gijsbert_bos
Vital Football Hero
This doesn't look good for us:
Now I'm not a huge believer in xG but...
- Thread starter gijsbert_bos
- Start date
TrickyImps!
Vital Squad Member
I quite like xG, but it doesn’t take into context the opponents.
We’ve played Portsmouth, Oxford and Peterborough all away, so the figure was never going to be high.
On the flip side, we have played two newly-promoted teams at home, plus a Fleetwood side who were very average.
It’d be interesting to see the number after our next 2 games.
We’ve played Portsmouth, Oxford and Peterborough all away, so the figure was never going to be high.
On the flip side, we have played two newly-promoted teams at home, plus a Fleetwood side who were very average.
It’d be interesting to see the number after our next 2 games.
MaineRoad_96
Vital 1st Team Regular
In that thread he reckons Adam Jackson averages 6.9 big chances per 90 mins. I assume that’s because he had that header from the corner at Portsmouth? Either way, it just shows how these sort of stats can be skewed early in the season.
I hate to sound like a Philistine but xG is a load of old bollocks isn’t it?
I hate to sound like a Philistine but xG is a load of old bollocks isn’t it?
gijsbert_bos
Vital Football Hero
To be fair to him, he does preface that stat with a caveat that it's "just for fun" or something similar.
I do think it can be useful in showing a team's strengths and weaknesses. In our case, we aren't very threatening and we are conceding lots of chances. Nothing we didn't really know but the fact we are bottom for both metrics might be indicative of our general direction of travel unless we buck our ideas up.
Absolutely. Let's stick with trying to score more than the other side, more often than not!
It reflects we’ve been under the cosh for a decent sized spell in the majority of our games.
Exeter - first half
Pompey - all game
Oxford - second half
Posh - all game
Fleetwood - 20 mins onwards
FGR the only game we were really in control of and we conceded a poor goal.
Oxford we earned the right to sit in. Pompey and Peterborough the same approach, it obviously worked better in one than the other.
xG when put into context reveals a lot and come the end of the season will be an accurate reflection of most teams and most players. There will be exceptions but it’s generally a good barometer.
Exeter - first half
Pompey - all game
Oxford - second half
Posh - all game
Fleetwood - 20 mins onwards
FGR the only game we were really in control of and we conceded a poor goal.
Oxford we earned the right to sit in. Pompey and Peterborough the same approach, it obviously worked better in one than the other.
xG when put into context reveals a lot and come the end of the season will be an accurate reflection of most teams and most players. There will be exceptions but it’s generally a good barometer.
I’ve read Posh’s xG was 1.93 so they aren’t the mega impact into it.
Penalties like Oxford add 0.85.
WellingtonImp
Vital 1st Team Regular
Correct.
WellingtonImp
Vital 1st Team Regular
xG could be useful, when viewed with healthy skepticism. Not something that can be relied upon for accuracy or decision-making. A little more nuanced than a horoscope… but not by much.
MaineRoad_96
Vital 1st Team Regular
Yeah sorry mate, I was being a bit facetious. Too small a sample size to draw too many conclusions I’d say - I imagine getting a good hiding off Peterborough doesn’t help with those stats.
Red Wimp
Vital Football Legend
That shows what a load of bollocks it is then !
I'll start by admitting I'm an xg cynic.
Genuine question, where do they judge the xg? I watched match of the day and in the Bournemouth v Forest game, for Bournemouth's 3rd goal they're 2 on 1 with the keeper, the man with the ball makes the correct decision to square the ball to the man in the middle and he scores.
For the purpose of xg, if he doesn't square it and shoots from a tight angle with the odds in the keepers favour do they judge the xg on the chances of him scoring that shot or the xg when he had the choice to make as to whether to shoot or pass to the man with the open goal. If it's the latter the xg is surely higher.
To try and simplify what I'm saying. If he takes the shot do you judge the xg on what ultimately happened or do go back a second to the point he should've passed and award the higher xg?
Xg is surely subjective depending on when the person calculating it decides the shot or goal was most likely.
Genuine question, where do they judge the xg? I watched match of the day and in the Bournemouth v Forest game, for Bournemouth's 3rd goal they're 2 on 1 with the keeper, the man with the ball makes the correct decision to square the ball to the man in the middle and he scores.
For the purpose of xg, if he doesn't square it and shoots from a tight angle with the odds in the keepers favour do they judge the xg on the chances of him scoring that shot or the xg when he had the choice to make as to whether to shoot or pass to the man with the open goal. If it's the latter the xg is surely higher.
To try and simplify what I'm saying. If he takes the shot do you judge the xg on what ultimately happened or do go back a second to the point he should've passed and award the higher xg?
Xg is surely subjective depending on when the person calculating it decides the shot or goal was most likely.
StrangelyBrown
Vital Squad Member
Our xG yesterday was better than Cambridge.
I'll leave you with that thought on how valuable xG is.
It's based on the shot/chance.
Which means it gives a potentially unrealistic picture as it ignores the sequence of events before any shot.
There may have been several opportunities in the build up where the chance of a goal was higher than when they eventually took the shot, but the wrong choice was made.
That's why I take it with a massive pinch of salt. You can usually tell by watching a game who had the best of it and who had the best chances.
