|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 6, 2021 10:24:48 GMT
Help me please people. What stat apart from 'goals for' tells you more about which team was more effective in a single game?
I am coming to the conclusion that there are statistical anomalies in football that we as fans still don't understand fully.
I am a real advocate for keeping football simple, but finding the right player at the right price seems to be so complicated that there has to be a simpler way of looking at it.
I am not sure about the price because at our level a lot of transfers are free.
I do not believe we can be fooled by possession % anymore.
It doesn't always reflect the efficiency and effectiveness of a player or team's performance and often gives a false sense of dominance.
Teams that keep the ball but don't penetrate often do this, and who can forget that Leicester won the PL with an average possession of 35%.
My idea is that there are 6 main stats which are best used as a percentage of the passes the team has had to show its overall effectiveness and efficiency, given that the number of passes defines possession.
Chances Created
Set Pieces
Shots
Shots on Target
Crosses from Open Play
Goals
With some loading for goals and shots on target you would certainly get a better idea of how efficient the team has been with their possession.
For example.
If Rovers beat Mansfield 2-1 with 80% possession and 21 Shots 10 of which are on target, but only scored twice, how effective were they? They had far too much of the ball to only score 2 goals
There is an argument to say Mansfield performed more efficiently scoring once with 20% possession.
Flip that to a 1-0 win for Mansfield and Rovers need to take a long hard look at what they do with their possession.
If they won 5-0 the stats above should also reflect their dominance efficiently and effectively.
I will follow this up as we go over weekend with the scores in L2 and beyond but let me know your thoughts and also if there are any other stats that would best show a team's effective use of their possession.
UTG #Moneyball
|
|
warehamgas
Predictions League
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,455 
|
Post by warehamgas on Aug 6, 2021 10:36:48 GMT
QAll good questions mango. Like you I like to keep it simple. Points gained, goals for and goals against are the best. Sometimes if you watch the game a gut feeling will tell you if we’re a good side or not. When we have the ball we should attack, when we haven’t got it we should defend as a team.
As an aside, when we went out of the league in ‘14 our defence was very good and conceded fewer than half the teams. But we couldn’t score. And Michael Smith and JJOT were in the divisional team. Yet we went down, statistics mean little when you don’t score enough, or at least more than you concede or get enough points. Which to me points to game management and I’m not sure there’s too many stats for that.
Hopefully this year with our recruitment we have leaders who can boss and manage a game.
UTG!
|
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Aug 6, 2021 10:47:07 GMT
You can do owt you like with stats.
As with Luke McCormick, he didn't score prolifically, yet his value to the team was priceless.
|
|
GasMacc1
Les Bradd
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,423
|
Post by GasMacc1 on Aug 6, 2021 11:22:52 GMT
I've always been sceptical of the "Chances Created" / "Shots on Target" / "Shots" categories.
Gazza's failure to convert that cross by the length of a stud against Germany in Euro 96 might not have registered in the stats, but you couldn't come much closer to scoring without actually putting the ball in the net.
Conversely, an off-balance "shot" with your wrong foot from 25 yards that the keeper fields with one hand might count as a shot on target, even though in truth it is just a sign of the team's failure to break through a well-drilled solid defensive unit.
It's difficult for the analysts to keep a tally, but as a fan you know whether you have seen something to make you jump up from your seat, or if the opposition has made your heart skip a beat.
|
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 6, 2021 11:56:04 GMT
QAll good questions mango. Like you I like to keep it simple. Points gained, goals for and goals against are the best. Sometimes if you watch the game a gut feeling will tell you if we’re a good side or not. When we have the ball we should attack, when we haven’t got it we should defend as a team. As an aside, when we went out of the league in ‘14 our defence was very good and conceded fewer than half the teams. But we couldn’t score. And Michael Smith and JJOT were in the divisional team. Yet we went down, statistics mean little when you don’t score enough, or at least more than you concede or get enough points. Which to me points to game management and I’m not sure there’s too many stats for that. Hopefully this year with our recruitment we have leaders who can boss and manage a game. UTG! Note we went down with 50 pts as well which is the highest ever. |
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 6, 2021 11:56:55 GMT
I've always been sceptical of the "Chances Created" / "Shots on Target" / "Shots" categories. Gazza's failure to convert that cross by the length of a stud against Germany in Euro 96 might not have registered in the stats, but you couldn't come much closer to scoring without actually putting the ball in the net. Conversely, an off-balance "shot" with your wrong foot from 25 yards that the keeper fields with one hand might count as a shot on target, even though in truth it is just a sign of the team's failure to break through a well-drilled solid defensive unit. It's difficult for the analysts to keep a tally, but as a fan you know whether you have seen something to make you jump up from your seat, or if the opposition has made your heart skip a beat. Skip a beat might be a good stat |
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 6, 2021 20:27:53 GMT
I've always been sceptical of the "Chances Created" / "Shots on Target" / "Shots" categories. Gazza's failure to convert that cross by the length of a stud against Germany in Euro 96 might not have registered in the stats, but you couldn't come much closer to scoring without actually putting the ball in the net. Conversely, an off-balance "shot" with your wrong foot from 25 yards that the keeper fields with one hand might count as a shot on target, even though in truth it is just a sign of the team's failure to break through a well-drilled solid defensive unit. It's difficult for the analysts to keep a tally, but as a fan you know whether you have seen something to make you jump up from your seat, or if the opposition has made your heart skip a beat. Chances created is a measure of what they have done with all their possession. Zain Westbrooke was 2nd the league as a player last season. That did not reflect in the teams goals stats. Set pieces is another one, where you can see how effective they are from corners and free kicks against their possession, did it pay off? Shots total then shots on target is a oft quoted stat but not with any relevance if not compared with their overall possession. The team who is most effective might be the team with the smash and grab 1-0 away win, with the set piece specialist, with the most accurate crossers. It should all reflect in the overall goals column and should be an anomaly, where a team has 60% possession but loses 2-0. The stats must reflect how the game turned out, break that down to individual players and you will then see the most valuable. Hence #moneyball. Westbrooke is effective at something. He is a specialist at something and should be played to his strengths, not as a square peg and not expected to do stuff he does not specialise in. You don't ask Anssi to play on the wing. |
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 6, 2021 20:58:48 GMT
So tonight's game as an example, a perfect example of an anomaly.
Bournemouth
Goals 2
Possession 56%
Shots 7
On Target 4
Corners 4
WBA
Goals 2
Possession 44%
Shots 15
OT 5
Corners 8
Tell me who was more effective and efficient?
There is more to come from this.
I have to ask, who on WBA team, created the most chances, who won the ball most, who ran the furthest, how they created that many shots and set pieces from so little possession.
There would be more challenging questions levelled at Bournemouth who look as though they were passing for the sake of it, especially to only have 7 shots in the entire game, although they did score twice.
|
|
warehamgas
Predictions League
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,455
|
Post by warehamgas on Aug 6, 2021 23:21:19 GMT
So tonight's game as an example, a perfect example of an anomaly. Bournemouth Goals 2 Possession 56% Shots 7 On Target 4 Corners 4 WBA Goals 2 Possession 44% Shots 15 OT 5 Corners 8 Tell me who was more effective and efficient? There is more to come from this. I have to ask, who on WBA team, created the most chances, who won the ball most, who ran the furthest, how they created that many shots and set pieces from so little possession. There would be more challenging questions levelled at Bournemouth who look as though they were passing for the sake of it, especially to only have 7 shots in the entire game, although they did score twice. I’ll tell you mango. We’ve just got back from it! AFCB we’re glad to get a point but they had a team with several youngsters. After 18 months I hardly recognised any players! WBA created few chances but they bombarded AFCB aerially, corners, throw ins, free kicks. They thought AFCB were weaker in the air and really should have won but they didn’t. AFCB gutsed it out. WBA were huge! Man mountains and they bullied AFCB physically but the crowd got behind AFCB and got a point, well deserved. I haven’t seen the stats on the BBC website yet so just reacting to what you’ve said: WBA didn’t create much and from the 5 on target, they scored 2 so they had 3 others. I think they were all headers. I don’t remember Travers the keeper having to save any shots, apart from a few headers. AFCB passed around at the back esp from goal kicks before nearly getting into trouble and then a long ball! Crazy what they try to do playing it short when a team is pressing. Overall I’m surprised by the possession %. The impression I got was WBA had more because at times AFCB were under a battering in the air and it was very physical. I would have said WBA had more possession if I hadn’t see those figures, very surprising. Btw, the ref played one or two advantages esp for AFCB’s first goal but he let some bad fouls by WBA go which really got the crowd going esp one early on when it should have been a yellow card. He was quite poor overall. UTG! |
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 7, 2021 7:58:00 GMT
So tonight's game as an example, a perfect example of an anomaly. Bournemouth Goals 2 Possession 56% Shots 7 On Target 4 Corners 4 WBA Goals 2 Possession 44% Shots 15 OT 5 Corners 8 Tell me who was more effective and efficient? There is more to come from this. I have to ask, who on WBA team, created the most chances, who won the ball most, who ran the furthest, how they created that many shots and set pieces from so little possession. There would be more challenging questions levelled at Bournemouth who look as though they were passing for the sake of it, especially to only have 7 shots in the entire game, although they did score twice. I’ll tell you mango. We’ve just got back from it! AFCB we’re glad to get a point but they had a team with several youngsters. After 18 months I hardly recognised any players! WBA created few chances but they bombarded AFCB aerially, corners, throw ins, free kicks. They thought AFCB were weaker in the air and really should have won but they didn’t. AFCB gutsed it out. WBA were huge! Man mountains and they bullied AFCB physically but the crowd got behind AFCB and got a point, well deserved. I haven’t seen the stats on the BBC website yet so just reacting to what you’ve said: WBA didn’t create much and from the 5 on target, they scored 2 so they had 3 others. I think they were all headers. I don’t remember Travers the keeper having to save any shots, apart from a few headers. AFCB passed around at the back esp from goal kicks before nearly getting into trouble and then a long ball! Crazy what they try to do playing it short when a team is pressing. Overall I’m surprised by the possession %. The impression I got was WBA had more because at times AFCB were under a battering in the air and it was very physical. I would have said WBA had more possession if I hadn’t see those figures, very surprising. Btw, the ref played one or two advantages esp for AFCB’s first goal but he let some bad fouls by WBA go which really got the crowd going esp one early on when it should have been a yellow card. He was quite poor overall. UTG! Cheers for this. You said about the crowd which I still can't get used to, it's been too long. That does make sense looking at the stats which I got from the sky sports app. For my purpose I need better than what they provide. The Championship is a league of athletes who can also play a bit which is why L1 teams struggle to establish themselves ala Wycombe, Rotherham, etc. The aerial bombardment and percentage football is exactly what I mean about being efficient and effective with your possession. Bournemouth did nothing with theirs and WBA should have won. Thanks for the analysis from the front line. I bet it was great to see live football again. |
|
warehamgas
Predictions League
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,455
|
Post by warehamgas on Aug 7, 2021 9:47:09 GMT
Mango, you’re absolutely right about it being good to be back. The crowd made a difference last night. WBA were the better team overall but AFCB had 2/3 of the best moves, football-wise. Had there been no crowd I’d say that WBA would have won but the crowd got behind them and they got the draw. A crowd makes a big difference.
UTG!
|
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 7, 2021 22:15:52 GMT
Our game
Mansfield
Possession 56%
Passes 319
Chances created which can only be seen as shots plus corners 23
/ 7.21%
Shots 17 / 5.33%
OT 3 / 0.94%
Goals 2 / 0.63%
Taking these as percentages of the number of passes gives you some comparison with the opposition and future games. So it won't mean a lot to begin with until we get patterns and trends.
Rovers
Possession 44%
Passes 272
Chances 7 / 2.57%
Shots 3 / 1.1%
OT 2 / 0.74%
Goals 1 / 0.37%
So as a comparison, the stats back up the result and the dominance of the winner. Mansfield would want to look at their shot accuracy.
As we have mostly concluded Rovers were 2nd best but not far off.
|
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 20, 2021 7:07:57 GMT
This is an interesting angle on it, shows a lot of what we already knew, especially the fact Oldham had very little plan.  |
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 25, 2021 6:45:43 GMT
Questions which have answers that may prove or disprove the theory of their own importance in a game.
How often do you have to shoot at goal to score a goal?
Are corners important?
How big is the disadvantage of a team with a player on a yellow card?
How effective are counter attacks vs set pieces?
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,278
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Aug 25, 2021 8:56:19 GMT
Questions which have answers that may prove or disprove the theory of their own importance in a game. How often do you have to shoot at goal to score a goal? Are corners important? How big is the disadvantage of a team with a player on a yellow card? How effective are counter attacks vs set pieces? Depends if you have the players and tactic to be good with them. I don’t think we are, in fact I know we are not |
|
|
|
Post by brizzleblue52 on Aug 25, 2021 13:41:30 GMT
The stats at Exeter showed we had just as many shots as them, which is true, except only 1 went on. Thank fully Baldwin has gone. Responsible for 2 of their goals. (watch the video).
Also I remember the Garner said after a defeat that we had the majority of posession and completed the most passes. What he didn't say was that both figures were about our defence spending a lot of time passing it to each other
|
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 25, 2021 14:17:30 GMT
Questions which have answers that may prove or disprove the theory of their own importance in a game. How often do you have to shoot at goal to score a goal? Are corners important? How big is the disadvantage of a team with a player on a yellow card? How effective are counter attacks vs set pieces? Depends if you have the players and tactic to be good with them. I don’t think we are, in fact I know we are not Counter attack goals are proven to be nearly 6% more common than corner goals. |
|
|
|
Post by mangogas15 on Aug 25, 2021 14:18:32 GMT
The stats at Exeter showed we had just as many shots as them, which is true, except only 1 went on. Thank fully Baldwin has gone. Responsible for 2 of their goals. (watch the video). Also I remember the Garner said after a defeat that we had the majority of posession and completed the most passes. What he didn't say was that both figures were about our defence spending a lot of time passing it to each other Exactly, the stats suggest that was a 3-3 or 2-2 game and a very good performance from the away side. Which is why these particular stats are somewhat dated imo |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Aug 25, 2021 15:14:51 GMT
The stats at Exeter showed we had just as many shots as them, which is true, except only 1 went on. Thank fully Baldwin has gone. Responsible for 2 of their goals. (watch the video). Also I remember the Garner said after a defeat that we had the majority of posession and completed the most passes. What he didn't say was that both figures were about our defence spending a lot of time passing it to each other that's my main memory of the BG era - lots of Barca-style tippy tappy around the back, but little ability to slice through going forward. It was pretty, but a bit dull I felt that we called time on it a little early, tho acknowledge that there weren't many signs that it was going to suddenly 'click' it seems he's off to a decent start at Swindle though |
|
baselswh
Joined: May 2021
Posts: 4,666
Member is Online
|
Post by baselswh on Aug 25, 2021 18:10:31 GMT
The stats at Exeter showed we had just as many shots as them, which is true, except only 1 went on. Thank fully Baldwin has gone. Responsible for 2 of their goals. (watch the video). Also I remember the Garner said after a defeat that we had the majority of posession and completed the most passes. What he didn't say was that both figures were about our defence spending a lot of time passing it to each other that's my main memory of the BG era - lots of Barca-style tippy tappy around the back, but little ability to slice through going forward. It was pretty, but a bit dull I felt that we called time on it a little early, tho acknowledge that there weren't many signs that it was going to suddenly 'click' it seems he's off to a decent start at Swindle though BG said he had learnt alot at his time with Rovers.Maybe he has. |
|
