Wasted chances? (6 Viewers)

[Frostie]

Picking up on comments on other threads about our missing of opportunities (namely "if Godden was available v QPR" or "if we had ourselves a Brereton-Diaz we'd be where Blackburn are" etc.) I thought it might be interesting to do an analysis of our goal scoring & creating stats.

Is it fair to say we're missing lots of gilt-edged chances?
Or are we failing with our final ball?
Perhaps we're just taking poor quality shots overall?

So... Some numbers & my thoughts on them.

We've scored 34 goals from an xG of 34.9 (9th in the league).
2 of those are own goals admittedly so 32 from an xG of 34.9, not massive underperformance by any means.
For example you can attribute 0.77xG to Gyökeres's penalty miss v Barnsley alone.



One number that stands out is our number of shots per game.
We rank 3rd for Shots per game (13.9)
& joint 2nd for Shots on Target per game (4.9)



Thankfully, compared to last season, we rank only 8th for Woodwork hit so far this season!

So on this basis, it certainly seems we're creating shooting opportunities. Are they 'good' opportunities though?

I think some were surprised by the xG numbers from the QPR game (1.82 for us v 2.61 for them) considering we had 21 shots, but actually, I think they do a pretty decent job of underlining our problem, namely we take lots of poor quality shots. By that I don't mean the technique of the shot itself but more that we take lots of shots from unfavorable positions & low xG opportunities.

For example, Todd Kane had 2 shots v QPR that combined for a grand total of 0.05 xG, O'Hare with 4 shots for 0.18 xG, Hamer with 3 shots totalling 0.14x G etc etc.
The highest single chance xG was Waghorn's late chance for 0.50 xG.




So, Chances Created...

We rank 15th in the league for "Big Chances Created" with 29.




A "big" chance is defined as one that you typically have an above average chance of scoring from. Different providers can rate them slightly differently but typically assume anything over 0.30 xG is deemed a "Big" chance.
So, really, especially when you compare this number to some of the other teams (less than Birmingham, Cardiff & a handful more than Peterborough, Hull, Reading etc) we don't really create as many high quality scoring opportunities as our shot numbers & overall control of games would indicate.


So, to conclude...
I still maintain we're not far off where we want to be but we lack a little quality & cutting edge in the final third. A little of that is on the finishing but the vast majority, at least in my opinion, is on the final pass, chance creation & shot selection.

*EDIT
To add to this as naturally Gyökeres is coming under scrutiny for his goalscoring drought, his 9 goals have come from 8.73 xG

Interested to hear others thoughts.

 

---

[CovBrummie94]

It's always felt like it's the final ball that lets us down more than the finishing and this backs it up. Great work.

 

[Evo1883]

I think some fans just think we are a better than we actually are , yes we are a good side , but the constant top 6 talk has somewhat evaporated reality .

We are still progressing , it's visible on the pitch , and it's nice to watch too

 

[rexo87]

Great post, thankyou. It is the edge of the area that we struggle. We also rarely have a striker played through on goal mainly due to our lack of pace up front (the only real one i can think of was Vik vs Middlesbrough). Usually, we end uo faffing around on the edge of the area with little flicks that never really come off

Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk

 

[Liquid Gold]

We seem to be so indecisive when we get near the goal.

A couple of times when we were overloading against QPR we completely fluffed our lines. I'm thinking when Hamer played To Gyo and Gyo or Wag to Shipley, both time it seemed like the attacker wanted to take the shot but then decided to go for the pass when the opportunity had gone.

We ofer get ourselves in great positions when playing our high intensity press but they seem like deer in headlights about what to do.

 

[stevefloyd]

I think some fans just think we are a better than we actually are , yes we are a good side , but the constant top 6 talk has somewhat evaporated reality .

We are still progressing , it's visible on the pitch , and it's nice to watch too

Absolutely correct...we all want more but its our 2nd season back in the Championship it takes time to build a very good team unless you have loads of money and even then its not guaranteed..we are ticking along nicely

 

[shmmeee]

So you’re saying it’s all O’Hares fault?

(Kidding!)

I think a large amount of the thinking bringing in Lane and Bidwell was to get better delivery into the box and create better chances. As others have said little pace up front means we rarely put someone through down the middle and when we do they are often caught before they get to the area.

 

[Frostie]

We seem to be so indecisive when we get near the goal.

A couple of times when we were overloading against QPR we completely fluffed our lines. I'm thinking when Hamer played To Gyo and Gyo or Wag to Shipley, both time it seemed like the attacker wanted to take the shot but then decided to go for the pass when the opportunity had gone.

We ofer get ourselves in great positions when playing our high intensity press but they seem like deer in headlights about what to do.

Yeah, I'd agree with that completely.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

Great thread

 

[Frostie]

So you’re saying it’s all O’Hares fault?

(Kidding!)

I think a large amount of the thinking bringing in Lane and Bidwell was to get better delivery into the box and create better chances. As others have said little pace up front means we rarely put someone through down the middle and when we do they are often caught before they get to the area.

O'Hare creates lots of chances, still up there with the highest in the league, everything we do goes through him, but we don't always make the right decisions meaning "big" chances.

100% agree on Kane/Bidwell.
We now have a good, balanced combination of wing-backs imo. Maatsen & Dabo have decent pace & are good dribblers, will look to get to the byline & create whilst Kane & Bidwell are unlikely to beat a man but as soon as they get time & space will look to deliver.

 

[Londonccfcfan]

Picking up on comments on other threads about our missing of opportunities (namely "if Godden was available v QPR" or "if we had ourselves a Brereton-Diaz we'd be where Blackburn are" etc.) I thought it might be interesting to do an analysis of our goal scoring & creating stats.

Is it fair to say we're missing lots of gilt-edged chances?
Or are we failing with our final ball?
Perhaps we're just taking poor quality shots overall?

So... Some numbers & my thoughts on them.

We've scored 34 goals from an xG of 34.9 (9th in the league).
2 of those are own goals admittedly so 32 from an xG of 34.9, not massive underperformance by any means.
For example you can attribute 0.77xG to Gyökeres's penalty miss v Barnsley alone.

View attachment 23637

One number that stands out is our number of shots per game.
We rank 3rd for Shots per game (13.9)
& joint 2nd for Shots on Target per game (4.9)

View attachment 23638

Thankfully, compared to last season, we rank only 8th for Woodwork hit so far this season!

So on this basis, it certainly seems we're creating shooting opportunities. Are they 'good' opportunities though?

I think some were surprised by the xG numbers from the QPR game (1.82 for us v 2.61 for them) considering we had 21 shots, but actually, I think they do a pretty decent job of underlining our problem, namely we take lots of poor quality shots. By that I don't mean the technique of the shot itself but more that we take lots of shots from unfavorable positions & low xG opportunities.

For example, Todd Kane had 2 shots v QPR that combined for a grand total of 0.05 xG, O'Hare with 4 shots for 0.18 xG, Hamer with 3 shots totalling 0.14x G etc etc.
The highest single chance xG was Waghorn's late chance for 0.50 xG.

View attachment 23639
View attachment 23640

So, Chances Created...

We rank 15th in the league for "Big Chances Created" with 29.

View attachment 23641
View attachment 23642

A "big" chance is defined as one that you typically have an above average chance of scoring from. Different providers can rate them slightly differently but typically assume anything over 0.30 xG is deemed a "Big" chance.
So, really, especially when you compare this number to some of the other teams (less than Birmingham, Cardiff & a handful more than Peterborough, Hull, Reading etc) we don't really create as many high quality scoring opportunities as our shot numbers & overall control of games would indicate.


So, to conclude...
I still maintain we're not far off where we want to be but we lack a little quality & cutting edge in the final third. A little of that is on the finishing but the vast majority, at least in my opinion, is on the final pass, chance creation & shot selection.

*EDIT
To add to this as naturally Gyökeres is coming under scrutiny for his goalscoring drought, his 9 goals have come from 8.73 xG

Interested to hear others thoughts.

Excellent mate. So could it be the other end thats letting us down. The games about being good in both boxes.

Its fine margins.

 

[Liquid Gold]

Yeah, I'd agree with that completely.

I think that probably affects the xG of our chances too, we're overplaying and getting ourselves into poorer positions.

I suspect the xG would be higher if we a. took the shots initially or b. played the ball earlier.

It's a bit like we're still adjusting to the speed of the level.

 

[Londonccfcfan]

We really shouldnt have conceded 2 goals vs QPR, West Brom or SWANSEA. albe it we are wasting chances.

 

[SBT]

Interesting numbers - which of those three metrics out of the three tables you've posted there is most predictive of a team's place in the league?

I also wonder if our apparent gameplan (lots of shots on goal, few big chances, but a decent conversion rate) is more likely to result in the kinds of big swings in form we're seeing now.

 

[Frostie]

Excellent mate. So could it be the other end thats letting us down. The games about being good in both boxes.

Its fine margins.

Good question.

I think defensively we stack up pretty well.

As much as we all have rightly praised Simon Moore, he has on the whole been pretty well protected.
We average 2.2 Saves Per Game (56 saves total)



Of which, Moore doesn't really have to make an above average quality of saves in his Goals Prevented statistics.
*I have misplaced the graphic that shows this, you'll have to take my word for it that he's just slightly above average*

We are 17th for xG Conceded/Against (or xGA), a table you want to be bottom of.

View attachment 23645

All in all, our xG & xGA data very closely tallies with the league table so results are we're probably performing as expected.

What is interesting however is how fine the margins are.
If you have a look at this xG Table (a little over a week old now) which basically awards wins/points based on your xG & xGA for every game.
If we'd got what we "deserved" we could be up in 5th.

 

[Skyblueweeman]

Can someone explain in laymans terms what xg is?

 

[Greggs]

Can someone explain in laymans terms what xg is?

how many chances Ohare misses - divided by the amount of fouls hamer usually makes - multiplied by waghorn's wages.

 

[cc84cov]

If O’Hare took his chances we would be clear at the top

 

[cc84cov]

how many chances Ohare misses - divided by the amount of fouls hamer usually makes - multiplied by waghorn's wages.

 

[shmmeee]

Can someone explain in laymans terms what xg is?

Its a measure of the quality of a chance. If the average player would score that chance from that position half the time the xG is 0.5. For example a penalty is 0.76 or something because penalties are scored 76% of the time on average.

Players or teams that score above their xG are scoring harder chances (e.g. Hamer who only scores screamers) and those below their xG are missing easy chances (or lots of average chances).

It’s not perfect, all kinds of things like how the ball was played in, etc aren’t taken into account as far as I know, but it’s a good guide to whether someone is missing sitters or creating clear cut chances.

 

[Frostie]

Interesting numbers - which of those three metrics out of the three tables you've posted there is most predictive of a team's place in the league?

I also wonder if our apparent gameplan (lots of shots on goal, few big chances, but a decent conversion rate) is more likely to result in the kinds of big swings in form we're seeing now.

Generally speaking, I know people have mixed views on it, but xG (and by extension expected points) is a very good long term measure. It may not accurately predict the final table every season but given enough data it is very, very good at showing trends & whether a run of form is sustainable or not. The old mantra of "The league table never lies" isn't 100% true!

I like this video which some of you may find interesting:

 

[djr8369]

Picking up on comments on other threads about our missing of opportunities (namely "if Godden was available v QPR" or "if we had ourselves a Brereton-Diaz we'd be where Blackburn are" etc.) I thought it might be interesting to do an analysis of our goal scoring & creating stats.

Is it fair to say we're missing lots of gilt-edged chances?
Or are we failing with our final ball?
Perhaps we're just taking poor quality shots overall?

So... Some numbers & my thoughts on them.

We've scored 34 goals from an xG of 34.9 (9th in the league).
2 of those are own goals admittedly so 32 from an xG of 34.9, not massive underperformance by any means.
For example you can attribute 0.77xG to Gyökeres's penalty miss v Barnsley alone.

View attachment 23637

One number that stands out is our number of shots per game.
We rank 3rd for Shots per game (13.9)
& joint 2nd for Shots on Target per game (4.9)

View attachment 23638

Thankfully, compared to last season, we rank only 8th for Woodwork hit so far this season!

So on this basis, it certainly seems we're creating shooting opportunities. Are they 'good' opportunities though?

I think some were surprised by the xG numbers from the QPR game (1.82 for us v 2.61 for them) considering we had 21 shots, but actually, I think they do a pretty decent job of underlining our problem, namely we take lots of poor quality shots. By that I don't mean the technique of the shot itself but more that we take lots of shots from unfavorable positions & low xG opportunities.

For example, Todd Kane had 2 shots v QPR that combined for a grand total of 0.05 xG, O'Hare with 4 shots for 0.18 xG, Hamer with 3 shots totalling 0.14x G etc etc.
The highest single chance xG was Waghorn's late chance for 0.50 xG.

View attachment 23639
View attachment 23640

So, Chances Created...

We rank 15th in the league for "Big Chances Created" with 29.

View attachment 23641
View attachment 23642

A "big" chance is defined as one that you typically have an above average chance of scoring from. Different providers can rate them slightly differently but typically assume anything over 0.30 xG is deemed a "Big" chance.
So, really, especially when you compare this number to some of the other teams (less than Birmingham, Cardiff & a handful more than Peterborough, Hull, Reading etc) we don't really create as many high quality scoring opportunities as our shot numbers & overall control of games would indicate.


So, to conclude...
I still maintain we're not far off where we want to be but we lack a little quality & cutting edge in the final third. A little of that is on the finishing but the vast majority, at least in my opinion, is on the final pass, chance creation & shot selection.

*EDIT
To add to this as naturally Gyökeres is coming under scrutiny for his goalscoring drought, his 9 goals have come from 8.73 xG

Interested to hear others thoughts.

This is great. I’d been interested in some info on xG but didn’t know where to find it.

I think this will confirm what plenty suspected. Plenty of chances but not many clear cut ones. It does make you wonder if the coaching is already trying to address this as often the crowd are shouting “shoot” but the players are trying to work the ball into a better position still.

I think a club have a couple of data analysts now so I’m sure this is something that been looked at fairly closely.

 

[Frostie]

This is great. I’d been interested in some info on xG but didn’t know where to find it.

I think this will confirm what plenty suspected. Plenty of chances but not many clear cut ones. It does make you wonder if the coaching is already trying to address this as often the crowd are shouting “shoot” but the players are trying to work the ball into a better position still.

I think a club have a couple of data analysts now so I’m sure this is something that been looked at fairly closely.

Absolutely, it's a growing trend year on year now that there are far fewer shots from outside the penalty area at nearly all levels of the game.

What's quite interesting is that very similar analysis in Basketball (I know we have a few NBA fans on here) changed the game in completely the opposite direction & they now have far more longer range shots & higher scoring games as a result.

 

[djr8369]

I think that probably affects the xG of our chances too, we're overplaying and getting ourselves into poorer positions.

I suspect the xG would be higher if we a. took the shots initially or b. played the ball earlier.

It's a bit like we're still adjusting to the speed of the level.

Basically agree with this but think it’s speed of thought and decision making under pressure, which is the issue.

 

[djr8369]

What's quite interesting is that very similar analysis in Basketball (I know we have a few NBA fans on here) changed the game in completely the opposite direction & they now have far more longer range shots & higher scoring games as a result.

Weirdly I saw a graph of this yesterday in a blog post about investing.

 

[Skyblueweeman]

Its a measure of the quality of a chance. If the average player would score that chance from that position half the time the xG is 0.5. For example a penalty is 0.76 or something because penalties are scored 76% of the time on average.

Players or teams that score above their xG are scoring harder chances (e.g. Hamer who only scores screamers) and those below their xG are missing easy chances (or lots of average chances).

It’s not perfect, all kinds of things like how the ball was played in, etc aren’t taken into account as far as I know, but it’s a good guide to whether someone is missing sitters or creating clear cut chances.

Ta. Sounds similar to 'Strokes Gained' in golf (which I'm a big fan of).

 

[Liquid Gold]

Basically agree with this but think it’s speed of thought and decision making under pressure, which is the issue.

That's essentially what I'm trying to say. We're a good side just need that bit of ice in our veins.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Do they do similar stats for individual players? Be interesting to see how some players xG relates to their actual G.

Although on the whole I agree with creating good chances rather than taking potsshots, I do think we need to be willing to have a go a bit more from around the edge of the area - we've scored a few from there recently. Especially early in games when the keeper might be a bit nervous, or if it's someone who is usually the back-up or just back from injury. There's other times when you feel conditions like the wind or the sun could work in your favour and we don't take advantage of it.

 

[shmmeee]

Do they do similar stats for individual players? Be interesting to see how some players xG relates to their actual G.

Although on the whole I agree with creating good chances rather than taking potsshots, I do think we need to be willing to have a go a bit more from around the edge of the area - we've scored a few from there recently. Especially early in games when the keeper might be a bit nervous, or if it's someone who is usually the back-up or just back from injury. There's other times when you feel conditions like the wind or the sun could work in your favour and we don't take advantage of it.

infogol has player xG and xA, here’s O’Hare: https://www.infogol.net/en/player/callum-o'hare/11209