Doctor Zaius Posted Thursday at 08:33 Share Posted Thursday at 08:33 This is my problem with xG. I understand it as a metric to predict games on a more individual basis, but stuff like this makes it look like a load of nonesense. Burnley are a far more effective team than both us and Fulham. Everton might not be as good as their position suggests but worse than us and Fulham? Really? Theres a reason why Fulham are below us despite us being absolutely rancid. They're not very good. They might well stay up, but it'll be largely down to our inability to win games of football. Having them sat 14th in a table that's supposed to measure how good a team actually is just seems flat out disingenuous. Link to post Share on other sites
astraguy Posted Thursday at 08:34 Share Posted Thursday at 08:34 What was all that twitter beef about yesterday involving Steve , that youtuber and a 16 year lass? Link to post Share on other sites
Interpolic Posted Thursday at 11:34 Share Posted Thursday at 11:34 4 minutes ago, 54 said: Swansea should probably stop abusing people on Twitter full stop tbh, stopping it for seven days is a bit of a piss take. Link to post Share on other sites
AyeDubbleYoo Posted Thursday at 13:32 Share Posted Thursday at 13:32 (edited) 5 hours ago, Doctor Zaius said: This is my problem with xG. I understand it as a metric to predict games on a more individual basis, but stuff like this makes it look like a load of nonesense. Burnley are a far more effective team than both us and Fulham. Everton might not be as good as their position suggests but worse than us and Fulham? Really? Theres a reason why Fulham are below us despite us being absolutely rancid. They're not very good. They might well stay up, but it'll be largely down to our inability to win games of football. Having them sat 14th in a table that's supposed to measure how good a team actually is just seems flat out disingenuous. xG is a measure of how good the chances are basically, based on where the shot is from, angle, distance, foot vs head etc etc If you create lots of chances you can have a great xG but if your finishing is worse than the model suggests you'll obviously end up much worse off. And same with defending, you can concede lots of chances but have better saving than average. It's not really a measure of how 'good' a team you are, because finishing, saving, blocking etc are all part of that equation as well. It's just one measure to show how good the opportunities you have and concede are. Edited Thursday at 13:33 by AyeDubbleYoo Link to post Share on other sites
Yorkie Posted Thursday at 19:33 Author Share Posted Thursday at 19:33 That is some regimented bonking. Link to post Share on other sites
Disco Posted Thursday at 19:59 Share Posted Thursday at 19:59 26 minutes ago, Yorkie said: bonking Congrats on that new job at The Sun. Link to post Share on other sites
AyeDubbleYoo Posted yesterday at 09:02 Share Posted yesterday at 09:02 Clinical. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now