Clinical Blades

[Blades Analytics]

Excuse me on this one it might get a bit nerdy/statty but it has a very valid point.

So i wanted to point out that on Saturday we over performed our expected goals tally by the highest amount in over 2 years. Goes without saying we were brilliantly clinical from our 8 shots with 6 on target. This made me think back to last season, especially the final 10 games where our ability to be clinical and score that 2nd goal to take a game away from the opposition was a major factor in our tailing off in results (think Cardiff at home especially here)

For those who like this kind of thing i have broken down the 8 shots and their xG values here:

JOC min 6 - 0.34 - goal 1
O.Norwood min 11 - 0.05 (hit post)
M.Duffy min 23 - 0.06 - goal 2
O.Norwood min 41 - 0.14 - goal 3
B.Sharp min 49 - 0.36 - goal 4
D.Mcgoldrick min 50 - 0.09
D.Mcgoldrick min 65 - 0.44 (highest xG chance of game - slight sitter missed after the best flowing move of the match)
D.Mcgoldrick min 86 - 0.01
Total 1.49 xG.

So to summarise Duffy's shot is normally only scored 6% of the time from that situation and location and Norwood's free kick 14% of the time.....Utterly outstanding finishing/striking of the ball. No surprise 2 players with great technique.

Despite Not scoring DM actually finished the game with the highest individudal combined xG from all his chances. He might not have scored but he was constantly involved in efforts at goal and that bodes well for the future, he has now joined Billy and Leon in the top 15 highest players for xG so far this season. From their underlying numbers, the goals are there and will come for all 3!

 

[Ricky]

The stats confirmed everything I thought about McGoldrick's performance. Technically outstanding, worked hard and won his battles.

 

[SteveBlade]

If McGoldrick can stay fit, he's a top quality striker at this level. He's brilliant on the ball, and like Leon, who was never known for his work rate, seems to have really bought into how Wilder wants us to play.

It's a massive if, but even if he only manages 75% of the season he'll have been a very good signing.

 

[Blades Analytics]

Agree Ricky and you know your onions!

Must add goal threat to that too, especially with the whole marquee striker narrative not quite happening. We still carry a huge goal threat, so much so that the bookies actually have us as joint 3rd faves to score most goals

That added set piece threat and output and Duffy's good goalscoring start will help our strikers i think, its massive that we do (and are) contributing goals from different areas. Less pressure on strikers allows them to play with freedom and gets us all round performances like mcgoldricks on saturday

 

[Balham]

Great analysis, thanks Blades Analytics

Bit harsh to say McGoldrick's 65th minute chance was a sitter missed when it looked a decent save to me. You've mentioned expected saves: what's the xS (if that's right) of that chance? My thinking is that about the only thing the Villa keeper did right was keep that shot out, possibly against the odds. Same goes for the Duffy goal: 6% chance of scoring but I'd have thought a 60+% chance of a block/save?

 

[Stretch]

Stuck my neck out weeks ago and said McG would be the signing of the season for us, since then Norwood's arrival looks certain to trump that but still. For a freebie he could be up at Fleck and Duffy levels if we get 20+ more performances like Saturday from him.

 

[boo radley]

I got slightly confused reading that but I think it is about how good our players are at finding the
G spot?

 

[HodgysBrokenThumb]

Interesting stats. The one which surprised my untrained eye is that (if I've understood correctly) is that a chance like Norwood's free-kick is turned into a goal 14 times out of 100. This seems very high. Is it based only on instances where the player shoots rather than crosses? How would you know whether it is intended as a shot? A goal from that position seems highly unusual to me. Is Duffy's goal calculated from where he received the ball, rather than where he shot from?

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Interesting stats. The one which surprised my untrained eye is that (if I've understood correctly) is that a chance like Norwood's free-kick is turned into a goal 14 times out of 100. This seems very high. Is it based only on instances where the player shoots rather than crosses? How would you know whether it is intended as a shot? A goal from that position seems highly unusual to me. Is Duffy's goal calculated from where he received the ball, rather than where he shot from?

I thought exactly the same.

Seems like Duffy's goal and Norwood's goal should be the other way round.

 

[Topplayersleave]

Very good research, if we score four every game and miss a hatful it will all bring tremendous entertainment.
It somehow seems even more comprehensive when 10 good chances are created and missed but four goals are still scored rather than just one of those days when everything you hit goes in. even though the final score might be the same.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

If McGoldrick can stay fit, he's a top quality striker at this level. He's brilliant on the ball, and like Leon, who was never known for his work rate, seems to have really bought into how Wilder wants us to play.

It's a massive if, but even if he only manages 75% of the season he'll have been a very good signing.

You made that 75% statistic up -admit it!

 

[Benny and the Blades]

Well one things for certain we are getting more goals from midfield the we are from the strikers...

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Well one things for certain we are getting more goals from midfield the we are from the strikers...

Defence, midfield and attack are all tied on four a piece at the minute.

3 Sharp
2 Duffy
1 O'Connell
1 McGoldrick
1 Fleck
1 Egan
1 Norwood
1 Baldock
1 Freeman

 

[Silent Blade]

Blades Analytics . Think you might have missed the below question to you last week! Norwood took note!

What do you reckon about set pieces under Wilder? I noticed that we rarely attempt direct free kicks from outside boxes . Our corner taking has improved a lot since Norwood became our regular taker. He drives them rather than floating them (I hate them) and this makes it difficult for the keeper to claim them. This is what Woodward, Borbokis and Unsworth did too.

 

[Blades Analytics]

Blades Analytics . Think you might have missed the below question to you last week! Norwood took note!

What do you reckon about set pieces under Wilder? I noticed that we rarely attempt direct free kicks from outside boxes . Our corner taking has improved a lot since Norwood became our regular taker. He drives them rather than floating them (I hate them) and this makes it difficult for the keeper to claim them. This is what Woodward, Borbokis and Unsworth did too.

Apologies mate busy week!

first season under wilder we had outstanding set piece moves and big units such as Jack and EEL attacking them. In terms of direct FKs, i honestly (except Vas) can't remember us having that much goal threat from direct fks in so long! Norwood's technique is of the highest level, top ball striker and therefore we might just see some goals from them now on!

 

[Blades Analytics]

I thought exactly the same.

Seems like Duffy's goal and Norwood's goal should be the other way round.

I actually did think this too! but then i re-checked my own xG model (won't get too nerdy) but basically the only way i can explain the variance here is because my model records all free kicks from that similar location. Now a direct free kick shot from there could be from a left footer too (so naturally good angle for shot) and obviously all free kick takers who would shoot from there are probably players with better technique and better ball striking than sheer range of players that shoot from Duffy's position.

Duffy's shot bit of a weird one though, how my model works i have the opposition half divided into a number of zones. Duffy's shot just stayed inside a poor shooting zone and if it would have been recorded a couple of inches closer it would have been more a 0.17 shot....it's tight! xG is far from perfect loads to refine and i don't treat it religiously because of that it's just a nice information indicator. Both those efforts regardless of way round had less than 15% chance of going in....we just don't get lots of goals from those kind of zones normally!

 

[Blades Analytics]

Great analysis, thanks Blades Analytics

Bit harsh to say McGoldrick's 65th minute chance was a sitter missed when it looked a decent save to me. You've mentioned expected saves: what's the xS (if that's right) of that chance? My thinking is that about the only thing the Villa keeper did right was keep that shot out, possibly against the odds. Same goes for the Duffy goal: 6% chance of scoring but I'd have thought a 60+% chance of a block/save?

Ha just me using a normal term for once! think 44% expectation of scoring isn't a sitter right!

great question on xS. I'm trying to refine my model on xS at the moment, the maths behind has an algorithim to work out the value. It isn't directly related to xG as such as there's other variables that are recorded. Agreed though, Villa keeper was poor but he would have had a good number for xS in that instance!

 

[Tom Bott]

Defence, midfield and attack are all tied on four a piece at the minute.

3 Sharp
2 Duffy
1 O'Connell
1 McGoldrick
1 Fleck
1 Egan
1 Norwood
1 Baldock
1 Freeman

This is what we need though, goals from all areas of the squad, when we achieved promotion in 05/06 we had 15 (?) different goal scorers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005–06_Sheffield_United_F.C._season

But that was with Warnock in charge and he was apparently crap according to many on here.

UTB.

 

[IOM Blade]

on Saturday we over performed our expected goals tally by the highest amount in over 2 years.

What was our expected goals against Brizzle last game of last season? We scored three stonkers from just 5 shots.

 

[Blades Analytics]

Against Brizzle we hit 1.13 xG, we've hit much lower lol

 

[HVR]

Sat in the BLUT I noticed how poor the Villa keeper was down to his left first half, I'm sure it's no coincidence that Duffy aimed there and possibly why Norwood took a punt low to the keeper's left instead of curling in top right corner (and why the weird angle might have made it look accidental to the pundits)

 

[Blades Analytics]

Sat in the BLUT I noticed how poor the Villa keeper was down to his left first half, I'm sure it's no coincidence that Duffy aimed there and possibly why Norwood took a punt low to the keeper's left instead of curling in top right corner (and why the weird angle might have made it look accidental to the pundits)

Great pickup! i noticed this too. Small sample size perhaps but this is exactly what an opposition analyst would be looking at

 

[Revolution]

The keeper should have saved Duffy's shot imho.

I am surprised O'Connell's goal has a lower xg than Sharps. O'Connell was standing on the 6 yard box unchallenged (credit to Norwood for the cross and to him for getting there); Sharp was marked and had his back to goal when he received the ball. It's mere percentage points but the Sharp chance was harder when he received the ball I think.

 

[HolmesfieldBlade]

Defence, midfield and attack are all tied on four a piece at the minute.

3 Sharp
2 Duffy
1 O'Connell
1 McGoldrick
1 Fleck
1 Egan
1 Norwood
1 Baldock
1 Freeman

Look at that list of scorers. Simply amazing.

If you’re going to win promotion, your list of goal threats would resemble this!

 

[Dnblade]

The stats confirmed everything I thought about McGoldrick's performance. Technically outstanding, worked hard and won his battles.

Adds a lot of mobility aswell...loved that run from deep where he got the ball from Norwood on the turn...skates away from the 2 Villa players like they're not there.
Unlucky not to score...he's looking a good signing,I'm liking him more each time I see him.

 

[Blades Analytics]

The keeper should have saved Duffy's shot imho.

I am surprised O'Connell's goal has a lower xg than Sharps. O'Connell was standing on the 6 yard box unchallenged (credit to Norwood for the cross and to him for getting there); Sharp was marked and had his back to goal when he received the ball. It's mere percentage points but the Sharp chance was harder when he received the ball I think.

It's simply because it was a Header, over the shots i watched back and many other xG models headers from even simple distances are missed more frequently because they are less controllable. You're right, to the eye i completley agree, but honestly when i watched back 5000 efforts at goal you honestly see some outstanding misses from headers from that distance! 50p head doesn't even begin to explain it!

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Excuse me on this one it might get a bit nerdy/statty but it has a very valid point.

So i wanted to point out that on Saturday we over performed our expected goals tally by the highest amount in over 2 years. Goes without saying we were brilliantly clinical from our 8 shots with 6 on target. This made me think back to last season, especially the final 10 games where our ability to be clinical and score that 2nd goal to take a game away from the opposition was a major factor in our tailing off in results (think Cardiff at home especially here)

For those who like this kind of thing i have broken down the 8 shots and their xG values here:

JOC min 6 - 0.34 - goal 1
O.Norwood min 11 - 0.05 (hit post)
M.Duffy min 23 - 0.06 - goal 2
O.Norwood min 41 - 0.14 - goal 3
B.Sharp min 49 - 0.36 - goal 4
D.Mcgoldrick min 50 - 0.09
D.Mcgoldrick min 65 - 0.44 (highest xG chance of game - slight sitter missed after the best flowing move of the match)
D.Mcgoldrick min 86 - 0.01
Total 1.49 xG.

So to summarise Duffy's shot is normally only scored 6% of the time from that situation and location and Norwood's free kick 14% of the time.....Utterly outstanding finishing/striking of the ball. No surprise 2 players with great technique.

Despite Not scoring DM actually finished the game with the highest individudal combined xG from all his chances. He might not have scored but he was constantly involved in efforts at goal and that bodes well for the future, he has now joined Billy and Leon in the top 15 highest players for xG so far this season. From their underlying numbers, the goals are there and will come for all 3!

Good stuff but you appear to have missed Sharp's first half chance which the keeper smothered round the post from a close range effort.

 

[Revolution]

Good stuff but you appear to have missed Sharp's first half chance which the keeper smothered round the post from a close range effort.

Sharp was flagged offside, which is perhaps why it doesn't register.

 

[Revolution]

It's simply because it was a Header, over the shots i watched back and many other xG models headers from even simple distances are missed more frequently because they are less controllable. You're right, to the eye i completley agree, but honestly when i watched back 5000 efforts at goal you honestly see some outstanding misses from headers from that distance! 50p head doesn't even begin to explain it!

Well, having watched O'Connell last season I have seen a fair number of missed headers! (his expected goals was 4 better than actual, I recall. He's a good bet to "regress to the mean" and get a few more IMHO).

 

[Tom Bott]

Our pass completion in the first half would be a good stat. As would the number of times we dispossessed them.