League Two xg Table 22/23

I've posted earlier versions of this before but we now have the complete version for the season; in short, what the League Two table looks like based on "expected goals", as opposed to the rather more important statistic of actual goals.

Take it with a pinch of salt if you like, but I do think there's something in this. It has our xG against more or less in line with the number of goals we actually conceded, but has us almost 19 goals down on what we should have scored. According to the table, that should have led to an additional 23 points and a 5th place finish, instead of 11th.

For me, it reaffirms what we anecdotally know from last season. That we lacked composure in front of goal far too often, that we often didn't take advantage of long spells of dominance in games, and that all-in-all we aren't a million miles from being a top side at this level. Yes, League Two will be more competitive next season, but I firmly believe that with a bit of tweaking and a concerted effort to address these fundamental issues, we can be a force to be reckoned with.

[img]https://experimental361.files.wordpress.com/2023/06/2022-23-l2.png[/img]

https://experimental361.com/2023/06/01/expected-goals-table-league-2-2022-23/

I think it's another affirmation of how well we did last season. At points people were losing their heads thinking we might be sucked into another relegation battle but that didn't seem remotely plausible to me. Even when I saw us lose I thought generally we looked ok.

How far do you go and give credence to this sort of stuff?

What about the sitters missed against us? Those opposition shots that hit the woodwork or were brilliantly saved by Crocombe?

What about a wrong decision by the ref that impacts a game, or by the linesman? What if subs should have been used differently, or a different team or formation adopted?

Then there is a high chance that the wrong interpretation of data can be made, perhaps in this case the chances aren't being created for the right sort of player or not created well enough.

It's like a player who is lauded for having a high percentage pass rate, when in reality he passes the ball 5 yards sideways all game.

I would be very wary of stuff like this myself.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

How far do you go and give credence to this sort of stuff?

What about the sitters missed against us? Those opposition shots that hit the woodwork or were brilliantly saved by Crocombe?

What about a wrong decision by the ref that impacts a game, or the linesman? What if subs should have been used differently, or a different team or formation adopted?

Then there is a high chance that the wrong interpretation of data can be made, perhaps in this case the chances aren't being created for the right sort of player or not created well enough.

It's like a player who is lauded for having a high percentage pass rate, when in reality he passes the ball 5 yards sideways all game.

I would be very wary of stuff like this myself.

The xg goals against would take into account those things, but I'm surprised our xg against is close to actual.

I think accuracy of these things at this level is hugely questionable. In the Premier league all matches are televised and you can replay every chance multiple times to analyse it. At this level you're relying on some anorak judging it in real time who is likely to be a fan so biased too.

I can only remember a handful of games where we dominated and had chances that didn't go in. I thought our biggest problem was creating chances, not missing them.

There's no way we deserved to be 5th on any metric last season. And anybody that thinks this is accurate has a very short memory of just how little we created at home for 80% of those games.

The makeup of our attack will be entirely different to last season though, so while this does prove we created a lot last season and had we been more clinical we'd have perhaps pushed for a playoff spot it's by no means a given that our xG will remain up next season. I think for all the chat about whether or not McAtee had a good season we'll see a downturn in our xG without him. I don't think his goal/assist stats tell close to the full story of his season and I think we were a much more creative and dynamic team when he played. Obviously, it's not all down to attack though and one of the positives to look at here is that we have retained an entire midfield (bar Morris who we hope we'll upgrade) and three out of four fullbacks that contributed to this.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

It's like a player who is lauded for having a high percentage pass rate, when in reality he passes the ball 5 yards sideways all game.

I'm not fully sold on xG either and I'm with you in that stats like this should be questioned but I don't think this 5 yard pass comparison is necessarily fair as xG is calculated specifically on quality of chances. It's not inflated by things like a daisy cutter shot from 30 yards out rolling well wide for example.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

How far do you go and give credence to this sort of stuff?

What about the sitters missed against us? Those opposition shots that hit the woodwork or were brilliantly saved by Crocombe?

What about a wrong decision by the ref that impacts a game, or the linesman? What if subs should have been used differently, or a different team or formation adopted?

Then there is a high chance that the wrong interpretation of data can be made, perhaps in this case the chances aren't being created for the right sort of player or not created well enough.

It's like a player who is lauded for having a high percentage pass rate, when in reality he passes the ball 5 yards sideways all game.

I would be very wary of stuff like this myself.

I don't recall many of those at all, if any!

Quoted from Mariner_09

I don't recall many of those at all, if any!

Not exactly every game but he pulled off quite a few superb save over the season.

I bet when Tshimanga was out for the rest of the season at Chesterfield, it made difference to their rating even though he was scoring all their goals.
It's an absolute joke

Interesting, as it ties in with another stat I saw that had us down as having the 2nd highest amounts of shots in home games, behind Northampton. Think Mark Stilton tweeted it - can anyone confirm?

What an absolute crock of garbage this new age statistic is. How can you have an end of season table based on expected goals? They were expected but they didn't come. So theres an end to it. We finished 11th and we scored some goals, some of which were expected and some weren't. Another meaningless fabricated stat for the FIFA generation. It's balderdash.

Quoted from BlackandWhiteBarmy2

What an absolute crock of garbage this new age statistic is. How can you have an end of season table based on expected goals? They were expected but they didn't come. So theres an end to it. We finished 11th and we scored some goals, some of which were expected and some weren't. Another meaningless fabricated stat for the FIFA generation. It's balderdash.

I tried to be more diplomatic in my post but of course you are absolutely right, it's a load of old balderdash. Every match is a cornucopia of mistakes, successes and what might have beens which makes trying to give statistical meaning to one part of the game meaningless.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

I tried to be more diplomatic in my post but of course you are absolutely right, it's a load of old balderdash. Every match is a cornucopia of mistakes, successes and what might have beens which makes trying to give statistical meaning to one part of the game meaningless.

And yet the xG table is not far from being reflective of the actual table. Shows us as being one the few outliers, and hey presto, our finishing could be better or we need better strikers. Who'd have thought it?

I don't mind any amount of statistics being used as long as they're not completely replacing instinct and professional knowledge..

The biggest biggest x goals underachievement in the table was Newport. Boggle in tge divisions leading scorers list so not sure that gives any confidence this means anything

Quoted from Bigdog

And yet the xG table is not far from being reflective of the actual table. Shows us as being one the few outliers, and hey presto, our finishing could be better or we need better strikers. Who'd have thought it?

I don't mind any amount of statistics being used as long as they're not completely replacing instinct and professional knowledge..

Just use the actual table then!

Of course I get what you are saying but you can analyse things anyway you like - we concede less goals we go higher in the table  ditto with scoring more.

Whatever fans think of this data stream it is helpful to see us rated near the top of the adjusted table.  Much better than being rated bottom surely?

In American spirts they have a fancy name for an analysis on how teams perform when a player is not playing for any reason.  They conclude, or try to, the impact on team performance and results when a key player or players are absent.  I would think Waterfall and Clifton would be important misses for us.  

Quoted from TownSNAFU5

Whatever fans think of this data stream it is helpful to see us rated near the top of the adjusted table.  Much better than being rated bottom surely?

In American spirts they have a fancy name for an analysis on how teams perform when a player is not playing for any reason.  They conclude, or try to, the impact on team performance and results when a key player or players are absent.  I would think Waterfall and Clifton would be important misses for us.  

It is of absolutely no value at all. We finished where we finished. It wouldn't matter if we finished top of the 'adjusted' table, the fact is we finished 11th. It is pointless issuing a table after the fact based on things that were expected to happen but didn't.

I'm all for looking at other statistics other than the league table. This gives us a look into where we are doing well or failing. Its no different from ground covered, sprints per 90, tackles won, headers won, crosses completed etc etc and surely with us moving out of the dark ages and into the modern era this is exactly the kind of data the club will be using?

Quoted from Oly1987

I'm all for looking at other statistics other than the league table. This gives us a look into where we are doing well or failing. Its no different from ground covered, sprints per 90, tackles won, headers won, crosses completed etc etc and surely with us moving out of the dark ages and into the modern era this is exactly the kind of data the club will be using?

When I was younger a college tutor proved to us that statistics (data) can be compiled, used and manipulated any way you like, to show any result you like and to achieve any objective you like and I still take this sceptical view all these years later!

I’ve always said good teams create their own luck 🍀

Last minute winners , coming back from behind and getting lots of penalties isn’t down to good luck.
It comes down to belief , not giving up and spending lots of time and having possession in the opponents penalty box

Old men in 'thinking something new is excrement' shocker.

Quoted from BlackandWhiteBarmy2

It is of absolutely no value at all. We finished where we finished. It wouldn't matter if we finished top of the 'adjusted' table, the fact is we finished 11th. It is pointless issuing a table after the fact based on things that were expected to happen but didn't.

Have to disagree on having no value. The impact of the statistic come the end of the season in real terms is zero, as has been pointed out the league table will be the league table based on the actual result of the game.

The xG stat gives us an indicator of how many goals we ‘should’ have expected to score. Feel free to debate how that is calculated all you like, I have zero idea and will simply trust the brains that came up with it.

We can all see from the stands that we haven’t had a striker in the typical mould that we can rely on to score 15-20 goals a season. Yet Leyton Orient proved you don’t need that to win a league. You need goals from all over. So whilst we’re all being archaic about the need for one player who can score 20 goals, the professional football folk will be using statistics like these to identify which of the players in certain positions are missing these chances that we ‘should’ be scoring.

If we find that between one centre midfielder and two wingers they’re collectively guilty of missing good chances to the tune of 15 goals then we find upgrades who do score those chances and hey presto we’re 15 goals and 5/6 positions better off in the league.

Some will argue that the stats tell us what we already see/know, but I bet few would believe we’ve had more shots at home than everyone bar Northampton. There will always be an objective view of our performances that tell us through experience and instinct what is/isn’t working but I’m very much of the belief that within some statistics you can find a different picture to the one your eye paints.

Quoted from gtfc_chris

Have to disagree on having no value. The impact of the statistic come the end of the season in real terms is zero, as has been pointed out the league table will be the league table based on the actual result of the game.

The xG stat gives us an indicator of how many goals we ‘should’ have expected to score. Feel free to debate how that is calculated all you like, I have zero idea and will simply trust the brains that came up with it.

We can all see from the stands that we haven’t had a striker in the typical mould that we can rely on to score 15-20 goals a season. Yet Leyton Orient proved you don’t need that to win a league. You need goals from all over. So whilst we’re all being archaic about the need for one player who can score 20 goals, the professional football folk will be using statistics like these to identify which of the players in certain positions are missing these chances that we ‘should’ be scoring.

If we find that between one centre midfielder and two wingers they’re collectively guilty of missing good chances to the tune of 15 goals then we find upgrades who do score those chances and hey presto we’re 15 goals and 5/6 positions better off in the league.

Some will argue that the stats tell us what we already see/know, but I bet few would believe we’ve had more shots at home than everyone bar Northampton. There will always be an objective view of our performances that tell us through experience and instinct what is/isn’t working but I’m very much of the belief that within some statistics you can find a different picture to the one your eye paints.

I don’t think we need in depth analysis to tell us who’s been missing these sitters and where we need to upgrade , most of us that have watched the games all season could tell you that

Quoted from grimps

I don’t think we need in depth analysis to tell us who’s been missing these sitters and where we need to upgrade , most of us that have watched the games all season could tell you that

I suppose it’s hard to argue with that. Perhaps the Club and all others who are spending vast sums on data led approaches should reconsider that tact and simply turn to forums where the fans who have been watching all season could simply tell you who to upgrade.

Out of interest, and using stats but away from the xG one, if we had a player who from the stands appeared useless and was widely criticised across the fan base, but we statistically won more ppg with him in the side than not would you go with what you see or what statistically wins us more points?

Quoted from gtfc_chris

I suppose it’s hard to argue with that. Perhaps the Club and all others who are spending vast sums on data led approaches should reconsider that tact and simply turn to forums where the fans who have been watching all season could simply tell you who to upgrade.

Out of interest, and using stats but away from the xG one, if we had a player who from the stands appeared useless and was widely criticised across the fan base, but we statistically won more ppg with him in the side than not would you go with what you see or what statistically wins us more points?

There’s always a lot more to a player than how many goals he scores.
Some players drag defenders away leaving his partner in space or with more time etc which would be hard for any statistician to pick up on.
Some strikers can hold the ball up for long periods of the game relieving pressure on the rest of the team.
Some stickers score 25 a season and do nothing else.

A good manger or scout should be able to notice these skills or talents and work out if it can fit in the team and style of play that he’s looking to have

Quoted from gtfc_chris

I suppose it’s hard to argue with that. Perhaps the Club and all others who are spending vast sums on data led approaches should reconsider that tact and simply turn to forums where the fans who have been watching all season could simply tell you who to upgrade.

Out of interest, and using stats but away from the xG one, if we had a player who from the stands appeared useless and was widely criticised across the fan base, but we statistically won more ppg with him in the side than not would you go with what you see or what statistically wins us more points?

Like all statistics that last point is open to wide interpretation.

Say I was in the side for 10 games; the players raise their game because they know I'm useless,  and we win all 10 games. Would you keep me in?

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

Like all statistics that last point is open to wide interpretation.

Say I was in the side for 10 games; the players raise their game because they know I'm useless,  and we win all 10 games. Would you keep me in?

Are you Weghorst?

I think we need to get some T-shirts knocked up, '5th place for xG 22/23'

Quoted from grimps

There’s always a lot more to a player than how many goals he scores.
Some players drag defenders away leaving his partner in space or with more time etc which would be hard for any statistician to pick up on.
Some strikers can hold the ball up for long periods of the game relieving pressure on the rest of the team.
Some stickers score 25 a season and do nothing else.

A good manger or scout should be able to notice these skills or talents and work out if it can fit in the team and style of play that he’s looking to have

There's no doubting players have different attributes and bring different qualities to the team performance, no arguments against from me. Managers, scouts and fans will all be able to see the face value of a player and see over time what their main qualities appear to be and more so for us as fans we develop affection for players who display qualities we each admire, again not going to dispute that. The game has existed for over 100 years without statistics guiding it and relying solely on the feel and view of humans so I get where people may have a view that statistics aren't required and that the human eye is sufficient enough to build a good squad.

I don't think anyone could dispute however the fine margins that exist in the leagues in terms of who is likely to be competitive. Every year the leagues become tighter and tighter and more clubs consider themselves as having a right or reasonable ambition to compete at the top end of the league.  To try and get on the right side of those margins teams have recognised in recent years that statistics can paint pictures of what is happening that might not be blatantly obvious to the eye and use them to rectify the problem area.

Lets continue with this xG scenario. It tells us what we 'should' have expected to score. From the stands we see we've missed some good chances and we need better finishers. Easy. Dig deeper into that Xg stat and it will likely tell us where those chances have come from. This will tell us the key trait that we require from a striker. You referenced they all have different attributes and I agree. Some might show great anticipation to get across defenders and apply a first time finish inside the 6-yard box. Another might have great composure and calmness around the penalty spot area to find a gap to finish, another might be prolific in 1v1s and let's add another who has great heading ability in the box.

If PH signs a striker who has historically scored 15+ a season but mostly from inside the 6-yard box, but our xGs are coming from crosses in the air, then he isn't going to be effective. Much as we watch games and can see we need a goalscorer I highly doubt anyone is sat there with notepad and pen analysing the nature of our missed chances, nor is anyone watching games back over 90 minutes to determine this, if you do then I'd say you're in the statistics camp.

The example above is specific to scoring goals and the main quality of the striker that will complement how we play. Let's take it backwards a little bit and be more broad. We had a period where we struggled this season and people were getting twitchy about relegation. What was the problem? Players? System? Manager? If every fan on this forum gave their view it would not be universal. Take the human eye again and we all interpret what we see differently, so how do you determine where fact lies and opinion stops? For fans saying the system was wrong, then xG might suggest otherwise, telling us we were creating the chances and not scoring them. We might see that from the stands but we still use it as a stick to beat whoever we want round the head with to suit our opinion against what the facts are. I found home games to be very nightmarish for the most part and if the statistic that we had more shots at home than everyone except Northampton is true then I wouldn't have believed it without someone pointing it out. Does the lack of wins and PHs pragmatic approach cloud the fact that actually we create a lot and are good at home save the finish?

Stats can be exploited to suit most arguments, I haven't done any research or used anything concrete to 'prove' my viewpoint, but I bet if I scratched a little I could. But I'd also suggest you could find a stat that 'proved against' my argument on the same topic. This debate could go on forever just on that basis alone. My critique of the particular stat that started the thread would be how an xG is decided, but as I said before I'll simply trust that someone much cleverer than I has come up with some formula/algorithm that depicts it as close as possible.

Either way, my view in support of the stat as a tool is that it can make much clearer the fine detail we don't automatically record watching the game live. That information can be used to determine strikers that fit the profile we need based on the nature of chances we're missing rather than changing the play book if it's proven to work shy of the final finish. If that fine detail sees us bring in a totally unknown striker not utilised the right way in his existing team who ends up scoring 20 goals, getting us promoted and we sell him on for 750k then I'd suggest the stat has been very much worth it.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

Like all statistics that last point is open to wide interpretation.

Say I was in the side for 10 games; the players raise their game because they know I'm useless,  and we win all 10 games. Would you keep me in?

Direct answer = Yes. Why would anyone not?

I also don't dispute at all that stats can be interpreted differently.... just like the human eye.

For example, I could argue that we've just won 10 games because the good players are raising their game to accommodate a useless player, so keep the useless player in because it's working and forgive the players for not working as hard in the games previous.

I could also argue that I've got 10 players who have highlighted they haven't been working as hard as they could because the previous 11th man was half decent so they got lazy and I as manager would not be happy with that.

I think the difference between interpreting statistics is that amongst us as fans we'll argue them to prove our own views. PH and all his staff won't be using them for that purpose, they will be scrutinising what it means to performance, player targeting and all round improvement to our results. They will be working in tandem to identify players who we can attract within our budget that might not be quite so coveted as the obvious talent that all the top end competing teams will be attempting to sign.

Quoted from gtfc_chris

Direct answer = Yes. Why would anyone not?

I also don't dispute at all that stats can be interpreted differently.... just like the human eye.

For example, I could argue that we've just won 10 games because the good players are raising their game to accommodate a useless player, so keep the useless player in because it's working and forgive the players for not working as hard in the games previous.

I could also argue that I've got 10 players who have highlighted they haven't been working as hard as they could because the previous 11th man was half decent so they got lazy and I as manager would not be happy with that.

I think the difference between interpreting statistics is that amongst us as fans we'll argue them to prove our own views. PH and all his staff won't be using them for that purpose, they will be scrutinising what it means to performance, player targeting and all round improvement to our results. They will be working in tandem to identify players who we can attract within our budget that might not be quite so coveted as the obvious talent that all the top end competing teams will be attempting to sign.

I'm cleaning my boots as we speak.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

I'm cleaning my boots as we speak.

You better deliver on these 10 wins!