Jump to content

Still not worthy of a thread


Recommended Posts

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
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 by AyeDubbleYoo
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/04/2021 at 15:32, AyeDubbleYoo said:

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.

Problem with xG us that it doesn't take into account the actual goals scored. A team chasing a result is far more likely to have more chances than the winning team, so an xG table like that isn't really that accurate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Optimistic Nut said:

Does xG take into account a ‘double save’ for example? Say Gayle hits a shot at a keeper which may have been 0.3 chance of a goal, then puts the rebound wide which was also 0.3, does xG add that as 0.6 or 0.3 in total?

 

Quote

 

In the 78th minute, Nürnberg attempted three shots which ultimately led to a goal. Hanno Behrens attempts a shot that is saved, but he is able to take a second shot as the ball is deflected off the defender. The second shot goes off the woodwork, which allows Adam Zreľák to easily tap it in. According to StatsBomb's expected goals model:

  • Behrens' first shot with the goalkeeper in his way = .37 xG
  • Behrens' second shot with the goalkeeper out of position but a defender in the way = .68 xG
  • Zreľák's shot with an open net = .81 xG

The sum of these three shots is 1.86 expected goals, even though it is impossible to score more than one goal in a single move. To solve this problem, we find the probability that the defending team does not allow a goal in this possession. In this case, the calculation is:

(1 - .37) x (1 - .68) x (1 - .81) = .0383 or a 3.83% probability that Schalke does not allow a goal

To find Nürnberg's xG, we simply subtract that probability from 1:

1 - .0383 = .9617 xG

 

So for Gayle

(1-0.3) x (1-0.3) = 0.7 x 0.7 = 0.49 of no goal, .51 XG

 

https://fbref.com/en/expected-goals-model-explained/

Edited by Inferior Acuña
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/04/2021 at 11:53, Optimistic Nut said:


Tweet by Hearts TVs commentator. Would be equivalent to Raisbeck posting similar. :lol:

Following this, Hearts fans campaigning for the club to ‘leave it on the stand’ in regards to picking up the trophy when it gets awarded. Wanting the players to go up, take their medals and walk back down the tunnel.

Edited by Optimistic Nut
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...