Most liked posts in thread: xG

Too simplistic. We could have had Greaves or Lineker or Cottee or Owen up front last season and still not won games because we were creating hardly any genuine chances. We previously had clinical strikers for this level in Vaughan and Doyle but didn't win games because we rarely got the ball to them in the right areas.
What xG tells us is that this team, with Doyle or Vaughan in it, would probably be topping the league.

 

The simple fact is that all clubs from the Premier down and deep into non-league all use extremely detailed match analysis statistics to help them forward in understanding where things are working and where they ain't. They spend alot of time, energy and money on them because in a game of fine margins, which football so often is, everyone is looking for the way to squeeze that extra 5 per cent or so out of their team that can mean the difference between a win a draw or a loss. xG is another very good measure in the tool box. It's simply telling you 'what is' in terms of attempts etc and from where. It's then up to good coaches and managers to extrapolate that, and work it to their best advantage in the future, with the players they have available and their skills - and a pointer to what type of player they may have to bring in to improve. I want that for City. Can't understand why some on here are decrying it as if 'there be monsters!'

 

There is only one meaningful statistic in football, and that's the FINAL SCORE. Anything else is incidental.

 

I think even the (dare I say it) ignorant could have told you that without the need for xG statistics.

It's blindingly obvious and staying is right in the face every matchday.

The xG statistics are promising though in that last season, during the good run and when xG was still low, we could all tell it would fizzle out. And it did. Hopefully the high xG statistics mean that even if we don't get that striker we want then we may still create enough chances for someone in our team to have a purple patch and just about get us over the line.

 

ignorant, completely dumb retards, some philistines on this thread think, you lads are eating too much red meat calling your fellow those sort of names.

 

To be honest, up until late last season I thought xG was much of a muchness. But when a fan site like WOAP can use it to so accurately predict what was likely to happen like they did last season made me take notice a bit.

Applying it to this season, we bizarrely seem to be seeing the reverse of last season. Where last season we were in a rich vein of form that was exceeding what the xG stat was suggesting after T&S took charge, this season we are under performing. WOAP predicted that form would likely tail off last season based on xG and it did in a drastic way. So in theory, we can rely on the stat again and we can use it to expect better form. Here's hoping anyway...!

 

Every professional club uses xG now, you’d have to be stuck in the 80’s not to. Our xG was poor in McCalls second season and under T & S and guess what after a run of form we collapsed, it’s not coincidence and only an idiot would think otherwise. Likewise in McCalls first season when we drew 5 on the spin, we had the second highest xG in the league, people’s heads were wobbling off yet a month later we were sat second in the league after our 3-3 thriller against Sheffield United.

It’s good to know we are near the top of this, if our forwards hit goal scoring form it shows the chances will be there and I’d expect us to go on a good run. The only thing xG doesn’t account for is human error, which in league 2 those who make the least errors usually win such is the standard.

 

The best example of xG is when Brentford sacked Mark Warburton. They were 5th in the playoffs but the data said they should have been 13th. It isn't 100% accurate but its the best indicator of where you should finish in a season. Like the naive on here who were banging on about Bowyer still having us in the playoffs, you people have no idea.

 

More fool the ones that don't.

 

Our failure to capitalise on our xG performance is frustrating. However, it paints a compelling picture as to how close we are to getting it right and what we'd reasonably expect if we add one quality striker. If Rupp doesn't back is by finding the money for a quality addition up top in January, he never will.

 

I think that's absolutely fair, and you can see where the onus needs to be come January.

I know that 91 other league clubs will be looking for more goals, but given chance creation isn't a problem you'd think the club might be able to persuade someone...

You'd hope that these days players and agents were as interested in data analysis as the clubs - why would a forward go somewhere that just isn't generating chances, and why wouldn't you go somewhere that's creating double figures (or close to) on a regular basis?