Ole and xG

Ace of Spades

Full Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
3,464
Eh?

Southampton and Wolves both had us pinned back after half time for a brief period before scoring. We just start playing like underdogs and clearing the ball back to them.
No, we were well on top against Wolves. It took a great strike to concede the goal.

Against Southampton, we did not have the same dominant display. Still, overall they did not pose too much threat. Again, a goal conceded from losing a header that should have been won by Lindelof.
 

Crashoutcassius

Full Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2013
Messages
6,925
Location
playa del carmen
Tbf people were happy to point to xg when we were outperforming. Shows that in general we are winning battles but lack quality or mentality in important moments - finishing, defending, goalkeeping. In general I think if a team concedes close to 100% of the shots of target they give up the fans will be disappointed with results.

There is a lot of whataboutism going on comparing us to Liverpool and city last year but have to remember they are the two greatest sides to ever play in the league
 

Ace of Spades

Full Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
3,464
You always get pined back, but usually it's not for a long time and during these time they didn't create much (I am talking about Palace and Southampton games, I have not seen the Wolves game). The goals we conceded had nothing to do with pressure teams have put on us.
True, stupid mistakes at the back have cost us goals. On the other hand, there is no doubt that we need more quality in midfield and attack. I would still look to improve on Lindelof as well.
 

Big Ben Foster

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
6,566
Location
Brasileiro in Chicago
Supports
Also support Vasco da Gama
I'll say the same thing I said last season when we were winning games - I wouldn't complain if I never had to hear anything about this xG nonsense again.
 

Kounan

Full Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2012
Messages
1,380
Location
Sarajevo, BiH
True, stupid mistakes at the back have cost us goals. On the other hand, there is no doubt that we need more quality in midfield and attack. I would still look to improve on Lindelof as well.
Oh yeah, we need a lot more quality, but for now we are not loosing points because we are outplayed. I remember that one seasone we didn't concede in 14 games in a row, but in 8 of these games we won 1:0 and had two 0:0 draws. So yeah, if you don't make stupid mistakes, you can win without your attackers having a great game.
 

bosnian_red

Worst scout to ever exist
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
37,221
Location
Canada
Its not nonsense but you have to look at it in the context of everything too, instead of the be all and end all. The logic of it is that for the most part, as a manager you make your system to create a lot of high quality chances and limit the chances the opposition creates. There are different systems for how to achieve this, but ultimately this is everyones plan.

All xG does is sum up how good each chance was over a game to give you how much you'd be expected to score with "average finishing". Average finishing as in data taken from similar situations across years of action and how often that chance would result in a goal basically. In general, year on year we've seen that teams tend to play pretty close to this stat and statistically it's a better marker for future league position than goals/goals conceded/shots on target/shots/possession are. Some bad luck now will hopefully turn around later in the season where we get some luck results to average it out, or we put in the same performances chance wise but go on a winning run and it looks rosier. A lot of times it all comes down to just clinical finishing, which we havent been while the opposition has been against us 3 games in a row. XG basically says that everyone tends to play to their expected goals over a large enough period of time. Incredibly small sample size for this season, but this is just quantifying reasons to keep some optimism despite the end results not panning out for a few games and expecting it to turn around if we play the same pretty much.
 

billybee99

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 27, 2015
Messages
511
Its not nonsense but you have to look at it in the context of everything too, instead of the be all and end all. The logic of it is that for the most part, as a manager you make your system to create a lot of high quality chances and limit the chances the opposition creates. There are different systems for how to achieve this, but ultimately this is everyones plan.

All xG does is sum up how good each chance was over a game to give you how much you'd be expected to score with "average finishing". Average finishing as in data taken from similar situations across years of action and how often that chance would result in a goal basically. In general, year on year we've seen that teams tend to play pretty close to this stat and statistically it's a better marker for future league position than goals/goals conceded/shots on target/shots/possession are. Some bad luck now will hopefully turn around later in the season where we get some luck results to average it out, or we put in the same performances chance wise but go on a winning run and it looks rosier. A lot of times it all comes down to just clinical finishing, which we havent been while the opposition has been against us 3 games in a row. XG basically says that everyone tends to play to their expected goals over a large enough period of time. Incredibly small sample size for this season, but this is just quantifying reasons to keep some optimism despite the end results not panning out for a few games and expecting it to turn around if we play the same pretty much.
It's horseshit.
 

bosnian_red

Worst scout to ever exist
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
37,221
Location
Canada
It wasn't nonsense last year when it supported the narrative.
People love to complain and then when something is telling them that there might be reasons for optimism anyway, then they tell you to feck off and let them complain and you're deluded for thinking otherwise.
 

JustAGuest

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
336

Aouer-United

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Messages
154
Well, in the Pep's first season, in exected points, they should have won the league by 10 points or so ahead of Spurs and Chelsea but they didn't, they went to spend 250m on fullbacks, CB, GK and Silva then they suddenly walked the league whilst playing one of best football in Europe.

We know we have a lot of things to do and that will require massive investment for us to improve midfield and attack.
 

Bestietom

Full Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
5,467
Location
Ireland
No, we were well on top against Wolves. It took a great strike to concede the goal.

Against Southampton, we did not have the same dominant display. Still, overall they did not pose too much threat. Again, a goal conceded from losing a header that should have been won by Lindelof.
Even if not won, he should have put him off by going in harder.
 

0le

Full Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2017
Messages
2,185
It's horseshit.
Statistics themselves are not horseshit, rather it is their misrepresentation which is "horseshit". If you know what you are doing however, they are invaluable and necessary. When you get fans that say "statistics don't mean anything", this is actually what they mean to say. In the case of xG, I guess it takes a lot more understanding to use them properly and perhaps the majority of fans, including myself, don't really care as much about going to that detail compared to other statistics like goals scored, assists etc.
 

reddev3

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 9, 2018
Messages
158
No stat in football is going to tell you the picture put XG is probably the best for an idea of a teams performance when taking into consideration variance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rood

Denis79

Full Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2014
Messages
4,076
I'm probably being a bit self-indulgent but the Ole thread is so busy this specific topic might get lost. Why are xG painting such a grim picture of his time in charge? Is it unusual to have such a massive disconnect between xG and the actual points on the table? Is this is all just a complete load of bollox? Does it tell us anything useful at all?

I don't quite understand how this xG works? Someone looks at the chances and does an assessment what should have happened?

Because I feel we were more unlucky than lucky last season, although the xG says otherwise.
 
Last edited:

Blueman

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 12, 2017
Messages
91
Supports
Man City
Well, in the Pep's first season, in exected points, they should have won the league by 10 points or so ahead of Spurs and Chelsea but they didn't, they went to spend 250m on fullbacks, CB, GK and Silva then they suddenly walked the league whilst playing one of best football in Europe.

We know we have a lot of things to do and that will require massive investment for us to improve midfield and attack.
Yup that's pretty much true. So frustrating that first season. I think it was a "playing the right way" thing but not got confidence to stop those goals or to score them,.
 

Crashoutcassius

Full Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2013
Messages
6,925
Location
playa del carmen
I don't quite understand how this xG works? Someone looks at the chances and does an assessment what should have happened?

Because I feel we've been more unlucky than lucky, although the xG says otherwise.
its explained in the article above nicely. it takes the position and the type of each chances and compares it to 1000s of chances of that type and position and before and gives a probability of goal.

Last year we ran way over xg under ole. this year we are running way under. the role of it is to show where the luck will even out over time. By the xg metric we have improved a lot this season over last, just less clinical and seem to concede almost every chance to give away. On the flip side of the corner liverpool are way over xg as we were last season and the season that we finished 2nd under mourinho
 

Denis79

Full Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2014
Messages
4,076
its explained in the article above nicely. it takes the position and the type of each chances and compares it to 1000s of chances of that type and position and before and gives a probability of goal.

Last year we ran way over xg under ole. this year we are running way under. the role of it is to show where the luck will even out over time. By the xg metric we have improved a lot this season over last, just less clinical and seem to concede almost every chance to give away. On the flip side of the corner liverpool are way over xg as we were last season and the season that we finished 2nd under mourinho
Ok, now I understand how it works. Thank you.
 

R'hllor

Full Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2013
Messages
12,494
How can anyone say its horseshit after our downfall in last part of the season, you could see it will happen miles away.
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
26,877
Location
xG Zombie Nation
How can anyone say its horseshit after our downfall in last part of the season, you could see it will happen miles away.
xG & xGA actually says that we should be second so far this season, only behind City. It hints that the system is working but the players are failing in important moments. Its a bit of a reverse of @Pogue Mahone tweet in that we're now conceding more than we should.

https://understat.com/league/EPL
 

Amarsdd

Full Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
558
How can anyone say its horseshit after our downfall in last part of the season, you could see it will happen miles away.
xG & xGA actually says that we should be second so far this season, only behind City. It hints that the system is working but the players are failing in important moments. Its a bit of a reverse of @Pogue Mahone tweet in that we're now conceding more than we should.

https://understat.com/league/EPL
This. Exactly.
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
26,877
Location
xG Zombie Nation
This. Exactly.
It's early days of course, we have played Wolves and Palace that have low xG anyway because they surrender possession.

I wouldnt call it oracle but horseshit aint.
I think it gives a general impression of the overall balance of play in a game. It also hints at which parts of your team are under-performing or over-performing.
 

El Zoido

Full Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
7,620
Location
UK
How can anyone say its horseshit after our downfall in last part of the season, you could see it will happen miles away.
It’s not horseshit, people just say it is because it supports their pathetic agenda.
 

Big Ben Foster

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
6,566
Location
Brasileiro in Chicago
Supports
Also support Vasco da Gama

Pogue Mahone

Poster of the year 2008
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
99,998
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
xG & xGA actually says that we should be second so far this season, only behind City. It hints that the system is working but the players are failing in important moments. Its a bit of a reverse of @Pogue Mahone tweet in that we're now conceding more than we should.

https://understat.com/league/EPL
Huh. That’s interesting. Quite a turnaround! Although I guess repeatedly dropping points by single goals and missing penalties in two out of the four games we played could account for the big disconnect between that table and the real one.
 

Treble

Full Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
10,643
4 games is a very small sample. We will have a better idea after 14 games. If we still are doing well in the xG table, then maybe Ole is on the right track indeed.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
38,727
Location
CA
I don't quite understand how this xG works? Someone looks at the chances and does an assessment what should have happened?

Because I feel we were more unlucky than lucky last season, although the xG says otherwise.
We were extremely lucky in that series of 10+ games we won. Everything was screaming that it was a purple patch and the xG was supporting that. I said back then, that soon we will get back to reality, which then happened.

It is the opposite this time around. We are outperforming xG and soon the results will follow. The regress to the mean is inevitable, though to be fair you don't need xG to realise that. We have played far better than to get 5 points out of 12.

About xG itself it has been explained many times. It is simply a start which is assigned based on the results of shots from the same positions. Most xG stats are based on 100k+ shots, where each position a shot has been taken is given a probability of being a goal based on similar shots. Far from perfect and very primitive compared to learning techniques which are in other fields, but it is still by far the best predictor in football.
 

El Zoido

Full Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
7,620
Location
UK
4 games is a very small sample. We will have a better idea after 14 games. If we still are doing well in the xG table, then maybe Ole is on the right track indeed.
We’re playing better now than we were when we were on the unbeaten run when he first joined.
 

Treble

Full Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
10,643
We’re playing better now than we were when we were on the unbeaten run when he first joined.
I'm not sure about that. We were poor in the first 60 minutes against Chelsea and we allowed teams who needed a goal to dominate us. In the minutes before their goals Wolves and Soton dominated, they didn't score against the run of play. Too early to tell now, xG will reveal more on the basis of at least 15 games.