• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Stats Thread

parklane1 said:
I know there are some on here who worship xg stats, but they are one of the most stupid of stats that are used by fans to prove NOTHING in reality.
Click to expand...

That's just not true. I'd ask you again exactly why you think they're stupid and prove nothing, but as in the past I'd imagine you'll just ignore me and then repeat your opinion again in the future.

Personally I think they're an imperfect but decent indicator of the quality of chances created by teams, to supplement what you've seen with your own eyes (or to substitute for that if you haven't been able to watch the match).
 
Last edited:
elltrev said:
That's just not true. I'd ask you again exactly why you think they're stupid and prove nothing, but as in the past I'd imagine you'll just ignore me and then repeat your opinion again in the future.

Personally I think they're an imperfect but decent indicator of the quality of chances created by teams, to supplement what you've seen with your own eyes (or to substitute for that if you haven't been able to watch the match).
Click to expand...

Do not remember ignoring you before mate at all and if i did i am sorry, i do not get into a big debate with those who love stats and you seem to be one of them. All i will say is that i worked in football for most of my life so dealt with all sort of stats about players/games/results every day.

They are a tool which can be useful but on occasions they can be offered up as the best thing since sliced bread which they are not. Its a shame that so many fans can not see past them ( in truth i am not saying you are one of them) but there are many fans around and at games who can not see the real worth in some of them and overblow the importance of them.

But it s all abo ut opinions.
 
That last image... all the City defenders retain possession i.e. don't give the ball away, because they are just dinking 10 yard passes to each other or whoever drops deep to get it. That is an example of a fairly useless stat in terms of "how good is John Stones" or whatever.
 
parklane1 said:
Do not remember ignoring you before mate at all and if i did i am sorry, i do not get into a big debate with those who love stats and you seem to be one of them. All i will say is that i worked in football for most of my life so dealt with all sort of stats about players/games/results every day.

They are a tool which can be useful but on occasions they can be offered up as the best thing since sliced bread which they are not. Its a shame that so many fans can not see past them ( in truth i am not saying you are one of them) but there are many fans around and at games who can not see the real worth in some of them and overblow the importance of them.

But it s all abo ut opinions.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I'm just interested to hear what it is about xG specifically that you think is so worthless. I admit I am a stats fiend in general (I work in social research), but I think and hope in a way that thinks about stats critically and carefully.

I wonder if most people are more closely aligned on stats then we all think - I reckon the majority think that some stats can be somewhat useful in some circumstances, no more and no less. I reckon only a minority dismiss them completely or think they're the be all and end all.
 
elltrev said:
Fair enough, I'm just interested to hear what it is about xG specifically that you think is so worthless. I admit I am a stats fiend in general (I work in social research), but I think and hope in a way that thinks about stats critically and carefully.

I wonder if most people are more closely aligned on stats then we all think - I reckon the majority think that some stats can be somewhat useful in some circumstances, no more and no less. I reckon only a minority dismiss them completely or think they're the be all and end all.
Click to expand...

To be honest i have never met anyone who dismiss ( them all) completely, They are a tool ( no more no less) and can be used to help decide some things. The problem is when folks use them to try and push the point they are trying to prove ( because its the way they see/want it to be). as for some thinking they are not the be all and end all i am not sure you are right about that.

Still as you say stats ( can be somewhat useful in some circumstances) i do not disagree, but they are overused by a lot of fans and that is the problem IF they want to see the big picture.
 
elltrev said:
Read this article this morning too. The interesting thing with Liverpool is that their goals for and against aren't that unusual compared to expected (Liverpool are the red dot, the other dots are the other 19 PL teams):

View attachment 9148

View attachment 9149

(And I'd argue that those graphs also show that the xG model is pretty decent, taking into account that different teams will have different abilities in finishing and goalkeeping. Correlation is 94% for goals for, and 84% for goals against).

But then on points, Liverpool do way better than expected:

View attachment 9150

But rather than it being a flaw in the xG model, I wonder if it just reflects Liverpool displaying the classic title-winning trait of winning when you don't play well - in close games where they should have drawn or lost, finding the finishing and/or goalkeeping edge to win instead.
Click to expand...

"the xG model"

Which xG model though? There are double digit numbers of them competing with each other. There is no standard one, And they are frequently updated to the latest version.

At best a good xG can show a trend over a long period of data. It is completely meaningless over 90 minutes. That MIchael Caley twitter account where he posts the xG graphic of a game he didn't watch and writes a know it all sentence summary is particularly annoying.
 
Modric THFC said:
"the xG model"

Which xG model though? There are double digit numbers of them competing with each other. There is no standard one, And they are frequently updated to the latest version.

At best a good xG can show a trend over a long period of data. It is completely meaningless over 90 minutes. That MIchael Caley twitter account where he posts the xG graphic of a game he didn't watch and writes a know it all sentence summary is particularly annoying.
Click to expand...

Fair point about there being different models. Though are there double digits? Personally, aside from any broadcasters, I've only seen Understat's and Michael Caley's, and they seem to be very close. E.g. taking just the 10 matches on the last day of the PL season, there was a 97% correlation between their respective xG estimates for each of the 20 teams:

upload_2020-8-18_9-19-18.png

(And for what it's worth my previous post was based on the Understat stats.)

Do you have evidence that there are double digit different models and that they produce very different estimates?

And do you have evidence that xG stats are 'completely meaningless' over 90 minutes?

(I’m not necessarily doubting you, just interested to see the evidence).
 
Last edited:
The thing is, our xG will look poor because as soon as we score, we stop trying to score for 70 minutes, then try again at the end... so we rack up xGA by design, hence that table is poo and Spurs are the best.
 
9w1jcrthlug61.jpg

So many questions
- How bad were we?
- How bad was the Scum? they really are better off than last season? fudge ..
- Leicester is actually worse this season?
 
So after a start where it only seemed like Son and Kane were contributing

Goal scorers -> Kane 22, Son 18, Lucas 9, Vinicius 9, Bale 8, Ndombele 6, Lo Celso 5 (crazy considering how much he's been out).
9 Different goal scorers in PL alone, 17 different scorers in all comps.
Assists -> Son 15, Kane 14, Lucas 5, Reguilon 5

Possible this season -> two players with 20+ goals in all comps, 5 players in double figures and one of Kane or Son could hit 20 goals/20 Assists in season ..
 
Raziel said:
So after a start where it only seemed like Son and Kane were contributing

Goal scorers -> Kane 22, Son 18, Lucas 9, Vinicius 9, Bale 8, Ndombele 6, Lo Celso 5 (crazy considering how much he's been out).
9 Different goal scorers in PL alone, 17 different scorers in all comps.
Assists -> Son 15, Kane 14, Lucas 5, Reguilon 5

Possible this season -> two players with 20+ goals in all comps, 5 players in double figures and one of Kane or Son could hit 20 goals/20 Assists in season ..
Click to expand...
Amazing stats. Assume they include the Europa pre-qualifiers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back