they delivered their underlying numbers the following year.
Opta's xG table works with the same data but on a per game calculation, as opposed to an accumulating average. Correlation to actual tables is similarly strong by the end of any season, which is intuitive given what it's doing.
https://understat.com/league/E |
Well I tried to assimilated all the stats etc in this post.
Bottom line all these stats are a total waste of space.
Where are we in the table?
How come we’ve lost or drawn games when we’ve failed to perform?
At the end of the season when we are languishing will people point to the stats and claim success?
I must be old, playing in the District and Ipswich League we either won, drawn or lost.
You had a crap game you were called out.
Stats are good as long as you don’t have a Morsey or Robbie Savage fronting you up. | | | |
| We should be third... on 15:31 - Oct 23 with 1691 views | Bramidan |
| We should be third... on 15:29 - Oct 23 by Bramidan |
Well I tried to assimilated all the stats etc in this post.
Bottom line all these stats are a total waste of space.
Where are we in the table?
How come we’ve lost or drawn games when we’ve failed to perform?
At the end of the season when we are languishing will people point to the stats and claim success?
I must be old, playing in the District and Ipswich League we either won, drawn or lost.
You had a crap game you were called out.
Stats are good as long as you don’t have a Morsey or Robbie Savage fronting you up. |
Sorry Ipswich and district league, I am old, | | | |
| We should be third... on 15:34 - Oct 23 with 1680 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
You make your own luck. We need to take more of our chances and not concede so many soft goals.
I am sure we are not far away but currently we are below where we want to be which means we are giving ourselves a lot of ground to catch up. The longer we underperform, the more ground that will be. |  |
| |
| We should be third... on 15:36 - Oct 23 with 1672 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| We should be third... on 11:21 - Oct 23 by IP1Blue |
From what I’ve seen, we’re where we should be!
The data may suggest one thing but the eye test for me certainly shows we shouldn’t be 3rd! Think we’ve been pretty poor all season apart from Shef Utd and maybe Norwich but was that because we were good or they were poor?
Pompey I thought we were ok but not great.
Derby, Preston, Blackburn, Boro, Birmingham, Southampton and Bristol City - been pretty poor in all of them apart from a few spells in some of them! |
I was at Preston and we battered them nearly all game but didn't take our chances. It wasn't as one-sided as that embarrassing FA Cup defeat a few seasons ago but it wasn't far off.
The idea that we were poor apart from a few spells in that one is way off the mark. | |
| |
| We should be third... on 15:40 - Oct 23 with 1659 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| We should be third... on 14:45 - Oct 23 by WestSussexBlue |
That’s complete pony, it’s like saying if my aunty had balls then she’d be my uncle.
We are where we are because of what we’ve done and how we’ve done it.
If’s and but’s have no meaning, it’s up to us to turn the so called unlucky into luck. |
That's complete b0ll0cks to keep the analogy going 
Why do I say that? Because that analysis says pretty much the same as you are saying - we've not taken our chances, and the opposition have made more of theirs than would statistically be expected.
So the stats absolutely have meaning, and pretty much agree with what you say. | | | |
| We should be third... on 15:49 - Oct 23 with 1588 views | Smoresy |
| We should be third... on 15:29 - Oct 23 by Bramidan |
Well I tried to assimilated all the stats etc in this post.
Bottom line all these stats are a total waste of space.
Where are we in the table?
How come we’ve lost or drawn games when we’ve failed to perform?
At the end of the season when we are languishing will people point to the stats and claim success?
I must be old, playing in the District and Ipswich League we either won, drawn or lost.
You had a crap game you were called out.
Stats are good as long as you don’t have a Morsey or Robbie Savage fronting you up. |
I wouldn't like to attribute that post to your age. I'm far from ageist.
The final table is what counts, no doubt. Is it the be-all and end-all for strategic planning, for whether to rip up a team or cast out a manager? It shouldn't be the only consideration imo; that's too simplistic. You'd miss important trends, those which could inform you on the likelihood that a situation may improve without drastic intervention. Were you just missing a GK who could catch a ball, with many good pieces already on the board for instance? The league table couldn't answer that question alone.
This alternative table informs us that there's a more-than-reasonable chance our circumstances will improve without drastic action, without parachuting in Neil Warnock or signing another ten new players in January. And by circumstances I mean the actual league table. It won't improve if we defend and shoot like we did against Charlton, obviously, but the odds are in our favour that we won't repeatedly shoot and defend like we did against Charlton until infinity. | | | |
| We should be third... on 16:00 - Oct 23 with 1536 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| We should be third... on 15:29 - Oct 23 by Bramidan |
Well I tried to assimilated all the stats etc in this post.
Bottom line all these stats are a total waste of space.
Where are we in the table?
How come we’ve lost or drawn games when we’ve failed to perform?
At the end of the season when we are languishing will people point to the stats and claim success?
I must be old, playing in the District and Ipswich League we either won, drawn or lost.
You had a crap game you were called out.
Stats are good as long as you don’t have a Morsey or Robbie Savage fronting you up. |
To be honest, all this demonstrates is that you're completely missing the point. | | | |
| We should be third... on 16:09 - Oct 23 with 1492 views | wischip |
So because of the Opta statistics can we get the Charlton game replayed ? |  | | |
| We should be third... on 16:15 - Oct 23 with 1464 views | WestSussexBlue |
| We should be third... on 15:29 - Oct 23 by Bramidan |
Well I tried to assimilated all the stats etc in this post.
Bottom line all these stats are a total waste of space.
Where are we in the table?
How come we’ve lost or drawn games when we’ve failed to perform?
At the end of the season when we are languishing will people point to the stats and claim success?
I must be old, playing in the District and Ipswich League we either won, drawn or lost.
You had a crap game you were called out.
Stats are good as long as you don’t have a Morsey or Robbie Savage fronting you up. |
Totally agree, “bottom line is the stats are all a waste of time”,
Football and life in general used to be so much easier before analysis and stats took over. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
