New Manager

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
xG seems to be the poster boy stat for analytics and data in general, at a time when such things are becoming more prevalent. I'm not convinced that data-driven clubs like Brentford are really spending much time looking at xG specifically, I'd imagine it's much more specific and detailed stuff they're looking at. From what I can tell, xG is just a simple, high-level representation of chance creation that's a bit more reliable than shots on target.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kevin Francis
PLT said:
xG seems to be the poster boy stat for analytics and data in general, at a time when such things are becoming more prevalent. I'm not convinced that data-driven clubs like Brentford are really spending much time looking at xG specifically, I'd imagine it's much more specific and detailed stuff they're looking at. From what I can tell, xG is just a simple, high-level representation of chance creation that's a bit more reliable than shots on target.
Click to expand...
Deffo. I’d say it’s pretty commonplace now. Data driven clubs will be going much much deeper than XG. I heard one the other day and I can’t remember the name for it but it’s basically a measure for how many times a player does something that they wouldn’t be expected to do in a given situation. Making them unpredictable. These analysts certainly go in deep. Still room for the good old eye test in my opinion though, the underlying data just separates the wheat from the chaff.
 
Kevin Francis said:
Deffo. I’d say it’s pretty commonplace now. Data driven clubs will be going much much deeper than XG. I heard one the other day and I can’t remember the name for it but it’s basically a measure for how many times a player does something that they wouldn’t be expected to do in a given situation. Making them unpredictable. These analysts certainly go in deep. Still room for the good old eye test in my opinion though, the underlying data just separates the wheat from the chaff.
Click to expand...

But how the hell do you measure unpredictable, sometimes it can be great and outwit the opposition or score an own goal
 
Kevin Francis said:
Yes but no two chances are the same. The amount of variables are too great. Wet pitch. Windy day. Uneven pitch. Crowd noise. How set the player is before they take their shot etc etc. I’m not saying it’s not a good tool. I think it’s great to be honest. I just mean it’s not clear cut and there’s a degree of subjectivity
Click to expand...
Nobby Stiles only scored goal(s) when he was wearing his false teeth - FACT 100 % of the time.

You must log in or register to see images
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kevin Francis
PLT said:
xG seems to be the poster boy stat for analytics and data in general, at a time when such things are becoming more prevalent. I'm not convinced that data-driven clubs like Brentford are really spending much time looking at xG specifically, I'd imagine it's much more specific and detailed stuff they're looking at. From what I can tell, xG is just a simple, high-level representation of chance creation that's a bit more reliable than shots on target.
Click to expand...

It's certainly a more reliable metric to judge players on than the old "Go to wikipedia, look at goals scored in games played and draw a conclusion on striker's ability".
 
  • Like
Reactions: NewcastleTiger and Chazz Rheinhold
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back