Football statistics/general analysis/philosophicable pontification thread


#143

I’m with @shamrockgooner This ‘expected goals’ stat is absolute bullshit, especially more so, on the back of just one set of games played. What’s even the point of it?


#144


#145

whats your take on it Cal? it’s new and computers came up with it so that means it’s good?


#146

I really don’t care much to have an interest or opinion on it either way.

I got a like though so will take it :wink:


#147

Might help if you read the article mate :wink:

Think Calum’s meme is a pretty appropriate reflection of your and others’ kind of reflexive dismissal/reflexively dubious attitude toward it.

Whether the pundits will use it right or not is another matter to whether the stat has use or is worth looking at.


#148

[quote=“AbouCuellar, post:147, topic:236”]
Might help if you read the article mate :wink:

Think Calum’s meme is a pretty appropriate reflection of your and others’ kind of reflexive dismissal/reflexively dubious attitude toward it.

Whether the pundits will use it right or not is another matter to whether the stat has use or is worth looking at.
[/quote]I don’t particularly care about it one way or the other, I just think it’s a bit of a flawed statistic, that’s been introduced for the sake of whatever it is. It’s nothing to do with the fact it’s new and all that stuff, I just don’t think it really adds anything meaningful.


#149

I think giving us a better idea of how many chances and the quality of the chances a team had versus the other, especially with a statistic that has a predictive quality to it, is definitely adding something new. It beats the old days when @Robin_L and I would argue about who deserved to win, with me posting possession and shots on goal and counting up important chances in a more subjective way.


#150

I’ve looked at it. I know what it’s trying to achieve, i don’t believe it’s a meaningful stat.

You disagree? That’s OK but it doesn’t mean I’m just being dismissive for the sake of it.


#151

@shamrockgooner your post after the old man meme was hilarious tbh. :smile:

Also you bunch of old timers, predictions and forecasting will never be 100% reliable or accurate, in many cases even outright wrong.

It’s ‘expected’ for a good reason, an educated indicator in of a process that has an obscene amount of variables. Even if xG isnt all its cracked up to be, we won’t know that until enough time has elapsed to review it properly. Even then it will likely be a platform to get us closer to more accurate predictions.

Also yeah pretty fucking dismissive there lol


#152

Tbh your tone here is pretty much the definition of dismissive. :joy: There isn’t even anything I can potentially respond to here, it’s just: “I don’t like it and that’s that.”


#153

Well I wasn’t trying to have a debate about and only came into the thread when tagged. I’ve still no interest in a debate but like i say that doesn’t mean my opinion is as simplistic as you’re making out. It’s not.


#154

It’s quite a weird/innovative concept that Opta have worked on. Kudos to the people having to find and measure all the samples haha.

I still think there are too many variables (and the nature of the game/individual) for it to provide any genuine information and comparison. I’ll see how sky use it over the course of the season to see if it has good analytical value!


#155

https://streamable.com/m2l7z


#156

If the stat is proven to be flawed, I’m totally willing to hear it. But as far as I can tell it’s a useful measure and something that simply provides a bit more context to things.


#157

Like all statistics it needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, but it’s obviously a useful stat and a step forward in analysing football statistically. As the video points out it’s really a quite intuitive stat. Most importantly as statsbomb have shown in other articles it has predictive value, which is basically the acid test for if a stat is useful or not.


#158

I wonder if with time they could personalise the statistic to take into account the player taking the shot. If Messi is one on one with the goalkeeper or over a free-kick then no way does it have the same value if Burnley’s no.10 were in the same position.


#159

Just admit you are being a grumpy old sod and get back to shouting at kids for playing on your lawn.


#160

I don’t have a lawn. :slight_smile:


#161

I’m sure they will work towards this, but so far a lot of the statistical research has shown that finishing skill is not as big a factor as we might intuitively think. If this component were added it would probably change the outputs relatively negligibly. I think @Burgundy posted an article where they were looking at how much players outperformed their xG above which is worth a look (if I’m right and it’s in this thread).


#162

Don’t fuck with my mockery.