Here is the place to talk about all things city and football!
by LookMumImOnMCF.net » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:03 pm
Nigels Tackle wrote:LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:Think this might be the article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40699431I quite like that it tries to add a qualitative element , its not perfect, but then all stats can be rendered useless. Shots off target for example - were they decent shots or all from 35 yards?
I don't think the name "Expected Goals" is great, should be Chance Creation, or something better than that.
the arsenal game was a classic example of where expected goals falls short
we created 7 or 8 very good chances but only a couple of these led to a shot on goal
It does what it does though, you can only really argue against the methodology. The xG for that game was 2.2? Dunno what your argument is against it here.
As I say it's not perfect but it's an interesting debate to have. Stelling & co's dismissal of it earlier in the week is symptomatic of the dinosaur analysis we've put up with for too long
-
LookMumImOnMCF.net
- Donated to the site
- Denis Law's Backheel
-
- Posts: 9316
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:49 pm
- Supporter of: LookMumI'mOnMCF.net
- My favourite player is: LookMumI'mOnMCF.net
by nottsblue » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:04 pm
What's the xg for a penalty?
-
nottsblue
- Colin Bell's Football Brain
-
- Posts: 29882
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 5:17 pm
- Location: Nottingham
- Supporter of: manchester city
- My favourite player is: niall Quinn & Kun
by LookMumImOnMCF.net » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:12 pm
nottsblue wrote:What's the xg for a penalty?
0.76
-
LookMumImOnMCF.net
- Donated to the site
- Denis Law's Backheel
-
- Posts: 9316
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:49 pm
- Supporter of: LookMumI'mOnMCF.net
- My favourite player is: LookMumI'mOnMCF.net
by nottsblue » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:14 pm
LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:nottsblue wrote:What's the xg for a penalty?
0.76
At the risk of showing my ignorance, but does that imply that, on average, one out of every penalties is missed?
-
nottsblue
- Colin Bell's Football Brain
-
- Posts: 29882
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 5:17 pm
- Location: Nottingham
- Supporter of: manchester city
- My favourite player is: niall Quinn & Kun
by LookMumImOnMCF.net » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:19 pm
nottsblue wrote:LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:nottsblue wrote:What's the xg for a penalty?
0.76
At the risk of showing my ignorance, but does that imply that, on average, one out of every penalties is missed?
Not sure if you missed a "4" out of your post but if so then yeah.
Remember it's just a dataset of (I think I read) 5,000 pens. It doesn't take into a account an individual player's record, each of their xG will be different.
-
LookMumImOnMCF.net
- Donated to the site
- Denis Law's Backheel
-
- Posts: 9316
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:49 pm
- Supporter of: LookMumI'mOnMCF.net
- My favourite player is: LookMumI'mOnMCF.net
by nottsblue » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:25 pm
LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:nottsblue wrote:LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:nottsblue wrote:What's the xg for a penalty?
0.76
At the risk of showing my ignorance, but does that imply that, on average, one out of every penalties is missed?
Not sure if you missed a "4" out of your post but if so then yeah.
Remember it's just a dataset of (I think I read) 5,000 pens. It doesn't take into a account an individual player's record, each of their xG will be different.
Yes, did miss out the four. Interesting that an individual will have a different xg for a penalty. So by that token Yaya will be 1 xg on a penalty?
Conversely, does a goalkeepers success rate come into the equation or is it solely down to the attacking side?
-
nottsblue
- Colin Bell's Football Brain
-
- Posts: 29882
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 5:17 pm
- Location: Nottingham
- Supporter of: manchester city
- My favourite player is: niall Quinn & Kun
by LookMumImOnMCF.net » Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:37 pm
If he takes 10 pens and scores 10 then yeah, his xG would be 1. You could say 10 isn't enough data to go on really. 0.76 xG will be an average, most players will be better/ worse to some degree.
Individual stats like an individual player's skill or what foot they are for example, keeper in goal, isn't taken into account. The guy who came up with xG has admitted this is a drawback of xG.
Again I'm not saying it's perfect but it's a decent start ok imo
-
LookMumImOnMCF.net
- Donated to the site
- Denis Law's Backheel
-
- Posts: 9316
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:49 pm
- Supporter of: LookMumI'mOnMCF.net
- My favourite player is: LookMumI'mOnMCF.net
by PrezIke » Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:00 pm
https://www.theguardian.com/football/bl ... SApp_OtherInterestingly enough, an article in The Guardian today on xG from “Real football men vs the nerdy analytics crowd … ”
The basic concept of expected goals is simple. It answers the question: should a player have scored that chance? Or, when you add all the chances together, should a team have won that match?...
The question of whether this stat is useful to you depends on what you want from a game. A lot of people, increasingly known as “real football people”, don’t need a stat to tell them what they can see with their own eyes. Others, the analytics crowd or “football nerds”, think it provides context. Especially if you didn’t actually watch the game.
Part if a comment posted I100% agree with:
I think it's quite funny that xG is derided so much by the so called "real football people", as it's the stat that actually probably best correlates with what you actually see with your eyes when watching.
I've done a fair bit of work on xG this year with regards to the Premiership games, and I can confirm, it ain't perfect. But then nothing is. And nothing ever will be with football, it's far too complex a game. But it ain't half bad, and the more complex the models that compute the xG, the more accurate it will become. As I said, it ain't half bad, it's predicting dips in results based on performance fairly consistently. And the opposite.
-
PrezIke
- Shaun Goater's 103 Goals
-
- Posts: 7445
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 12:18 pm
- Location: 'N Why See
- Supporter of: City
- My favourite player is: KDBeezy
by patrickblue » Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:31 pm
I think they should have an expected excuses stat.
Whinger would get top marks every game.
[img]https://giphy.com/gifs/3o7qDYcso3azifQVyg/html5[/img]
-
patrickblue
- Donated to the site
- Shaun Goater's 103 Goals
-
- Posts: 7169
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:49 pm
- Location: Newbury Berks
- Supporter of: City
- My favourite player is: The one and only Goat
by patrickblue » Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:40 pm
But then Moaning Mo will probably score pretty highly tonight.
[img]https://giphy.com/gifs/3o7qDYcso3azifQVyg/html5[/img]
-
patrickblue
- Donated to the site
- Shaun Goater's 103 Goals
-
- Posts: 7169
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:49 pm
- Location: Newbury Berks
- Supporter of: City
- My favourite player is: The one and only Goat
by Foreverinbluedreams » Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:45 pm
LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:Nigels Tackle wrote:LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:Think this might be the article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40699431I quite like that it tries to add a qualitative element , its not perfect, but then all stats can be rendered useless. Shots off target for example - were they decent shots or all from 35 yards?
I don't think the name "Expected Goals" is great, should be Chance Creation, or something better than that.
the arsenal game was a classic example of where expected goals falls short
we created 7 or 8 very good chances but only a couple of these led to a shot on goal
It does what it does though, you can only really argue against the methodology. The xG for that game was 2.2? Dunno what your argument is against it here.
As I say it's not perfect but it's an interesting debate to have. Stelling & co's dismissal of it earlier in the week is symptomatic of the dinosaur analysis we've put up with for too long
The argument is that Sterling's chance when he had a tap in to an open goal would not factor in this analysis because no shot was taken, this is where it falls short.
As is acknowledged in that Guardian article, individual player's ability needs to be acknowledged for it really to be a useful analytic tool. For example if DeBruyne has a chance on the edge of the box the expectancy that he will score is far greater than if say Silva had it.
-
Foreverinbluedreams
- Denis Law's Backheel
-
- Posts: 9224
- Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:34 pm
- Supporter of: Euthanasia
by Beefymcfc » Wed Nov 22, 2017 9:58 pm
Didn't we invent this as part of our visionary football?
In the words of my Old Man, "Life will never be the same without Man City, so get it in while you can".
The Future's Bright, The Future's Blue!!!
-
Beefymcfc
- Anna Connell's Vision
-
- Posts: 46400
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:14 am
- Supporter of: The Mighty Blues
by Mikhail Chigorin » Wed Nov 22, 2017 10:10 pm
Beefymcfc wrote:Didn't we invent this as part of our visionary football?
Sort of 'holistic hypotheticals' ??
-
Mikhail Chigorin
- Shaun Goater's 103 Goals
-
- Posts: 7933
- Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 5:37 pm
- Location: Lost in the variations of the King's Gambit
- Supporter of: Manchester City
- My favourite player is: Bert Trautmann
by Beefymcfc » Wed Nov 22, 2017 10:24 pm
Mikhail Chigorin wrote:Beefymcfc wrote:Didn't we invent this as part of our visionary football?
Sort of 'holistic hypotheticals' ??
That made me laugh.
But, I'm sure our club started pulling together certain stats which included these, which was a transformation in footballing analysis.
Could be wrong though, I usually am
In the words of my Old Man, "Life will never be the same without Man City, so get it in while you can".
The Future's Bright, The Future's Blue!!!
-
Beefymcfc
- Anna Connell's Vision
-
- Posts: 46400
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:14 am
- Supporter of: The Mighty Blues
by LookMumImOnMCF.net » Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:20 pm
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:Nigels Tackle wrote:LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:Think this might be the article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40699431I quite like that it tries to add a qualitative element , its not perfect, but then all stats can be rendered useless. Shots off target for example - were they decent shots or all from 35 yards?
I don't think the name "Expected Goals" is great, should be Chance Creation, or something better than that.
the arsenal game was a classic example of where expected goals falls short
we created 7 or 8 very good chances but only a couple of these led to a shot on goal
It does what it does though, you can only really argue against the methodology. The xG for that game was 2.2? Dunno what your argument is against it here.
As I say it's not perfect but it's an interesting debate to have. Stelling & co's dismissal of it earlier in the week is symptomatic of the dinosaur analysis we've put up with for too long
The argument is that Sterling's chance when he had a tap in to an open goal would not factor in this analysis because no shot was taken, this is where it falls short.
As is acknowledged in that Guardian article, individual player's ability needs to be acknowledged for it really to be a useful analytic tool. For example if DeBruyne has a chance on the edge of the box the expectancy that he will score is far greater than if say Silva had it.
100% agree. But if a player air-kicks from two years out it's not registered as a shot on or off target either, this isn't just an xG anomaly, it's an issue for a lot of stats.
Likewise, individual ability isn't taken into account on the quality of the corner taker, free kick taker, shots on/ off target player etc etc. Ultimately I don't think any stat will tell the full story, just offer a bit more insight.
PrezIke wrote:Real football men vs the nerdy analytics crowd …
MCF.net vs LookMum round 2,149,092
-
LookMumImOnMCF.net
- Donated to the site
- Denis Law's Backheel
-
- Posts: 9316
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 5:49 pm
- Supporter of: LookMumI'mOnMCF.net
- My favourite player is: LookMumI'mOnMCF.net
by Foreverinbluedreams » Thu Nov 23, 2017 9:22 am
"A lot of people, increasingly known as “real football people”, don’t need a stat to tell them what they can see with their own eyes. Others, the analytics crowd or “football nerds”, think it provides context. Especially if you didn’t actually watch the game."
Do I have to pick a side, can't I judge from what I've seen but acknowledge that stats can be useful too?
It does provide some context but that last line is just bollox, if you didn't watch the game then you can't analyse it with any degree of competence regardless of what stats you use.
-
Foreverinbluedreams
- Denis Law's Backheel
-
- Posts: 9224
- Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:34 pm
- Supporter of: Euthanasia
by Justified logic » Thu Nov 23, 2017 9:38 am
LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:Foreverinbluedreams wrote:LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:Nigels Tackle wrote:LookMumImOnMCF.net wrote:Think this might be the article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40699431I quite like that it tries to add a qualitative element , its not perfect, but then all stats can be rendered useless. Shots off target for example - were they decent shots or all from 35 yards?
I don't think the name "Expected Goals" is great, should be Chance Creation, or something better than that.
the arsenal game was a classic example of where expected goals falls short
we created 7 or 8 very good chances but only a couple of these led to a shot on goal
It does what it does though, you can only really argue against the methodology. The xG for that game was 2.2? Dunno what your argument is against it here.
As I say it's not perfect but it's an interesting debate to have. Stelling & co's dismissal of it earlier in the week is symptomatic of the dinosaur analysis we've put up with for too long
The argument is that Sterling's chance when he had a tap in to an open goal would not factor in this analysis because no shot was taken, this is where it falls short.
As is acknowledged in that Guardian article, individual player's ability needs to be acknowledged for it really to be a useful analytic tool. For example if DeBruyne has a chance on the edge of the box the expectancy that he will score is far greater than if say Silva had it.
100% agree. But if a player air-kicks from two years out it's not registered as a shot on or off target either, this isn't just an xG anomaly, it's an issue for a lot of stats.
Likewise, individual ability isn't taken into account on the quality of the corner taker, free kick taker, shots on/ off target player etc etc. Ultimately I don't think any stat will tell the full story, just offer a bit more insight.
We need an expected assist (xA) stat as well then.
-
Justified logic
- Rosler's Grandad Bombed The Swamp
-
- Posts: 3559
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 6:40 pm
- Location: Playing in the hole
- Supporter of: Manchester City
- My favourite player is: David Silva
by mr_nool » Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:19 am
Foreverinbluedreams wrote:"A lot of people, increasingly known as “real football people”, don’t need a stat to tell them what they can see with their own eyes. Others, the analytics crowd or “football nerds”, think it provides context. Especially if you didn’t actually watch the game."
Do I have to pick a side, can't I judge from what I've seen but acknowledge that stats can be useful too?
It does provide some context but that last line is just bollox, if you didn't watch the game then you can't analyse it with any degree of competence regardless of what stats you use.
Pretty Boy Lee can.
-
mr_nool
- Donated to the site
- Colin Bell's Football Brain
-
- Posts: 26165
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:48 am
- Location: Utrecht
by iwasthere2012 » Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:37 am
mr_nool wrote:Foreverinbluedreams wrote:"A lot of people, increasingly known as “real football people”, don’t need a stat to tell them what they can see with their own eyes. Others, the analytics crowd or “football nerds”, think it provides context. Especially if you didn’t actually watch the game."
Do I have to pick a side, can't I judge from what I've seen but acknowledge that stats can be useful too?
It does provide some context but that last line is just bollox, if you didn't watch the game then you can't analyse it with any degree of competence regardless of what stats you use.
Pretty Boy Lee can.
Perhaps he can.
I’d go one further and say being at the game and watching the broader scale of things, enables you to form a much more accurate assessment of what is actually happening than seeing it on a tv screen which shows a much narrower view of the game.
I believe this, even despite the replays and different angles and slow motions etc.
I’m with FIBD in so far as a combination of statistical analysis and what a coach actually sees in training and in a match, with the benefit of video footage, is no doubt of high sports science value.
For the ordinary fan though, I sometimes despair of all the armchair analysis, quoting all sorts of stats as proof.
If you have any kind of football brain at all and you watch enough of the team to form more than a short term opinion, then I think there is enough evidence in front of your eyes week in week out. Stats help but I rarely use them as a sole prop for my opinions.
You can’t beat your own intuition or gut feel.
-
iwasthere2012
- Denis Law's Backheel
-
- Posts: 9845
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 4:14 pm
- Location: Dublin
- Supporter of: Manchester City
- My favourite player is: David Silva (was PabZab)
by Dameerto » Thu Nov 23, 2017 10:39 am
Beefymcfc wrote:Mikhail Chigorin wrote:Beefymcfc wrote:Didn't we invent this as part of our visionary football?
Sort of 'holistic hypotheticals' ??
That made me laugh.
But, I'm sure our club started pulling together certain stats which included these, which was a transformation in footballing analysis.
Could be wrong though, I usually am
A few seasons back the club released an enitre season's worth of data for people to experiement with from an analytical point of view - I have no idea if the guy who developed xG used that data though.
VIVA EL CITIES
"The adjudicatory chamber of the Ethics Committee ... has banned Mr Joseph S. Blatter ... for eight years and Mr Michel Platini ... for eight years from all football-related activities (administrative, sports or any other) on a national and international level. The bans come into force immediately." - 21/12/2015
-
Dameerto
- Donated to the site
- Allison's Big Fat Cigar
-
- Posts: 18703
- Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:08 pm
- Supporter of: El City
- My favourite player is: Sergio Forwardo
Return to The Maine Football forum
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bear60, BlueinBosnia, blues2win, carl_feedthegoat, carolina-blue, city72, CTID Hants, Dubciteh, gmercer1, Harry Dowd scored, HBlock Cripple, Indianablue, john@staustell, Majestic-12 [Bot], Mase, Nickyboy, Nigels Tackle, nottsblue, Original Dub, PeterParker, ruralblue, salford city, steelsnail, Woodyblue, zabbadabbado and 1121 guests