Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?
So looking at those two graphs it appears that Burnley And Sheffield United are the best two teams in the division - However, I wish there was some way of finding out this information in a clearer format.
Perhaps a quick look at a league table in early May could help !!So looking at those two graphs it appears that Burnley And Sheffield United are the best two teams in the division - However, I wish there was some way of finding out this information in a clearer format.
As with anything, these are indications and ultimitely what happens on the pitch matters. Take last season finl xG table for the championship:Thanks for sharing. I appreciate analytics like this. I used to really enjoy listening to Jay on BladesPod. He offered great insight, presumably through reviewing similar data models.
I'd be intrigued to know whether models like this and XG do broadly even themselves out over the course of the season. A quick review of the last few season's data VS final league standings would provide the answers.
If they do, you could start (to an extent) to draw conclusions such as - "Burnley are probably due a drop off in front of goal," or "Swansea are due an up-tick in form" etc..
As above, the two best teams in the division are where they are for a reason and Middlesbrough (and maybe West Brom) represent the only threat to that.
Yes, I look at these graphs and wonder why we aren't top by a considerable margin!I think there were 4 shared the other day on one thread.
They all basically say fuck Burnley, Sheff U is where it's at!
Scatter graphics: Championship, 11 Jan 2023
There have been just about enough matches played for a first outing of the scatter graphics. These compare the attacking and defensive performances of every team in a division – each of the f…experimental361.com
Because we are actually overperforming vs the quality of the chances that we create/give up. The current xG table show that:Yes, I look at these graphs and wonder why we aren't top by a considerable margin!
This is the issue with xG as a guide to an extent.Because we are actually overperforming vs the quality of the chances that we create/give up. The current xG table show that:
In short we probably shouldn`t be winning quite as many games as we are - based on the quality of the chances we create/give up - in fact if you look at the xGA we should have conceded 6 more goals than we have.
The good news is that the further we get into the season, and the longer we maintain our position/gap, the less relevant the above becomes. With 20 games left if WBA and Bore were to start accumulating points at the rate implied by the above, and we were to drop off to the level implied by the above, we would still get another 33 points, whereas they would get 43 and 39 respectively - not enough to overtake us.
Every win we get makes anyone catching us less likely - even if they win as well, as it reduced the number of games available to catch up.
It looks very positive at the moment - but lets see where we are in 10 games time.
An observation that I've had in many matches under Hecky and it does make me wonder if it's deliberate is
We seem to focus all our energies and tactics on creating chances and preventing the opposition from having chances
however the downside is we don't seem to make any attempt regards controlling midfield (the middle third), think it's because he prefers speedy/ direct attacking.
I remember Wilder used to sometimes say, we played well overall and he was pleased with our play in the middle third
but he'd then say the most important aspects of any match are the key moments in the attacking and defending thirds and that's where we need to improve.
Note: Under Jukanovic we were often excellent in the middle third and often controlled midfield with plenty of possession, this made our attacks slow.
so we struggled to create chances and the opposition wouldn't attack much but often looked dangerous creating decent chances,
So when people say we haven't played well (like against QPR), agree we didn't look good in the centre circle area but based on chances we still performed well.
Note: I think this visual is more representative of how teams play rather than how good they are. Swansea for example have a billion touches everywhere but are 15th, while Luton don't give a shit about having the ball and have a shot at making the playoffs again.
Shit! I was looking at it from the wrong perspective, i.e. looking at the graphs we are clearly the best team, and Burnley are lucky to be top because the graphs show they're not as good as us, yet they're top.Because we are actually overperforming vs the quality of the chances that we create/give up. The current xG table show that:
In short we probably shouldn`t be winning quite as many games as we are - based on the quality of the chances we create/give up - in fact if you look at the xGA we should have conceded 6 more goals than we have.
The good news is that the further we get into the season, and the longer we maintain our position/gap, the less relevant the above becomes. With 20 games left if WBA and Bore were to start accumulating points at the rate implied by the above, and we were to drop off to the level implied by the above, we would still get another 33 points, whereas they would get 43 and 39 respectively - not enough to overtake us.
Every win we get makes anyone catching us less likely - even if they win as well, as it reduced the number of games available to catch up.
It looks very positive at the moment - but lets see where we are in 10 games time.
Excellent point, interesting stuff.
Think there can be a massive difference between "looking good" and "being good" and quite often fans judge a team on how they look.
Club culture is also an interesting one.
We've tried going towards more of a Swansea style under Robson and Jukanovic and our fans hated the slower constant sideways passing just to keep possession.
Our fans have always preferred a quicker more direct game with plenty of goal mouth action.
Also over the decades, our fans have accepted lower technical standards as long as the players have character and give 100% effort.
xG is, as with all stats/analytics, only a starting point.This is the issue with xG as a guide to an extent.
You also have to have a complete team to be successful. If you create better chances but have shit strikers then that doesn’t equate to you somehow ought to be higher up. It just shows your limitations as a team.
If we happen to have better forwards, we can probably get away with slightly less chance creation because we’re probably playing out some games, dropping the tempo because the game is done.
But these teams have to keep plugging away because their forward can’t hit a cow’s arse with a banjo.
An xG chance falling to Billy Sharp has no differentiation compared to the same change falling to Chris Basham (no disrespect to Bash, I picked Him because he’s one of the longest without a goal).
All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?