GB SPORTS Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 1 hour ago, IlsonDerby said: No but what it did highlight is that they were clearly punching above their weight and they have since regressed back to where their xG might suggest they should be. Imagine you look at the end of the season and 2 teams finish on identical points. One team is roughly where they should be based on xG and the other team is way above where xG would have them. Which team would you assume are more likely to repeat that sort of performance in the following season? In the end stats are about probability so the chances are the team with the least deviation from xG will be nearer, there is one big however. The dangerous assumption is that next season everything is going to be the same as the previous season in terms of marginals. If you study what Sir Dave Brailsford says there is a lot to gain from these small changes and this makes any historical stat meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanoakaram4life Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 This is the window that Carson should go for me. It's time to refresh our back 5. I'd bring in a couple of centre backs and a new GK to challenge Roos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade 86 Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 I'm wary of of placing any statistal value on XG principally because I'm not even convinced it's really a stat. If over 30 games ateam concedes only 5 goals while scoring 60 then you can sesnibly derive thast not only are they otent in attack, but also defesively very strong. XG seesm to me to be a glorified guess masquerading as something more tangible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 If Burnley sell and release the two keepers Heaton and Hart which is mentioned in the press then they would want proper experienced cover and Carson would be cheap by premiership prices Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 xG is something that's always going to divide fans. Some think that it's absolute baalocks, some see it as insightful. I like it. The way I see it is as a measurement of the likelihood of a goal being scored and as a tool to see whether a team has been lucky or unlucky to win. The Carson thing is interesting. It'll annoy people that "lesser" keepers are above him but, if anything, it would back up the decision to drop him for Roos in that he was expected to save seven of the goals that he actually conceded. I think it's a fair view that last season was his worst in a Derby shirt and that chart, albeit only one factor, backs it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlsonDerby Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 6 hours ago, RoyMac5 said: Err that's what statistics supposedly foretell - but how on earth can they, at this level of detail, do more than say what the eye could easily have told you. This is just making 'jobs' for the sake of it. Some stats are useful others are merely to provide work. Because your eye cannot simply watch all 46 matches for every team so it's nice to know whether performances are 'chance after chance', 'clinical', 'both, or 'neither' which possession and shots on target just cannot do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 1 minute ago, IlsonDerby said: Because your eye cannot simply watch all 46 matches for every team so it's nice to know whether performances are 'chance after chance', 'clinical', 'both, or 'neither' which possession and shots on target just cannot do. Only if you believe the stats are correct ie telling what they say they tell - they don't say 'lies, damn lies and statistics' for nothing you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlsonDerby Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 4 hours ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said: I'm wary of of placing any statistal value on XG principally because I'm not even convinced it's really a stat. If over 30 games ateam concedes only 5 goals while scoring 60 then you can sesnibly derive thast not only are they otent in attack, but also defesively very strong. XG seesm to me to be a glorified guess masquerading as something more tangible. You're dealing with extremes there. Obviously its clear looking at Man City's stats that they were pretty decent in defence and offence but for example, do we really know who's more likely to be winning the 'Everton Trophy' next season out of Wolves, Watford, Everton, Leicester etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlsonDerby Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 Just now, RoyMac5 said: Only if you believe the stats are correct - they don't say 'lies, damn lies and statistics for nothing you know'. Well then lets do a way with all statistics. Possession? who cares? Shots? Whatever? Top goalscorer in the division? Who needs to know? People will rave about Brentford's recruitment style yet bash stats like xG which are very similar. Both are about looking under the surface of the results of a football match etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlsonDerby Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 5 hours ago, WHAT DO I GET said: In the end stats are about probability so the chances are the team with the least deviation from xG will be nearer, there is one big however. The dangerous assumption is that next season everything is going to be the same as the previous season in terms of marginals. If you study what Sir Dave Brailsford says there is a lot to gain from these small changes and this makes any historical stat meaningless. I know what you're saying and I wouldnt 'lump' on any team finishing where the previous season's xG would have placed them because as people have mentioned, there are too many variables. What I would say is, 2 teams finish 16th and 17th this season on the exact same points. One team would have loads more points based on xG, the others have been marginally better than xG would suggest. I'd look at that and say 'well team A just needs to improve on their finishing/invest in someone to finish the abundance of chances being created. Team B will require much more work in order to stay up next season'. I'm not saying statistics are the be all and end all but in this age it's so reductionist to write them off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB SPORTS Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 13 minutes ago, IlsonDerby said: I know what you're saying and I wouldnt 'lump' on any team finishing where the previous season's xG would have placed them because as people have mentioned, there are too many variables. What I would say is, 2 teams finish 16th and 17th this season on the exact same points. One team would have loads more points based on xG, the others have been marginally better than xG would suggest. I'd look at that and say 'well team A just needs to improve on their finishing/invest in someone to finish the abundance of chances being created. Team B will require much more work in order to stay up next season'. I'm not saying statistics are the be all and end all but in this age it's so reductionist to write them off. True. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DontTrustTheDevilInside Posted July 14, 2019 Share Posted July 14, 2019 On 13/07/2019 at 11:54, David said: Sorry, I know you see no reason for a discussion but I have to say this is nonsensical. Football is a tactical game, Burnley haven’t been lucky to stay in the Premier League, they play to their strengths and are rewarded for doing so. In 17/18 the xG table says they should have finished 14th, they finished 7th. Expected points 41, actual points 54. It would actually be quite disrespectful to Sean Dyche if I walked up to him on the street and said you were lucky mate, I’m sure he will argue they work damn hard in training working on taking the chances when they come to them. Expected goals can throw up some interesting things and Burnley is a prime example, not sure where it was but there was some interesting analysis with expected goals. The analysis was basically that Burnley allow longer shots down the middle but the cbs split to position themselves to block shots to the corner. Their block rates are great, shots saved by goalkeepers look impressive but the shots have a really low expected goals rate because they don’t give away good chances. Be interested to see if the statisticians could do something about how well a gk commands their area and claims crosses, that’s regularly complained by most clubs and said to be a ‘lost art’. Be intrigued to see who’s braver and successful, because there’s some ‘kamikaze’ goalkeepers who’s cross claiming success rate would be ambitious but useless and then if fans were to believed most goalkeepers would be so unambitious it wouldn’t even create the stat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimeram Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 18 hours ago, Sparkle said: If Burnley sell and release the two keepers Heaton and Hart which is mentioned in the press then they would want proper experienced cover and Carson would be cheap by premiership prices Do not mention Hart. That guy is worse than awful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 2 hours ago, oldtimeram said: Do not mention Hart. That guy is worse than awful What has happened to Hart. Man City and England no.1 with that confident and cocky swagger to West Ham saying "nah" and him being second choice at Burnley. That's quite a fall. His confidence must have taken a good kicking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubbles Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 I love Scotty to bits, proper professional, top player who is all around a great guy. it will be sad if he leaves but if he does then I wish him nothing but the best. He's had an absolutely incredible time here and deserves a great move. When he retires I hope he can return as a goalkeeping coach (if Shay ever leaves). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 3 hours ago, oldtimeram said: Do not mention Hart. That guy is worse than awful He’s not though is he Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimeram Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 28 minutes ago, Sparkle said: He’s not though is he In my opinion, I do not think Hart is a very good goalkeeper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 3 minutes ago, oldtimeram said: In my opinion, I do not think Hart is a very good goalkeeper Fair enough but his trophies and international appearances suggest otherwise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimeram Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 2 hours ago, Sparkle said: Fair enough but his trophies and international appearances suggest otherwise Yes but he was the choice of England managers in an era of very little choice. In another era he would never have got anywhere near the England goalkeeping position. Every time I seemed to watch him he made an almighty clanger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BathRam72 Posted July 15, 2019 Share Posted July 15, 2019 5 minutes ago, oldtimeram said: Yes but he was the choice of England managers in an era of very little choice. In another era he would never have got anywhere near the England goalkeeping position. Every time I seemed to watch him he made an almighty clanger I would argue Seaman was worse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.