Strikers & Forwards and xG - which players outperform their xG.

[Classical Mechanic]

I think one of the interesting things xG can hint at is which strikers can score from sub-optimal chances etc.

Unsurprisingly Messi is by far the best player I can find in this regard in the past 5 seasons his record against his xG is (rounded) +10, +5, +10, -1 and +7 goals so +31 goals!

Ronaldo (unsurprisingly to me) rarely outperforms his xG. Past 5 seasons +9, -1, 0, -1, -2,

Kane has a good record outperforming xG in his past 5 seasons +4, +2, +9, +3, +1

Martial has outperformed his xG for United every season +4, +1, +3, +2,

Rashford has been less impressive over the same period +2, -1, +1, -2 but actually evens pretty much over that time.

The worst I have seen in a season from a top forward is Lewandowski who scored 11 less than xG predicted last season!

Feel free to add players I've missed.

 

[Grande]

I think one of the interesting things xG can hint at is which strikers can score from sub-optimal chances etc.

Unsurprisingly Messi is by far the best player I can find in this regard in the past 5 seasons his record against his xG is (rounded) +10, +5, +10, -1 and +7 goals so +31 goals!

Ronaldo (unsurprisingly to me) rarely outperforms his xG. Past 5 seasons +9, -1, 0, -1, -2,

Kane has a good record outperforming xG in his past 5 seasons +4, +2, +9, +3, +1

Martial has outperformed his xG for United every season +4, +1, +3, +2,

Rashford has been less impressive over the same period +2, -1, +1, -2 but actually evens pretty much over that time.

The worst I have seen in a season from a top forward is Lewandowski who scored 11 less than xG predicted last season!

Feel free to add players I've missed.

How does Danny James look this season?

Or more seriously, how does the average player relate to XG?

And, who scores the most: The ten players with highest xG stats, or the ten players with highest goals to xG ratio?

 

[Kasper]

Interesting tread but probably shouldn't have opened with a Messi and Ronaldo comparison as it will now soon evolve into a civil war.

 

[Crashoutcassius]

Would expect martial and rashford to be running under so far this year given we are running so much under? Or are the chances going to different players

 

[Cassidy]

Would expect martial and rashford to be running under so far this year given we are running so much under? Or are the chances going to different players

Are we?

 

[roonster09]

I think one of the interesting things xG can hint at is which strikers can score from sub-optimal chances etc.

Unsurprisingly Messi is by far the best player I can find in this regard in the past 5 seasons his record against his xG is (rounded) +10, +5, +10, -1 and +7 goals so +31 goals!

Ronaldo (unsurprisingly to me) rarely outperforms his xG. Past 5 seasons +9, -1, 0, -1, -2,

Kane has a good record outperforming xG in his past 5 seasons +4, +2, +9, +3, +1

Martial has outperformed his xG for United every season +4, +1, +3, +2,

Rashford has been less impressive over the same period +2, -1, +1, -2 but actually evens pretty much over that time.

The worst I have seen in a season from a top forward is Lewandowski who scored 11 less than xG predicted last season!

Feel free to add players I've missed.

Was checking Messi's record few days back, his teammates under perform from the chances he creates. He should have more assists.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

How does Danny James look this season?

Or more seriously, how does the average player relate to XG?

And, who scores the most: The ten players with highest xG stats, or the ten players with highest goals to xG ratio?

The average is 0, that's how it works, it evaluates the quality of a chance by how many goals are scored from the same position. It would be interesting to see an xG using data from elite strikers only I guess.

Dan James is +2 so far and doing well

https://understat.com/player/5595

Probably only bettered by Aguero, Pukki and Abraham so far

https://understat.com/league/EPL/2019

 

[Crashoutcassius]

Are we?

yes, see ole and xg thread

 

[Anustart89]

How does Danny James look this season?

Or more seriously, how does the average player relate to XG?

And, who scores the most: The ten players with highest xG stats, or the ten players with highest goals to xG ratio?

The average player should by definition score exactly as much as his xG says.

Second part is hard to answer, because there’s a difference between Rashford who performs close to his xG due to inflating xG with low-percentage shots and Sterling who I imagine performs close to his xG because he scores many tap-ins created by his teammates. His total xG is probably higher than Rashford’s due to getting into good scoring positions but I would guess the goal to xG ratio would be somewhat similar (or Sterling being a bit higher since he’s scoring one goal from a 0.85xG tap-in while not inflating his xG with 30 yard shots).

A player can after four games have an xG of 8 but only score 4 goals and another can have an xG of 2 and score 5. I think your top ten would probaby (this far into the season) consist of players with high goals to xG ratios but later on would be players with high xG totals with good/decent ratios (pretty much form in the early parts of the season vs quality of chance creation later on, and some outliers like Aguero who will have lots of chances and still outperform his xG)

 

[Cassidy]

yes, see ole and xg thread

From what I can see overall we're about level. Our expected goals from the first 4 games is 7.65 and we have scored 7, we are hardly running so much under.

This is because we outperformed vs Chelsea and even in the games where we underperformed it was usually only by 1 goal

The issue is we have conceded more than we should have, again not by much so far though

https://understat.com/team/Manchester_United/2019

In fact from open play we are actually outperforming xGoals our issue has been we have missed penalties

 

[sunama]

What's with the fixation with xG?
Actual goals is what I care about...not xG. Or is this a way of trying to make out that we actually won the league, because our xG was the highest?

 

[SilentWitness]

I feel sick.

 

[Anustart89]

From what I can see overall we're about level. Our expected goals from the first 4 games is 7.65 and we have scored 7, we are hardly running so much under.

This is because we outperformed vs Chelsea and even in the games where we underperformed it was usually only by 1 goal

The issue is we have conceded more than we should have, again not by much so far though

Are penalties included in that xG calculation? If not, our xG should be higher so meaning that we’re running under that.

 

[Cassidy]

Are penalties included in that xG calculation? If not, our xG should be higher so meaning that we’re running under that.

It is included

 

[Anustart89]

It is included

Ah so basically we have an xG of 5 from open play over four games, yeah? With our set of non-clinical attackers it emphasises the problem which we’ve been able to see with our own eyes, we simply can’t create chances from open play against parked buses. Need to push Pogba forward and/or get Gomes in for Lingard.

 

[Cassidy]

Ah so basically we have an xG of 5 from open play over four games, yeah? With our set of non-clinical attackers it emphasises the problem which we’ve been able to see with our own eyes, we simply can’t create chances from open play against parked buses. Need to push Pogba forward and/or get Gomes in for Lingard.

It actually shows we have been clinical...

 

[Anustart89]

It actually shows we have been clinical...

Because James is pulling our goals to xG ratio up. I’m not expecting him to be our main source of goals for the season. We need to create lots of chances so that Rashford and Martial can keep scoring.

 

[Cassidy]

Because James is pulling our goals to xG ratio up. I’m not expecting him to be our main source of goals for the season. We need to create lots of chances so that Rashford and Martial can keep scoring.

Martial is also positive in xGoals btw

 

[Pogue Mahone]

What's with the fixation with xG?
Actual goals is what I care about...not xG. Or is this a way of trying to make out that we actually won the league, because our xG was the highest?

Says he has no interest in xG.

Posts in a thread about xG.

 

[JustAGuest]

What's with the fixation with xG?
Actual goals is what I care about...not xG. Or is this a way of trying to make out that we actually won the league, because our xG was the highest?

Then do not post?

Some find interest in seeing how much possession a team has, others are interested distance covered, shots taken, home and away form, etc. It's another angle to view the game from, and if you understand what it implicates, then you have an additional level of insight.

 

[Mibabalou]

The issue here lies with what the stat xG is.

It takes the average goals scored from a shot from that position.


Ronaldo / Messi all very good players are better than average players so will outperform xG; it simple a way to tell you who outperforms averages which we already knew they were above avg players.

 

[JustAGuest]

The issue here lies with what the stat xG is.

It takes the average goals scored from a shot from that position.


Ronaldo / Messi all very good players are better than average players so will outperform xG; it simple a way to tell you who outperforms averages which we already knew they were above avg players.

As mentioned in the OP, Ronaldo has only done this in 1 of his past 5 seasons. Perhaps it implies that his main strength is getting into good positions, rather than his finishing?

 

[sparx99]

From what I can see overall we're about level. Our expected goals from the first 4 games is 7.65 and we have scored 7, we are hardly running so much under.

This is because we outperformed vs Chelsea and even in the games where we underperformed it was usually only by 1 goal

The issue is we have conceded more than we should have, again not by much so far though

https://understat.com/team/Manchester_United/2019

In fact from open play we are actually outperforming xGoals our issue has been we have missed penalties

Doesn't that suggest our problem is chance creation not chance conversion? Or in other words, Rashford and Martial don't miss that many it's just we don't provide that many chances?

 

[JustAGuest]

From what I can see overall we're about level. Our expected goals from the first 4 games is 7.65 and we have scored 7, we are hardly running so much under.

This is because we outperformed vs Chelsea and even in the games where we underperformed it was usually only by 1 goal

The issue is we have conceded more than we should have, again not by much so far though

https://understat.com/team/Manchester_United/2019

In fact from open play we are actually outperforming xGoals our issue has been we have missed penalties

I think the xPts metric on the site is more telling in this case. We are underperforming this by a massive 4.34, more than any other team in the league.

 

[Anustart89]

Martial is also positive in xGoals btw

Fair enough, but IMO it still highlights the point I was trying to make, ie that we create too few chances from open play.

Creating chances worth five goals from open play in four games is simply not enough for a team aspiring to be near the top of the league. It forces us to be clinical in our finishing and leaves us in a situation where one goal conceded has a high chance of costing us points.

I’d rather have many more chances created and a higher xG to aspire to match than relying on clinical finishing throughout a 38 game season.

 

[Cassidy]

Doesn't that suggest our problem is chance creation not chance conversion? Or in other words, Rashford and Martial don't miss that many it's just we don't provide that many chances?

Yes

 

[Codie]

I only just recently heard about this xG stat and I know a lot of people in the other xG threads say it’s worthless and bollocks, but I find it a really interesting stat. Of course it doesn’t tell the complete picture but it does give some insight into certain situations, the Messi and Ronaldo stats have emphasised this for me.

It would be cool to have been able to see some stats of past players, such as Ronaldo and compare to Messi - though I bet Messi comes up on top of anyone.

 

[Cassidy]

Fair enough, but IMO it still highlights the point I was trying to make, ie that we create too few chances from open play.

Creating chances worth five goals from open play in four games is simply not enough for a team aspiring to be near the top of the league. It forces us to be clinical in our finishing and leaves us in a situation where one goal conceded has a high chance of costing us points.

I’d rather have many more chances created and a higher xG to aspire to match than relying on clinical finishing throughout a 38 game season.

I agree, I just pointed out that the data didn't support your comment about non clinical strikers. We have a creativity issue for sure, you don't need stats to tell you that!

 

[giorno]

I think the xPts metric on the site is more telling in this case. We are underperforming this by a massive 4.34, more than any other team in the league.

The xPts from understat is kind of worthless since it doesn't take stuff such as score situation into account. Their xG also counts double chances that end in a goal as separate

 

[JustAGuest]

The xPts from understat is kind of worthless since it doesn't take stuff such as score situation into account. Their xG also counts double chances that end in a goal as separate

Isn't that a problem with their xG stat in general in that case, not specifically the xPts? I know there are better models out there, but unfortunately they aren't as available to the public as understat.

Edit: unless you mean the state of the game, such as a team being 1-0 down having to push for a goal, and then creating more chances (the defending team may also get a high quality counter as a result of this). I guess it's worthwhile to always consider the context of each game.

 

[giorno]

Isn't that a problem with their xG stat in general in that case, not specifically the xPts? I know there are better models out there, but unfortunately they aren't as available to the public as understat.

Yes but their xPts is based on their xG. And the xG by itself has some issues but i don't know if it's broken or anything. The xPts does, because games are directly affected by score situation. xG just tells you who had the better chances

 

[JustAGuest]

Yes but their xPts is based on their xG. And the xG by itself has some issues but i don't know if it's broken or anything. The xPts does, because games are directly affected by score situation. xG just tells you who had the better chances

Yeah, I realised in my edit above. It's a valid point, but I feel that weighting up each team's chances against each other will in general form a fair assessment of the game.

 

[giorno]

Yeah, I realised in my edit above. It's a valid point, but I feel that weighting up each team's chances against each other will in general form a fair assessment of the game.

It does. It tells you who had the better chances. Which in some cases isn't the same as who should have won the game

 

[Ventura]

A guy who scores spot on his xG is Jesse Lingard, with 0,04 xG this season. Matic, who only played 20 minutes, managed more than that.

 

[kps88]

Dan James is +2 so far and doing well

Does that mean he's doing well or that he's maybe over performed in his first few games?

 

[Grande]

yes, see ole and xg thread

Which thread is that? Did a quick search and couldn’t find it.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Does that mean he's doing well or that he's maybe over performed in his first few games?

I didn't include this season in my OP because its early days. It seems unlikely to me that he'll keep scoring low probability goals all season. If he does he'll be one of the best in Europe.

 

[roonster09]

Which thread is that? Did a quick search and couldn’t find it.

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/ole-and-xg.445613/

 

[Cassidy]

Does that mean he's doing well or that he's maybe over performed in his first few games?

Overperforming in your first few games is doing well isn't it.

 

[Ekeke]

As mentioned in the OP, Ronaldo has only done this in 1 of his past 5 seasons. Perhaps it implies that his main strength is getting into good positions, rather than his finishing?

Maybe so but does that mean he isnt just as good as his goal scoring record suggests? For example Martial might be ahead every season at United, but there are clearly times when his movement hasnt been very good and he wasnt getting into positions to even suggest getting a goal. Rashford's movement to get into those positions tends to be a bit better, but maybe he's been less clinical. Either way neither is as good as they could have been and both scored the goals they did.