League One xG table

fenaddick said:

Braziliance said:

fenaddick said:

Also shows how good the Stevenage defence is, obviously we should have still probed more but it’s not like they’re an awful team 

I was never expecting us to score many past a side that contains Piergianni. Still one of the best centre backs in this league. We had no luck against him, again. 

Haha been waiting for you to bring him up! He was good at the weekend, think it would’ve been good to see him up against Ahadme so I was annoyed about his nose 

Going to buy a signed shirt of his and frame it. 

Jokes aside, they are just a solid side defensively and I had literally 0 expectations of more than a goal, as soon as the first went in, I knew it was done. Hope it isn't like this for much longer.

Sort of does show that xG is also a useful thing to follow as if you were going to the game/watching and paying attention to stats, you'd know we were due this bad run

Braziliance said:

Callumcafc said:

MrOneLung said:

Sorry, another question

in the xG table if in a match the xG is 1.01 versus 1.99 does that go down as a point for a 1-1 draw ? 

Or does the expected points give the 1.99 a ‘win’ 

In full awareness that I’m opening myself up for ridicule from certain quarters. If you wanted to be proper nerdy about it and distribute points based on xG… here’s what I’d do.

Take Stevenage v Charlton yesterday.

Stevenage had 0.50 xG on 11 shots, averaging 0.045 per shot. Charlton had 0.16 xG on 7 shots, averaging 0.023 per shot.

You can use a Binomial distribution to figure out some percentages based on the chances that were created during the 90 mins…

Stevenage: n(shots)=11, p(probability of goal)=0.045
~60% scores 0,
~31% scores 1,
~7% scores 2,
~1% scores 3
and smaller for more…

Charlton: n=7, p=0.023
~84% scores 0,
~14% scores 1, 
~1% scores 2
and smaller for more…

Then multiply those percentages…
~51% of 0-0,
~26% of 1-0,
~8% of 0-1,
~4% of 1-1,
~6% of 2-0,
~1% of 2-1
and smaller for other results…

Then add up the scorelines to each result…
~33% Stevenage
~55% Draw
~8% Charlton
(yes 4% is missing - because of all the rough calculations I’ve done above)

Then allocate the points based on those outcomes…
Stevenage (3pts * 0.33 + 1pt * 0.55) = 1.54
Charlton (3pts * 0.08 + 1pt * 0.55) = 0.79

Scoham said:

Callumcafc said:

MrOneLung said:

Sorry, another question

in the xG table if in a match the xG is 1.01 versus 1.99 does that go down as a point for a 1-1 draw ? 

Or does the expected points give the 1.99 a ‘win’ 

In full awareness that I’m opening myself up for ridicule from certain quarters. If you wanted to be proper nerdy about it and distribute points based on xG… here’s what I’d do.

Take Stevenage v Charlton yesterday.

Stevenage had 0.50 xG on 11 shots, averaging 0.045 per shot. Charlton had 0.16 xG on 7 shots, averaging 0.023 per shot.

You can use a Binomial distribution to figure out some percentages based on the chances that were created during the 90 mins…

Stevenage: n(shots)=11, p(probability of goal)=0.045
~60% scores 0,
~31% scores 1,
~7% scores 2,
~1% scores 3
and smaller for more…

Charlton: n=7, p=0.023
~84% scores 0,
~14% scores 1, 
~1% scores 2
and smaller for more…

Then multiply those percentages…
~51% of 0-0,
~26% of 1-0,
~8% of 0-1,
~4% of 1-1,
~6% of 2-0,
~1% of 2-1
and smaller for other results…

Then add up the scorelines to each result…
~33% Stevenage
~55% Draw
~8% Charlton
(yes 4% is missing - because of all the rough calculations I’ve done above)

Then allocate the points based on those outcomes…
Stevenage (3pts * 0.33 + 1pt * 0.55) = 1.54
Charlton (3pts * 0.08 + 1pt * 0.55) = 0.79

Glad you both liked it. :-)

FWIW I did the same thing for all 8 of our games so far this seasons and came to a points total of 11.5 odd, so not far off the 13 we have in reality.

Next job, work it out for all 90 odd games played so far do an entire league table..!

Bristol R bottom of the table based on xG/xA.
Smashing us 3-0 before we grabbed 2 late goals.

Covered End said:

Bristol R bottom of the table based on xG/xA.
Smashing us 3-0 before we grabbed 2 late goals.

They’re still bottom as well.

In another post I shared that that’s only the fourth time this season, after 102 games played, that any team has scored twice from outside the area in one game.

They got lucky that two of their four long range efforts tonight found the net, won’t happen often and they’ll have to improve if the win isn’t to be a one off for them.

Doesn’t excuse our own issues before people jump down my throat.

Callumcafc said:

Covered End said:

Bristol R bottom of the table based on xG/xA.
Smashing us 3-0 before we grabbed 2 late goals.

They’re still bottom as well.

In another post I shared that that’s only the fourth time this season, after 102 games played, that any team has scored twice from outside the area in one game.

They got lucky that two of their four long range efforts tonight found the net, won’t happen often and they’ll have to improve if the win isn’t to be a one off for them.

Doesn’t excuse our own issues before people jump down my throat.

It’s not luck that both players had loads of space on the edge of the box to pick their spot

We could’ve stood off them completely, had zero defenders and they still would be unlikely to score twice in four efforts from that range.

Last night, Berry closed down Sinclair and Anderson closed down (a little belatedly) Lindsay. Both found the net in the same evening anyway. Our closing down certainly wasn’t any worse than Bristol Rovers on a couple of our long range efforts but their shots go in and ours don’t. That’s football.

Neither of these look like the result of us not working hard to close down shots from range. They’re just well placed shots that have done us. Any other night both of them end up in the stands because of the pressure they’re under.

You n half clutch at straws Cal but I admire your positivity. Wish I could have some supporting this club.

O-Randy-Hunt said:

You n half clutch at straws Cal but I admire your positivity. Wish I could have some supporting this club.

Callumcafc said:

We could’ve stood off them completely, had zero defenders and they still would be unlikely to score twice in four efforts from that range.

Last night, Berry closed down Sinclair and Anderson closed down (a little belatedly) Lindsay. Both found the net in the same evening anyway. Our closing down certainly wasn’t any worse than Bristol Rovers on a couple of our long range efforts but their shots go in and ours don’t. That’s football.

Neither of these look like the result of us not working hard to close down shots from range. They’re just well placed shots that have done us. Any other night both of them end up in the stands because of the pressure they’re under.

We have problems sure. We also got unlucky, and I’m standing by that.

If you want to ignore the statistical significance to justify having a moan then that’s fine.

It's true that the odds of League one players continually hitting the top corner is very unlikely and we are very unlucky in that sense, but equally I think the stills are a bad indicator of the closing down job being done. The stills make it look like our player has got so close to stopping the shot from happening, but in reality they're nowhere near. Closing down a shot is to do one of two things; either rush the opposition into not being able to take the shot they want or physically blocking it from making its way to the goal. Our players aren't getting there quick enough and the opposition players are taking exactly the shot they want with no-one being able to stop them. I've taken a different still about a second before yours:

 

He's fully measured his shot there, he's been able to do exactly what he wants and Berry has neither put him off nor got close enough to make contact. The fact is our midfielders have a habit of reacting a second too late, often Berry or Docherty are trailing behind or Anderson reads it too late and their closing down efforts are token. That's what needs to change, we've got to be aggressively stopping these players from being able to measure these shots, rush them and we'll suddenly see them flying over the bar like they would against other teams. 

ElfsborgAddick said:

O-Randy-Hunt said:

You n half clutch at straws Cal but I admire your positivity. Wish I could have some supporting this club.

Blind faith is not necessarily a good thing, it can get in the way of reality.

As for the xg rubbish..............

The assumption of absolutes is what gets me.

It’s not blind faith in the slightest. I know we have problems.

I know that the xG numbers given to these shots by the model are probably a touch lower than they should be because we’re not up to scratch in terms of closing down.

Regardless, even if they were both doubled in xG value to 6% and 12% due to poor closing down - that is still extremely unlucky to have conceded from both!!!

Look at Conor Coventry’s effort in the same game - no closing down from the Bristol Rovers defenders at all. If that was against us and the oppo had scored it would’ve been pulled apart by us fans in the post match analysis. A well struck shot under little pressure and the keeper makes a good save to tip it over.

5:40 here https://youtu.be/WqmfsI6mprM?si=ZHngulM5P9nDx7Bi

ElfsborgAddick said:

Callumcafc said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

O-Randy-Hunt said:

You n half clutch at straws Cal but I admire your positivity. Wish I could have some supporting this club.

Blind faith is not necessarily a good thing, it can get in the way of reality.

As for the xg rubbish..............

The assumption of absolutes is what gets me.

It’s not blind faith in the slightest. I know we have problems.

I know that the xG numbers given to these shots by the model are probably a touch lower than they should be because we’re not up to scratch in terms of closing down.

Regardless, even if they were both doubled in xG value to 6% and 12% due to poor closing down - that is still extremely unlucky to have conceded from both!!!

Look at Conor Coventry’s effort in the same game - no closing down from the Bristol Rovers defenders at all. If that was against us and the oppo had scored it would’ve been pulled apart by us fans in the post match analysis. A well struck shot under little pressure and the keeper makes a good save to tip it over.

5:40 here https://youtu.be/WqmfsI6mprM?si=ZHngulM5P9nDx7Bi

Okay, you are clearly a fan of XG and I am not, let's leave it at that.

I am. It’s flawed but it’s directionally accurate. Plenty of smart people in my corner. If it’s not for you that’s cool.

Callumcafc said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

Callumcafc said:

ElfsborgAddick said:

O-Randy-Hunt said:

You n half clutch at straws Cal but I admire your positivity. Wish I could have some supporting this club.

Blind faith is not necessarily a good thing, it can get in the way of reality.

As for the xg rubbish..............

The assumption of absolutes is what gets me.

It’s not blind faith in the slightest. I know we have problems.

I know that the xG numbers given to these shots by the model are probably a touch lower than they should be because we’re not up to scratch in terms of closing down.

Regardless, even if they were both doubled in xG value to 6% and 12% due to poor closing down - that is still extremely unlucky to have conceded from both!!!

Look at Conor Coventry’s effort in the same game - no closing down from the Bristol Rovers defenders at all. If that was against us and the oppo had scored it would’ve been pulled apart by us fans in the post match analysis. A well struck shot under little pressure and the keeper makes a good save to tip it over.

5:40 here https://youtu.be/WqmfsI6mprM?si=ZHngulM5P9nDx7Bi

Okay, you are clearly a fan of XG and I am not, let's leave it at that.

I am. It’s flawed but it’s directionally accurate. Plenty of smart people in my corner. If it’s not for you that’s cool.

Thank you.

killerandflash said:

Copied this from the match thread, as it's more of an xG issue. I'm not an xG sceptic, but the actual numbers do confuse me.

1) We regularly concede goals from the edge of the box, indeed if I was an opposition coach I'd be asking my players to target this area, yet the xG values for BR's 2 shots are really low, as if they were worldy strikes.

2) Mitchell's goal has a really high xG as it was basically on the goal line, but if he had left it and it was given as a Godden goal, the xG presumably would have been much lower, despite being the same attack. Because Mitchell poached it on the line it now becomes a "big chance" making our team xG look much higher than BR's.

1) think of the hundreds of shots from the edge of the box that don’t go in. It might seem like we concede from them a lot but that’s probably just natural to not remember all the times a shot from there was blocked/missed. If it was that easy to score from the edge of the box, we’d see it everywhere a lot more in football across all leagues 

NabySarr said:

killerandflash said:

Copied this from the match thread, as it's more of an xG issue. I'm not an xG sceptic, but the actual numbers do confuse me.

1) We regularly concede goals from the edge of the box, indeed if I was an opposition coach I'd be asking my players to target this area, yet the xG values for BR's 2 shots are really low, as if they were worldy strikes.

2) Mitchell's goal has a really high xG as it was basically on the goal line, but if he had left it and it was given as a Godden goal, the xG presumably would have been much lower, despite being the same attack. Because Mitchell poached it on the line it now becomes a "big chance" making our team xG look much higher than BR's.

1) think of the hundreds of shots from the edge of the box that don’t go in. It might seem like we concede from them a lot but that’s probably just natural to not remember all the times a shot from there was blocked/missed. If it was that easy to score from the edge of the box, we’d see it everywhere a lot more in football across all leagues 

2) xG has flaws and this is one of them. But that’s why xG isn’t designed to be looked at on a game by game basis. It’s better looking at medium-long term where this kind of thing isn’t as impactful 

I saw several goals in the Champions League this week scored from a similar position to the first 2 BR goals. Attackers cutting in from wide positions to score from the edge of the box is pretty common now, especially when so many teams play inverted wingers.

Both of those tables are mis-named. They don't show whether teams have overperformed or underperformed at all. What they show is how good xG has been at predicting match outcomes. For some teams, Charlton is a good example, Opta's 'game outcome simulations' seem to be a pretty decent indicator of match day outcomes. Though these tables only show the overall pattern; it could be spot-on or wildly out on a match by match basis, we can't tell from this. For other teams, Exeter and Cambridge are prime examples, the xG model is underperforming as an indicator.