League One xG table

ElfsborgAddick said:

Callumcafc said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

ValleyGary said:

I don’t take too much notice of it, but the fact that clubs analytics departments use it keenly, shows it means something.

I agree with that, but how meaningful and successful it is would be an interesting question to coaches and managers.

Ask Brentford and Brighton who were ahead of the curve and using this stuff 10-15 years ago.

They’ve both no doubt moved on to even more advanced metrics these days to stay ahead of the game - and the same discussions will be had in 2040 about whatever they’re using today.

And there are clubs using this stuff that get relegated, so where does that leave XG?

Using data effectively is one of many things clubs need to get right. Brighton and Brentford also made the right appointments and invested well in other areas of their clubs.

Scoham said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Callumcafc said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

ValleyGary said:

I don’t take too much notice of it, but the fact that clubs analytics departments use it keenly, shows it means something.

I agree with that, but how meaningful and successful it is would be an interesting question to coaches and managers.

Ask Brentford and Brighton who were ahead of the curve and using this stuff 10-15 years ago.

They’ve both no doubt moved on to even more advanced metrics these days to stay ahead of the game - and the same discussions will be had in 2040 about whatever they’re using today.

And there are clubs using this stuff that get relegated, so where does that leave XG?

Using data effectively is one of many things clubs need to get right. Brighton and Brentford also made the right appointments and invested well in other areas of their clubs.

Which is where the latter part of your post is nail on head.

Scoham said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Scoham said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Callumcafc said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

ValleyGary said:

I don’t take too much notice of it, but the fact that clubs analytics departments use it keenly, shows it means something.

I agree with that, but how meaningful and successful it is would be an interesting question to coaches and managers.

Ask Brentford and Brighton who were ahead of the curve and using this stuff 10-15 years ago.

They’ve both no doubt moved on to even more advanced metrics these days to stay ahead of the game - and the same discussions will be had in 2040 about whatever they’re using today.

And there are clubs using this stuff that get relegated, so where does that leave XG?

Using data effectively is one of many things clubs need to get right. Brighton and Brentford also made the right appointments and invested well in other areas of their clubs.

Which is where the latter part of your post is nail on head.

Using data well could be the difference between success and failure though. Same with managerial appointments, coaching staff, recruitment, budgets, training facilities, quality of your pitch, physiotherapy/medical/sports science etc.

It would be mad to ignore data or put too much trust in it.

Think Liverpool hiring Arne Slot is a really good example of this. Well publicised that they used data to figure out which managers played a style similar to Klopp that would be easy for the squad to adapt to. There were bigger names available but he seems to have done a good job. The data was the jumping off point before character references, interviews etc.

The debate doesn’t need to be complicated, it’s a straight choice between:
a) having lots of information.
b) not having lots of information.  

BR7_addick said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Callumcafc said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

ValleyGary said:

I don’t take too much notice of it, but the fact that clubs analytics departments use it keenly, shows it means something.

I agree with that, but how meaningful and successful it is would be an interesting question to coaches and managers.

Ask Brentford and Brighton who were ahead of the curve and using this stuff 10-15 years ago.

They’ve both no doubt moved on to even more advanced metrics these days to stay ahead of the game - and the same discussions will be had in 2040 about whatever they’re using today.

And there are clubs using this stuff that get relegated, so where does that leave XG?

Maybe they didn’t use the data, or maybe they did but didn’t make appropriate changes, maybe they spent less on analytics than the rest, or maybe they didn’t but went down anyway.  What’s the point you’re making here, that if someone gets relegated despite using statistical information that all other clubs should stop using it?

fenaddick said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

BR7_addick said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Callumcafc said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

ValleyGary said:

I don’t take too much notice of it, but the fact that clubs analytics departments use it keenly, shows it means something.

I agree with that, but how meaningful and successful it is would be an interesting question to coaches and managers.

Ask Brentford and Brighton who were ahead of the curve and using this stuff 10-15 years ago.

They’ve both no doubt moved on to even more advanced metrics these days to stay ahead of the game - and the same discussions will be had in 2040 about whatever they’re using today.

And there are clubs using this stuff that get relegated, so where does that leave XG?

Maybe they didn’t use the data, or maybe they did but didn’t make appropriate changes, maybe they spent less on analytics than the rest, or maybe they didn’t but went down anyway.  What’s the point you’re making here, that if someone gets relegated despite using statistical information that all other clubs should stop using it?

Maybe that football is a simple game and that you pass the ball to a team mate, and move towards the opponents goal.

That is my humble opinion rather than being difficult and argumentative.

Cor never thought of that! Maybe you should email it over NJ, might find it helpful

Yes daddy.

ElfsborgAddick said:

BR7_addick said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Callumcafc said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

ValleyGary said:

I don’t take too much notice of it, but the fact that clubs analytics departments use it keenly, shows it means something.

I agree with that, but how meaningful and successful it is would be an interesting question to coaches and managers.

Ask Brentford and Brighton who were ahead of the curve and using this stuff 10-15 years ago.

They’ve both no doubt moved on to even more advanced metrics these days to stay ahead of the game - and the same discussions will be had in 2040 about whatever they’re using today.

And there are clubs using this stuff that get relegated, so where does that leave XG?

Maybe they didn’t use the data, or maybe they did but didn’t make appropriate changes, maybe they spent less on analytics than the rest, or maybe they didn’t but went down anyway.  What’s the point you’re making here, that if someone gets relegated despite using statistical information that all other clubs should stop using it?

Maybe that football is a simple game and that you pass the ball to a team mate, and move towards the opponents goal.

That is my humble opinion rather than being difficult and argumentative.

Yeah I’m sure that’s how Pep’s team talk each game usually goes.

fenaddick said:

Scoham said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Scoham said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Callumcafc said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

ValleyGary said:

I don’t take too much notice of it, but the fact that clubs analytics departments use it keenly, shows it means something.

I agree with that, but how meaningful and successful it is would be an interesting question to coaches and managers.

Ask Brentford and Brighton who were ahead of the curve and using this stuff 10-15 years ago.

They’ve both no doubt moved on to even more advanced metrics these days to stay ahead of the game - and the same discussions will be had in 2040 about whatever they’re using today.

And there are clubs using this stuff that get relegated, so where does that leave XG?

Using data effectively is one of many things clubs need to get right. Brighton and Brentford also made the right appointments and invested well in other areas of their clubs.

Which is where the latter part of your post is nail on head.

Using data well could be the difference between success and failure though. Same with managerial appointments, coaching staff, recruitment, budgets, training facilities, quality of your pitch, physiotherapy/medical/sports science etc.

It would be mad to ignore data or put too much trust in it.

Think Liverpool hiring Arne Slot is a really good example of this. Well publicised that they used data to figure out which managers played a style similar to Klopp that would be easy for the squad to adapt to. There were bigger names available but he seems to have done a good job. The data was the jumping off point before character references, interviews etc.

Liverpool are very smartly run, using data very well. There’s a reason their recruitment has such a high success rate compared to clubs like Man Utd and Chelsea that spend way more money 

killerandflash said:

Stats don't replace the scoreline, but they do give an indication of how a team is playing.

Two 1-0 wins. One in which the winning team has 2 shots, 1 on target. The second in which the winning team has 25 shots, 11 on target.

The same scoreline but very different performances.

Thing is just looking at those stats you would say that the second team obviously has better attacking intent & over a season will do much better than team 1. Again, 1 particular match tells you nothing but certainly better than XG.

golfaddick said:

killerandflash said:

Stats don't replace the scoreline, but they do give an indication of how a team is playing.

Two 1-0 wins. One in which the winning team has 2 shots, 1 on target. The second in which the winning team has 25 shots, 11 on target.

The same scoreline but very different performances.

Thing is just looking at those stats you would say that the second team obviously has better attacking intent & over a season will do much better than team 1. Again, 1 particular match tells you nothing but certainly better than XG.

You’ve just described xG…

.

MrOneLung said:

can someone actually post the league table based on xG ?
That is, after all the point of the thread

Both opta analyst and footballxg.com calculate a table based upon expected points. They also offer a prediction for 46 games. However, we haven't played nearly enough games for that prediction to stand up to scrutiny.

The point about xG is that it takes 25-30 data points per game, and not just the goals. It can therefore be useful to judge over ten games and compare vs:
- the competition
- previous seasons
- changes when there's a change in management, or players in/out due to transfers or injury

There will always be outliers, but most clubs will revert to their mean. If a club is outperforming xG then the choice is to ride out their luck, change approach, accept a downturn, or acquire / rehabilitate players.

In our case, Leaburn and Edwards are now available, and we require a win away to Stevenage or Bristol Rovers so as to stay in the frame. Should we win one plus our performances and xG improve then the bookies will perhaps place us back as one of the six favourites for a top six finish?

The point being that the bookies and xG are both independent of any Charlton bias, thus giving us a view which isn't distorted by our own views and emotions when watching the games.

What matters is that Nathan Jones needs to find away to create more, decent chances without compromising the serious progress made in defence. We've made some inroads with set pieces - whether one uses anecdotes or xG our attacking threat is roughly half our competition!

seriously_red said:

MrOneLung said:

can someone actually post the league table based on xG ?
That is, after all the point of the thread

Both opta analyst and footballxg.com calculate a table based upon expected points. They also offer a prediction for 46 games. However, we haven't played nearly enough games for that prediction to stand up to scrutiny.

The point about xG is that it takes 25-30 data points per game, and not just the goals. It can therefore be useful to judge over ten games and compare vs:
- the competition
- previous seasons
- changes when there's a change in management, or players in/out due to transfers or injury

There will always be outliers, but most clubs will revert to their mean. If a club is outperforming xG then the choice is to ride out their luck, change approach, accept a downturn, or acquire / rehabilitate players.

In our case, Leaburn and Edwards are now available, and we require a win away to Stevenage or Bristol Rovers so as to stay in the frame. Should we win one plus our performances and xG improve then the bookies will perhaps place us back as one of the six favourites for a top six finish?

The point being that the bookies and xG are both independent of any Charlton bias, thus giving us a view which isn't distorted by our own views and emotions when watching the games.

What matters is that Nathan Jones needs to find away to create more, decent chances without compromising the serious progress made in defence. We've made some inroads with set pieces - whether one uses anecdotes or xG our attacking threat is roughly half our competition!

It's really useful that xG has identified this.
No one else had noticed.

Covered End said:

seriously_red said:

MrOneLung said:

can someone actually post the league table based on xG ?
That is, after all the point of the thread

Both opta analyst and footballxg.com calculate a table based upon expected points. They also offer a prediction for 46 games. However, we haven't played nearly enough games for that prediction to stand up to scrutiny.

The point about xG is that it takes 25-30 data points per game, and not just the goals. It can therefore be useful to judge over ten games and compare vs:
- the competition
- previous seasons
- changes when there's a change in management, or players in/out due to transfers or injury

There will always be outliers, but most clubs will revert to their mean. If a club is outperforming xG then the choice is to ride out their luck, change approach, accept a downturn, or acquire / rehabilitate players.

In our case, Leaburn and Edwards are now available, and we require a win away to Stevenage or Bristol Rovers so as to stay in the frame. Should we win one plus our performances and xG improve then the bookies will perhaps place us back as one of the six favourites for a top six finish?

The point being that the bookies and xG are both independent of any Charlton bias, thus giving us a view which isn't distorted by our own views and emotions when watching the games.

What matters is that Nathan Jones needs to find away to create more, decent chances without compromising the serious progress made in defence. We've made some inroads with set pieces - whether one uses anecdotes or xG our attacking threat is roughly half our competition!

It's really useful that xG has identified this.
No one else had noticed.

I think we should go one further and do away with all stats including possession, shots and corners.

Let's just go back to the early 1900s and focus on the final score and vibes only.

Callumcafc said:

Covered End said:

seriously_red said:

MrOneLung said:

can someone actually post the league table based on xG ?
That is, after all the point of the thread

Both opta analyst and footballxg.com calculate a table based upon expected points. They also offer a prediction for 46 games. However, we haven't played nearly enough games for that prediction to stand up to scrutiny.

The point about xG is that it takes 25-30 data points per game, and not just the goals. It can therefore be useful to judge over ten games and compare vs:
- the competition
- previous seasons
- changes when there's a change in management, or players in/out due to transfers or injury

There will always be outliers, but most clubs will revert to their mean. If a club is outperforming xG then the choice is to ride out their luck, change approach, accept a downturn, or acquire / rehabilitate players.

In our case, Leaburn and Edwards are now available, and we require a win away to Stevenage or Bristol Rovers so as to stay in the frame. Should we win one plus our performances and xG improve then the bookies will perhaps place us back as one of the six favourites for a top six finish?

The point being that the bookies and xG are both independent of any Charlton bias, thus giving us a view which isn't distorted by our own views and emotions when watching the games.

What matters is that Nathan Jones needs to find away to create more, decent chances without compromising the serious progress made in defence. We've made some inroads with set pieces - whether one uses anecdotes or xG our attacking threat is roughly half our competition!

It's really useful that xG has identified this.
No one else had noticed.

I think we should go one further and do away with all stats including possession, shots and corners.

Let's just go back to the early 1900s and focus on the final score and vibes only.

Early 2000s perhaps.