Carlisle, the worst team in the opening weeks (sponsored by HelloGregory - andexperimental361)

[shoddycollins]

Ben Mayhew describes this graph as irresponsibly early. Too early to draw any conclusions at least, but still a factual representation of the way the chances have gone so far this season.

So it would seem we're very lucky to be up in 4th place this early given that only Oldham create slightly worse chances than us and only Notts and Cheltenham allow their opponents to create better chances. Indeed, you could take this to say that if there was no difference in shooting ability and shot-stopping ability among the players of this division, then the table would look like this:

1: MK Dons
2: Colchester
3: Bury
-----------------------------------
4: Northampton
5: Mansfield
6: Lincoln
7: Crawley
-----------------------------------
8: Newport
9: Yeovil
10: FGR
11: Stevenage
12: Exeter
13: Tranmere
14: Cambridge
15: Port Vale
16: Swindon
17: Macclesfield
18: Crewe
19: Oldham
20: Morecambe
21: Grimsby
22: Cheltenham
------------------------------------
23: Notts
24: Carlisle

For those who haven't seen expected goals before, it's how many goals a team would have scored if the likelihood of them scoring from each shot was purely based on how and where the shot was taken from, and nothing to do with the ability of either the player taking the shot or the goalie and defenders trying to block the shot, so it measures their ability to create and prevent chances rather than their ability to take and save them, which over the course of the season has proven to be a better indicator of where the team will end up in the league than looking at such things as shots on target and goals scored/conceded which are as much measures of the individual abilities of strikers and goalkeepers than the team as a whole. I never really liked the term 'expected goals' as people mistake it for the number of goals a team 'should' have scored, or deserved to score. Of course, no matter how many chances you create, if you fluff them all then you get nil and you deserve nil, but if you're creating excellent chances then you'd expect to start scoring them sooner rather than later.

 

[jbet]

Been following Ben's stuff closely for a few years and work with Xg regularly with work.

The only caveats I would add to the above is:

i) at this early stage the sample size is so small that one match can skew the data. Take Northampton's home match v Lincoln as a prime example of this.
ii) Looking from a high level at Xg is fine but it's also worthwhile to assess each match on its flow. Exeter are an interesting side. Purely on overall Xg they look a middle of the road outfit but closer inspection of their matches shows (especially away from home) they tend to get the job done early, the match wrapped up and then sit and create very little, simply preserving their lead. Teams that go ahead and see games out in a professional manner are often 'undervalued' by Xg because they simply don't need to create as much throughout the entire match to win matches.
ii) Ties in with the above point but red cards and penalties need to factored into the equation. Different Xg models have different ways of accounting for Pens, but they should add at least 0.75 to an overall team match Xg - if a team has been awarded a disproportionate amount of penalties for or against at this stage of the season then the Xg will not reflect a teams long term expectation.

 

[Son of Cod]

 

[shoddycollins]

nope, you're gonna have to explain it. Invisible shot? Something about shots?

 

[Son of Cod]

nope, you're gonna have to explain it. Invisible shot? Something about shots?

Haha he's that Bosnian MP that killed himself in court by doing a shot of poison. That gif is a popular meme now for when something makes you want to top yourself...you can decide whether I am reacting to our placing on the above graph or my own personal thoughts on "XG".

 

[Alan Partridge]

Pass me some of that stuff.

 

[shoddycollins]

Haha he's that Bosnian MP that killed himself in court by doing a shot of poison. That gif is a popular meme now for when something makes you want to top yourself...you can decide whether I am reacting to our placing on the above graph or my own personal thoughts on "XG".

Are Grimsby's placement on the graph and your own personal thoughts on XG not one and the same? I'm sure you'd feel differently were you at the other end.

 

[hellogregory]

I think we are very lucky to be where we are, but I’m delighted about it because we have 13 points on the board already which is a good quarter of the points total we’ll likely need to stay up.

We are a poor team, we have a painfully slow back 4 and an attack that really lacks any sort of quality even for this level. We’ve been quite lucky in most of the games I’ve seen us pick up points, teams missing glorious chances, us on the back foot and nicking a narrow win having created very little from open play. The only one where I think we’ve comfortably deserved the win was Cambridge last week, even though the score line was still narrow.

I’d also say fixtures have been kind to us. The only teams we’ve faced so far who’ll likely be in the top 7 or 8 are Exeter and Mansfield and we were well beaten by both. The other teams we’ve faced so far are all currently in the bottom half and possibly Northampton aside aren’t likely to trouble the top half.

The concern is that some of our better players in our weak areas are loanees (Nadesan and Yates) and both will likely be elsewhere come January. Likewise Anthony Gerrard who despite being slow is our best defender, but only on a 6 month deal so again will likely be gone in January.

The start has given us a good platform to survive relegation from which absolutely still has to be our aim with such a poor squad of players. Hopefully our luck will carry on against some of the weaker sides and we do manage to achieve it.

 

[Vanni]

Haha he's that Bosnian MP that killed himself in court by doing a shot of poison. That gif is a popular meme now for when something makes you want to top yourself...you can decide whether I am reacting to our placing on the above graph or my own personal thoughts on "XG".

That guy was a general in the Croatian Army, and accused of committing war crimes in the Bosnian conflict in the early 90's. AFAIK, he was not an MP, more so a Bosnian one. Where did you get that from SOC?

Apologies to forum members for going off topic. I'll comment on Shoddy's table at a later on (after I take a good look at it as I think the graph and the whole 'EG' business can be misinterpreted rather easily)

 

[shoddycollins]

I think we are very lucky to be where we are, but I’m delighted about it because we have 13 points on the board already which is a good quarter of the points total we’ll likely need to stay up.

We are a poor team, we have a painfully slow back 4 and an attack that really lacks any sort of quality even for this level. We’ve been quite lucky in most of the games I’ve seen us pick up points, teams missing glorious chances, us on the back foot and nicking a narrow win having created very little from open play. The only one where I think we’ve comfortably deserved the win was Cambridge last week, even though the score line was still narrow.

I’d also say fixtures have been kind to us. The only teams we’ve faced so far who’ll likely be in the top 7 or 8 are Exeter and Mansfield and we were well beaten by both. The other teams we’ve faced so far are all currently in the bottom half and possibly Northampton aside aren’t likely to trouble the top 7.

The concern is that some of our better players in our weak areas are loanees (Nadesan and Yates) and both will likely be elsewhere come January. Likewise Anthony Gerrard who despite being slow is our best defender, but only on a 6 month deal so again will likely be gone in January.

The start has given us a good platform to survive relegation from which absolutely still has to be our aim with such a poor squad of players. Hopefully our luck will carry on against some of the weaker sides and we do manage to achieve it.

Not sure why you think Nadesan, Yates and Gerrard are so likely to leave. I can't think of many examples recently where a half season loanee who did well we were unable to get back for the second half. I was able to look up our loan history on Transfermarkt and you have to go back to Max Ehmer, Ben Amos and Tom Lawrence all leaving us in 2014 to find players who established themselves in our first team but we couldn't extend the deals of. Nadesan in particular is on his second loan spell with us having done well in his first and where else would Fleetwood loan him to? They have plenty of options up front and seem to doing well enough with those.

As for Gerrard, I can't imagine he'll be awash with offers and after things at Oldham ended on such a bad note for him I'm sure he'd rather just knuckle down somewhere where things are going well for him rather than move on again, especially as here he has a manager who clearly values him and has worked with him before, and one of the best pie shops in the country.

 

[hellogregory]

Hope you’re right shoddy and can see what you mean re Gerrard with the Sheridan link. Yates is the one I think we’re most likelu lose if he continues to improve. The reason being is he’s already had a good taste of league 1 and if he proves himself in this 6 months I think he might fancy another crack at it.

 

[hold'um Oldham]

I knew it was bad been saying for weeks our season hinges on being able to convert the very few chances we are creating. The Crawley and Newport games were much the same from our point of view.

So would you prefer to be in the bottom left or the top right? Obviously the top right is more exciting to watch but generally I would say most seasons in league one we were bottom left (survived) where as last year I would say we were top right and went down

 

[PaulHaddock]

At least we’re not in a false position.

Luckily, the creator has said that 1 game can skew the results so I’d wait at least another 5 games. We’ve had some rotten luck with injuries so far and they’re only slowly making their way back.

 

[Son of Cod]

Are Grimsby's placement on the graph and your own personal thoughts on XG not one and the same? I'm sure you'd feel differently were you at the other end.

No mate, Grimsby's current placement is just depressing. However, even if we were in a decent position on there I would still hold the opinion that expected goals and these little graphs hold less weight than people give them credit.

That guy was a general in the Croatian Army, and accused of committing war crimes in the Bosnian conflict in the early 90's. AFAIK, he was not an MP, more so a Bosnian one. Where did you get that from SOC?

Apologies to forum members for going off topic. I'll comment on Shoddy's table at a later on (after I take a good look at it as I think the graph and the whole 'EG' business can be misinterpreted rather easily)

I can barely remember what I had for my tea last night so I can't remember such intricate details of news stories from the past few years. If you think about it though, some MPs are like the war generals of civilisation committing their own atrocities. And I knew it was something to do with Bosnia so I was partly right. Oh and I had carbonara for tea last night actually.

 

[shoddycollins]

No mate, Grimsby's current placement is just depressing. However, even if we were in a decent position on there I would still hold the opinion that expected goals and these little graphs hold less weight than people give them credit.

I think that's partly because too many people take them as in indication of what should have happened or what result they deserved to get, rather than an indication of what is likely to happen in the future, or what is likely to happen if a team carry on playing the way they have been. I don't really like the term 'expected goals' for that reason, should be something less catchy, like chance creation, or perhaps the Nathan Jones Best Team Assertion Index.

 

[codaplenty]

I think we are very lucky to be where we are, but I’m delighted about it because we have 13 points on the board already which is a good quarter of the points total we’ll likely need to stay up.

We are a poor team, we have a painfully slow back 4 and an attack that really lacks any sort of quality even for this level. We’ve been quite lucky in most of the games I’ve seen us pick up points, teams missing glorious chances, us on the back foot and nicking a narrow win having created very little from open play. The only one where I think we’ve comfortably deserved the win was Cambridge last week, even though the score line was still narrow.

I’d also say fixtures have been kind to us. The only teams we’ve faced so far who’ll likely be in the top 7 or 8 are Exeter and Mansfield and we were well beaten by both. The other teams we’ve faced so far are all currently in the bottom half and possibly Northampton aside aren’t likely to trouble the top half.

The concern is that some of our better players in our weak areas are loanees (Nadesan and Yates) and both will likely be elsewhere come January. Likewise Anthony Gerrard who despite being slow is our best defender, but only on a 6 month deal so again will likely be gone in January.

The start has given us a good platform to survive relegation from which absolutely still has to be our aim with such a poor squad of players. Hopefully our luck will carry on against some of the weaker sides and we do manage to achieve it.

I was waxing lyrical about you lot, are you trying to put me off !! If you are picking up points when not playing well sooner or later you will click into gear....and then get stuffed eh !!

 

[Luke Imp]

We're doing well to be averaging 2 a game yet only 1.5 on that table.

I suspect the defence figure is in the main down to that Northampton game.

 

[hold'um Oldham]

If you produced it again now we would probably move along quite nicely. A 3-0 victory will distort the table somewhat at this stage

 

[shoddycollins]

If you produced it again now we would probably move along quite nicely. A 3-0 victory will distort the table somewhat at this stage

Depends on the chances created, goals scored count for nothing in this table. For example, although we lost 2-0 to Tranmere, we outcreated them on expected goals and will probably have moved up as a result.

 

[Son of Cod]

We're doing well to be averaging 2 a game yet only 1.5 on that table.

I suspect the defence figure is in the main down to that Northampton game.

Most teams are getting about 10 shots against you, with a couple (Northampton, us and Bury) having 15+. Don't know if/how that is taken into account here.

 

[shoddycollins]

Most teams are getting about 10 shots against you, with a couple (Northampton, us and Bury) having 15+. Don't know if/how that is taken into account here.

The quality of the shots must be low because Lincoln's expected goals against is among the lower in the division. Hovering just above 1. If a team has 10 shots and their xG is 1 then likelihood is they're from outside the area, or depending on if the quality of the data makes the distiction between inside and outside the six-yard box then I'd guess headers outside the six yard box are fairly low in xG terms too.

For comparison, a penalty is worth around 0.7 xG, so seven times as good a chance to score as the average shots taken against Lincoln.

 

[shoddycollins]

We're doing well to be averaging 2 a game yet only 1.5 on that table.

I suspect the defence figure is in the main down to that Northampton game.

I think at this stage with not that many games played, 2 a game from 1.5 xG is within expectations, particularly if you have a decent striker. In a single match, a team getting 1.5 xG and scoring twice is very common. If you continue in that vein without improving chance creation then likelihood is you'll tend towards 1.5 a game as the season goes on.

 

[Luke Imp]

The quality of the shots must be low because Lincoln's expected goals against is among the lower in the division. Hovering just above 1. If a team has 10 shots and their xG is 1 then likelihood is they're from outside the area, or depending on if the quality of the data makes the distiction between inside and outside the six-yard box then I'd guess headers outside the six yard box are fairly low in xG terms too.

For comparison, a penalty is worth around 0.7 xG, so seven times as good a chance to score as the average shots taken against Lincoln.

They are, yeah.

We've conceded 5 goals, and only 2 from open play (one was an OG). Hasn't felt like we've had that many shots against us, bar Northampton where they had 3 one-on-one's, which I suspect are high on the xG.

 

[shoddycollins]

They are, yeah.

We've conceded 5 goals, and only 2 from open play (one was an OG). Hasn't felt like we've had that many shots against us, bar Northampton where they had 3 one-on-one's, which I suspect are high on the xG.

I think an own goal doesn't even count as a shot, and has zero xG, otherwise every pass back to the keeper would have to be counted as a shot.

The graph from your game against Northampton is below and seems to suggest it does buck the trend a bit.

There are maybe 5 reasonable chances for Northampton on there, can't tell whether any of these are one-on-ones, but one of the limitations of the xG system is it only counts chances if a shot was taken, so if the goalie gets to the ball before they can shoot or if for some reason the attacker never shoots and the chance goes begging then it won't appear at all. Also, the data used to compile these doesn't say anything about the position of defenders, so it won't differentiate between a shot taken in the area with only the goalie to beat, and a shot taken in a crowded penalty area. I believe he uses the descriptions from the live text on the BBC's match reports to categorise the shots.

A team that puts a lot of dangerous crosses into the box might have just as good a chance of scoring as a team that runs at the defence and shoots on sight, but the xG won't reflect this as any shot, no matter how wayward and how far out counts for at least something, whereas a cross flashed right across the face of goal might just be begging for someone to get on the end of it, but if nobody does then it counts for nothing in xG.

 

[Luke Imp]

361 have updated their graphs but came across this one, which shows where MK Dons problems lie.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1046473520371388416

 

[hold'um Oldham]

The fact we ain't on that list shows where our problems lie. Really wouldn't be surprised if we are in the bottom 5

 

[shoddycollins]

oddly we've improved slightly on xG... we've been outcreated in most of the games we've won, and I think the two recent home defeats were the only games all season where we've outcreated the opponents.