Tim Sherwood…gone \o/

[THFC6061]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

I agree that the quality of chances has improved. We have also committed more men to attacks, been more direct, more fluid in the final third and replaced a forward in poor form with one in red hot form. All of these will be contributing factors.

Premier League Results, League Table & Goal Statistics for Season 2013-14

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

Edit:-

Actually you know what. maybe it does show something?

I'm looking at the raw proportions and it looks like, on the 50th glance

AVB's team:-

Took more ill advised shots based on angles.
Shot from more hard to score locations based on distance.
And since he averages more shots at goal than the average premier league team a combination of both amounts to a significant amount more raw tallied low conversion rate type shots on goal

Large amount of shots and lots of those in comparison to the average prem team not so good. The focus as well didnt seem to be on creating good chances as it were i dont think?

Tim sherwood though

Has less shots on goal. Probably due to the taking less ill advised shots on goal
Takes Less shots even as a proportion as well as raw numbers i would guess from ill advised positions
The variance of the shot selection shows that the team focuses MORE on better conversion rate type shots. Their shot selection is actually BETTER!!!

and at the rate of shots per game i think it would amount to a higher rate of better shots per overall shots per game as opposed to AVB's tacticts?


this is too early in the morning for this ****

I'm not quite sure what you're saying there.

Under AVB we had more shots in total, but we had more per 90 from prime areas. This was a lower percentage of total shots because the total shots were still high. But more prime shots per 90 were being taken.

So Timmeh's percentage of good shots is higher, but AVB was getting more good shots per game.

It would be interesting to see a comparison of those figures with and without Townsend though.

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

Article states;

Under AVB, Tottenham scored from less than 17% of their shots on target, however since Lucky Tim has been at the helm they have managed to convert more than 51% of their on target shots!!! It may be the case that Sherwood has tremendous coaching capabilities but I’d certainly be betting that his Tottenham team won’t finish the season with more than half of their on target shots being scored. In fact, I’d wager that the Regression Monster is due to pay another visit to White Hart Lane.

From watching us, it's fairly obvious why this is. In the games TS has been in charge we have created better chances than we did under AVB. More clear cut chances = better conversion rate. It may also mean less overall shots as the more 'Gung-Ho' style we've adopted we tend to counter with pace and either carve the opposition open or lose the ball. With AVB's style we didn't carve anyone open, allowed the opposition to put 10 men behind the ball and took pot shots from distance, even our good chances we're not as clear cut as the chances we are creating now.

That being said, it's entirely possible that TS Sherwood can't keep us playing the way we are and we regress to the mean, but I don't think the reason for that will be him running out of luck. It will however be the test of how good he is as a manager and only time will tell.

How clear cut does a chance from the prime areas have to be?

We're all used to teams packing their own third against us, but I very much doubt they're packing the 6 yard box and making all of AVB's prime area shots bad ones.

You may say it's entirely possible we will regress towards mean, I'd say it's a near certainty. We have a PDO that teams like Barca and City can only dream of. In fact City went on a 10 game streak like ours earlier this season and the regression monster caught up with them, so I can't see us escaping it.

 

[Jordinho]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

I don't think transition is relevant. After all, if transition to attack was slow then in transition to defence it follows that we would have numbers back to defend and players would be closer to their positions. So whilst it would theoretically have an effect on our offensive numbers, it should equally reduce the goals allowed.

I'm a little surprised that the figures surprise you too. What the data show is exactly what I would have told you was happening anecdotally. Fortunately the author has the time and inclination to put into figures what we were seeing.

Not necessarily. While we are slow in getting forward, eventually we have a lot of players committed (pretty much everyone bar the CBs) and are very vulnerable to a quick counter attack. Especially if we're equally slow at getting back.

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

Not necessarily. While we are slow in getting forward, eventually we have a lot of players committed (pretty much everyone bar the CBs) and are very vulnerable to a quick counter attack. Especially if we're equally slow at getting back.

I'm not sure that goals on the break would manifest mainly as prime area goals. I'd expect Lloris to be out at least as far as the edge of his area. Even a keeper that stays rooted would force you to take the shot before you got into the prime area.

I also don't recall us conceding many like that. I remember Lloris playing sweeper and people being convinced that that would lead to a lot of goals against on the break, but it didn't really materialise to my memory.

 

[Jordinho]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

I'm not sure that goals on the break would manifest mainly as prime area goals. I'd expect Lloris to be out at least as far as the edge of his area. Even a keeper that stays rooted would force you to take the shot before you got into the prime area.

I also don't recall us conceding many like that. I remember Lloris playing sweeper and people being convinced that that would lead to a lot of goals against on the break, but it didn't really materialise to my memory.

The goals against have mostly happened in a small handful of games, but 99% of them I've forgotten already. It was more a general point, that even if our transition phase is slow, we will eventually have most of our players high up the pitch. Other teams may look to break more quickly when they've won the ball and won't commit as many men going forward and ultimately be unable to maintain possession high up the pitch, but still have lots of players covering (aka parking the bus). When we win possession against teams like that we have to attack quicker or they'll soon have everyone back. Of course, one possible outcome is that the other team will eventually tire and the gaps will start appearing towards the end of games. Patience is key.

 

[africanspurs]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

I'm not quite sure what you're saying there.

Under AVB we had more shots in total, but we had more per 90 from prime areas. This was a lower percentage of total shots because the total shots were still high. But more prime shots per 90 were being taken.

So Timmeh's percentage of good shots is higher, but AVB was getting more good shots per game.

It would be interesting to see a comparison of those figures with and without Townsend though.

to be fair i dont know what i am saying either

not sure there is any denying that we had more shots.....but our focus wasnt to getting those prime shots it seems...just shooting more than anything...the spread seems a lot more evenly distributed when compared with tim sherwoods

the percentages shouldnt change irrespective of how many shots were taken.......if the percentage is low then all that shows is that in relation to the amount of shots taken on average in a game we shot a low number of them in prime areas...but the raw total would be more than sherwoods it seems

i think i just repeated what you said just now word for word

in conclusion , our shot selection under sherwood is better

 

[Millsy_Yiddo]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

How clear cut does a chance from the prime areas have to be?

We're all used to teams packing their own third against us, but I very much doubt they're packing the 6 yard box and making all of AVB's prime area shots bad ones.

You may say it's entirely possible we will regress towards mean, I'd say it's a near certainty. We have a PDO that teams like Barca and City can only dream of. In fact City went on a 10 game streak like ours earlier this season and the regression monster caught up with them, so I can't see us escaping it.

Clear enough that they result in a goal more often. For example, a shot from the penalty spot which comes from a ball whipped in behind the opposition defence our cut back from the by-line with the opposition defence turned and running towards their own goal is more likely to result in a goal than one that comes from a strike inside a packed penatly area. My theory would be that we create more of the first type of chance (i.e we actually attempt to get in behind teams) now than we did under AVB. In order to prove it we'd have to look at every single shot from a prime area under both managers and evaluate them using some kind of agreed criteria. I don't think either of us could be arsed doing that :lol:

So based on this PDO business, our PDO under AVB was 860 and you claim everyone eventually returns to the mean. So if we'd kept AVB we'd have pulled back up to our mean eventually. However, by going from 860 under AVB to 1256 under Sherwood for however long it takes us to eventually return to mean is going to get us more points than keeping AVB would have. No?

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

So based on this PDO business, our PDO under AVB was 860 and you claim everyone eventually returns to the mean. So if we'd kept AVB we'd have pulled back up to our mean eventually. However, by going from 860 under AVB to 1256 under Sherwood for however long it takes us to eventually return to mean is going to get us more points than keeping AVB would have. No?

Only if you believe in luck rather than random strings of events. And only if you believe that Timmeh is inherently lucky.

 

[Millsy_Yiddo]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

Only if you believe in luck rather than random strings of events. And only if you believe that Timmeh is inherently lucky.

Apologies, but you're going to have to explain that to me (genuine question)?

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

Apologies, but you're going to have to explain that to me (genuine question)?

PDO is essentially as close an indicator as we can get to 'luck'.

So to suggest that AVB's PDO wouldn't have increased and that employing Timmeh is what put it where it is, is suggesting that Timmeh is somehow 'lucky' and AVB somehow 'unlucky'.

 

[Millsy_Yiddo]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

PDO is essentially as close an indicator as we can get to 'luck'.

So to suggest that AVB's PDO wouldn't have increased and that employing Timmeh is what put it where it is, is suggesting that Timmeh is somehow 'lucky' and AVB somehow 'unlucky'.

It's an indicator of shooting percentage + save percentage multiplied by 10. Both shooting percentage and save percentage can be influenced by things other than (but also including) luck. So how can you come to that conclusion?

Again, this is a genuine question rather than an attempted argument.

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

It's an indicator of shooting percentage + save percentage multiplied by 10. Both shooting percentage and save percentage can be influenced by things other than (but also including) luck. So how can you come to that conclusion?

Again, this is a genuine question rather than an attempted argument.

Take a look at James Grayson's blog, he goes into a very good explanation of how PDO is at least 60% luck. If it didn't have a random element, it wouldn't regress to mean the way it does.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

I agree that the quality of chances has improved. We have also committed more men to attacks, been more direct, more fluid in the final third and replaced a forward in poor form with one in red hot form. All of these will be contributing factors.

I think it's a similar story when defending as well.... There can be a difference in how good the chance is even if it's in a 'key' area... For example people talked about how we were lucky against Everton and how Osman could've had a hat-trick in the first 20 minutes. Now all of those Osman chances would've been considered good chances from those stats but when reviewing the 3 chances rationally - one was a fantastic first time volley from outside the area, one was a header from a corner where he did well to win it and the other was a curling shot from inside the box that had to travel past a couple of players that Lloris probably would've saved if it was on target. Compare that for example to Liverpool waltzing in behind us to have one on one with the keeper on numerous occasions.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

It's an indicator of shooting percentage + save percentage multiplied by 10. Both shooting percentage and save percentage can be influenced by things other than (but also including) luck. So how can you come to that conclusion?

Again, this is a genuine question rather than an attempted argument.

I think if we'd carried on playing our suicidal high line with Dawson and Capoue as central defenders then AVB's PDO may have got even worse!

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

I think if we'd carried on playing our suicidal high line with Dawson and Capoue as central defenders then AVB's PDO may have got even worse!

That's not how PDO works.

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

I think it's a similar story when defending as well.... There can be a difference in how good the chance is even if it's in a 'key' area... For example people talked about how we were lucky against Everton and how Osman could've had a hat-trick in the first 20 minutes. Now all of those Osman chances would've been considered good chances from those stats but when reviewing the 3 chances rationally - one was a fantastic first time volley from outside the area, one was a header from a corner where he did well to win it and the other was a curling shot from inside the box that had to travel past a couple of players that Lloris probably would've saved if it was on target. Compare that for example to Liverpool waltzing in behind us to have one on one with the keeper on numerous occasions.

That's an interesting take on the Osman chances.

The volley I'll give you, but the header was free and the curling shot (or the one that should have curled) was shown in a replay from behind him and he had a clear view to a large part of the goal with Lloris unsighted. By all rights two of them should have been goals (another example of Timmeh getting a PDO bump).

Also, only the header would have been a prime position I believe. The volley would have been a marginal shot and the curler was I think slightly outside the box and therefore also marginal - I may be wrong on that one.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

PDO is essentially as close an indicator as we can get to 'luck'.

So to suggest that AVB's PDO wouldn't have increased and that employing Timmeh is what put it where it is, is suggesting that Timmeh is somehow 'lucky' and AVB somehow 'unlucky'.

It's really not lucky that we are scoring more goals since Sherwood came in. It's very simple, we get more than 1 player in to the box when attacking and don't rely on pot shots from 25 yards out.

 

[Armchair Expert]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

It's really not lucky that we are scoring more goals since Sherwood came in. It's very simple, we get more than 1 player in to the box when attacking and don't rely on pot shots from 25 yards out.

Pot shots from terrible angles, with an opposing defence entrenched in excellent defensive positions because we attacked with the pace and stealth of a 850 tonne sloth.

 

[scaramanga]

Re: Tim Sherwood - Head Coach

It's really not lucky that we are scoring more goals since Sherwood came in. It's very simple, we get more than 1 player in to the box when attacking and don't rely on pot shots from 25 yards out.

Read the article, despite your belief we had more shots from good areas per match under AVB but fewer went. We gave away the same number but more went in. That's about as close a measurement of luck as anyone can get in football.