Dean Smith

[TRO]

1 hour ago, useless said:

Our forms is less to do with homeanway and more to do with the quality of the teams we're losing to and the quality of the that teams we've beat.

We've been beating the leagues better sides and losing to the ones that might be perceived as the weaker ones.

So I think it's a mental issue, maybe we try harder against the better teams and less against the others.

In other words we aren't losing to Southy, Leeds and Brighton because they were home games...

But more because we (maybe subconsciously) underrated them.

Or at least that state of mind played a part.

 

There certainly is a distinction that needs investigating....I think you make a valid observation.

I'm pretty sure, i know the reason, but i have already laboured the point.

[Mjvilla]

1 minute ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Definitely. But we are a work in progress. On our day we can beat anyone, but we are such a raw side. We make mistakes, we aren't switched on, we struggle on basic defending, we aren't clinical enough, and much more. But we also have a stupidly high level when we get it right. Finding that consistency needs to be a point of focus going forward.

But in terms of teams inviting us to attack, i.e. they sit deep etc. I think that more easily shows the inexperience, or maybe even naivety, in our team. 

We play exciting football and I love watching the Villa now, and it's a long time since I felt that.

This is spot on for me too. Even after losing to west ham and Brighton, it still felt ok because we played well and there's a sense of the results will come with those performances. It's better than losing and not trying to win.

[TRO]

5 minutes ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Definitely. But we are a work in progress. On our day we can beat anyone, but we are such a raw side. We make mistakes, we aren't switched on, we struggle on basic defending, we aren't clinical enough, and much more. But we also have a stupidly high level when we get it right. Finding that consistency needs to be a point of focus going forward.

But in terms of teams inviting us to attack, i.e. they sit deep etc. I think that more easily shows the inexperience, or maybe even naivety, in our team. 

We play exciting football and I love watching the Villa now, and it's a long time since I felt that.

I totally agree.....we are so close to getting it right.

I think the right signings in the next window, to address these concerns, will make us more rounded as a group.

Edited December 3, 2020 by TRO

[TRO]

3 minutes ago, Mjvilla said:

This is spot on for me too. Even after losing to west ham and Brighton, it still felt ok because we played well and there's a sense of the results will come with those performances. It's better than losing and not trying to win.

I too agree with that.....except i was furious with the manner of the conceded goals....the rest i agree with.

[YouUnastanFren]

1 hour ago, sparrow1988 said:

There's a bit of this in it, but there is also the fact that the better teams do more of the attacking, allowing us space to break in to and play in when we get the ball. Whereas the perceived weaker teams sit back, reduce the space in the danger areas, allow us to attack and then have acres of space when they break. It's finding that balance against the perceived weaker teams which is the key to us beating them more often.

I understand what you mean and I do think we could potentially be vulnerable to the counter attack due to our overly attacking line up but this really hasn't been the case in the vast majority of our wins or our losses this season IMO.

The only counter attack goals we've conceded have been the Wellbeck goal which was a Mings error in judgement and Liverpool's second. The first two Leeds goals were also quick attacks I suppose.

We also haven't struggled to break the more defensive teams down when they sit back, we've had multiple excellent goal scoring chances in every loss this season.

When teams are genuinely vulnerable to the counter and exploited by it, it almost always leads to them conceding multiple high quality goal scoring chances in the game. We haven't done that in any match other than the Leeds one.

IMHO our goals conceded have been down to unsustainably high quality of finishing from our opponents and individual errors from our defenders rather than any systemic vulnerability to counter attacks in our system.

1 hour ago, sparrow1988 said:

Perceived weaker teams is also key. There's not a whole lot of difference in quality between say 6th (maybe even 4th) and 15th in this league.

This is absolutely bang on. The amount of spending power and the quality of squads in this league now is lightyears ahead of years gone by.

[mikeyjavfc]

Another interest stat here that confirms what most of us know:

Under ‘expected points’ (basically comparison of xG for and against per game) we should be sitting 4th in the league with a game in hand. Just shows we have been unlucky with our recent results. Hopefully we revert to the mean soon and convert our good xG to wins.

[sparrow1988]

1 hour ago, YouUnastanFren said:

I understand what you mean and I do think we could potentially be vulnerable to the counter attack due to our overly attacking line up but this really hasn't been the case in the vast majority of our wins or our losses this season IMO.

The only counter attack goals we've conceded have been the Wellbeck goal which was a Mings error in judgement and Liverpool's second. The first two Leeds goals were also quick attacks I suppose.

We also haven't struggled to break the more defensive teams down when they sit back, we've had multiple excellent goal scoring chances in every loss this season.

When teams are genuinely vulnerable to the counter and exploited by it, it almost always leads to them conceding multiple high quality goal scoring chances in the game. We haven't done that in any match other than the Leeds one.

IMHO our goals conceded have been down to unsustainably high quality of finishing from our opponents and individual errors from our defenders rather than any systemic vulnerability to counter attacks in our system.

This is absolutely bang on. The amount of spending power and the quality of squads in this league now is lightyears ahead of years gone by.

Great post. My reasoning on us being susceptible to counter attacks is mostly due to the Leeds game actually. I thought we were very lucky that the score was as low as it was.

I still feel that we are susceptible but only becuase we are doing a lot of attacking. There is a lot of space back there but there is also a lot of space back there in the Man City and Liverpool setups and we saw how Liverpool can be exploited during the game against us. It's how the top teams play and I like that we are trying to play that way. There will be ups and downs trying to play this way but someone said this is the first time in a long time that they're excited watching us play and I'm the exact same.

If we cut out the errors at the back and show a bit more composure in front of goal (e.g. Trez's chance on Monday), then we'll be a side to be reckoned with.

[YouUnastanFren]

22 minutes ago, sparrow1988 said:

If we cut out the errors at the back and show a bit more composure in front of goal (e.g. Trez's chance on Monday), then we'll be a side to be reckoned with.

And his chance early on against Brighton, and his even better chance after the ball came back to him after he'd fluffed the first one.

In the whole league only Maupay can match Trez for wastefulness in front of goal over the last 3 games. He's 7th in the league for xG over that period.

Promising though that we've got 2 players in the top 7. The perks of playing with Grealish I guess.

[Rightdm00]

3 hours ago, mikeyjavfc said:

Another interest stat here that confirms what most of us know:

Under ‘expected points’ (basically comparison of xG for and against per game) we should be sitting 4th in the league with a game in hand. Just shows we have been unlucky with our recent results. Hopefully we revert to the mean soon and convert our good xG to wins.

Last year we finished one point better than our expected points for the season.  So the methodology there is pretty spot on. 

Most teams finish within a place or two of their expected points.

Understat.com has a nice layout for looking at present and past historical tables.

Amusing side note, the one team that breaks the mold for expected points is Newcastle. Based on expected points they should have finished bottom last year but managed 13. This year they are 10th but expected points says they should be 18th.  Bruce ball, gotta love it. 

[villalad21]

5 hours ago, sparrow1988 said:

If we cut out the errors at the back

That simply won't happen with Mings at the back.

Switching off has always been a part of his game and will never leave him.

[Indigo]

7 hours ago, mikeyjavfc said:

Another interest stat here that confirms what most of us know:

Under ‘expected points’ (basically comparison of xG for and against per game) we should be sitting 4th in the league with a game in hand. Just shows we have been unlucky with our recent results. Hopefully we revert to the mean soon and convert our good xG to wins.

Yep. While I appreciate some of the points about our defending over the past few games (specifically the first against both Brighton and West Ham), it's being exaggerated because the opposition have been ridiculously clinical at a rate that you're just not going to see over the course of a whole season. It's rare to not concede any chances in a game - Lacazette had a poor miss against us, Sheffield United missed a penalty, Mitrovic had a series of headers he'd be disappointed with etc - but it's just as rare for situations like Southampton and West Ham to happen where every hint of a chance goes in.

What I'm mostly concerned about is the depth of our squad, but if we can at least slightly address that in January and injuries go our way then we'll have more than a good season if we continue to play as well as we have been losses or not.

[Keyblade]

17 minutes ago, Indigo said:

Yep. While I appreciate some of the points about our defending over the past few games (specifically the first against both Brighton and West Ham), it's being exaggerated because the opposition have been ridiculously clinical at a rate that you're just not going to see over the course of a whole season. It's rare to not concede any chances in a game - Lacazette had a poor miss against us, Sheffield United missed a penalty, Mitrovic had a series of headers he'd be disappointed with etc - but it's just as rare for situations like Southampton and West Ham to happen where every hint of a chance goes in.

What I'm mostly concerned about is the depth of our squad, but if we can at least slightly address that in January and injuries go our way then we'll have more than a good season if we continue to play as well as we have been losses or not.

Yeah. I foresee a great season ahead if we keep up these performance levels. It will even itself out eventually. The problem is, a couple of injuries can derail all of that. The step down from Barkley to Hourihane has been immense and I imagine it would be similar in other areas of the pitch such as if Hause or Taylor were to come in.

[Dave-R]

On 01/12/2020 at 17:31, villalad21 said:

Are we learning? Is Smith learning.

I see the same mistakes from last season. I thought we had turned a corner post lockdown.

I'm happy with the point total as it's still a decent return. But i'm concerned about starting seeing the pre lockdown Villa slowly creeping in.

So Wolves is up next.. us going gung ho and Wolves countering us to pieces is what i am expecting. Please surprise me Dean.

Well if we park bus and we screw that up, then people will still go mental, cant win there.

We seemed to do better when we channel them a certain area and let them flood one side. Our counter attacking is was blasted Liverpool apart, I do not know why we are not using it more. Teams are waiting for us to botch an attack, leave an opening and hit us, we displayed what counter attacking could do to a powerful team and other teams are now doing it. 

What I noticed is when opposition is letting shots loose, no one is hardly charging them, why wouldn't you when these are some of the most dangerous shooter in the world???

Crosses are another problem, are we really going to keep sitting in the box and letting a team have that many crosses on us that its tennis and were the net, get out there and deal with the cross.

Outside the box, a danger zone that opposition is right in front of the goal, yet we back off to much and should charge more leaving just enough so that someone is always being marked, so no through balls.

As others have said and I will echo it I cant stand zonal marking for us, we got rid after LD last season, correct,?? so why has it returned, I'm boggled on that one.

We seem to have kinks, no where near as bad as before last seasons lockdown but they are still there. Question though, is it player or training, if its player then there are culprits and I'm afraid Mings is one for a start, to much social media and Gum chewing this guy has had and needs to lock his head into the game.

I think we need to strengthen a fair lot still and as long as we keep staying in the league then we should be able to do that.

[Dave-R]

Double post.

Edited December 3, 2020 by Dave-R

[Dave-R]

35 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Yeah. I foresee a great season ahead if we keep up these performance levels. It will even itself out eventually. The problem is, a couple of injuries can derail all of that. The step down from Barkley to Hourihane has been immense and I imagine it would be similar in other areas of the pitch such as if Hause or Taylor were to come in.

I think it will to Key, if we can add two or three more players come January that would be sweet. I can feel January being an expensive spend to be fair for us.

If it's not it will be hunting in the championship for cheap lovely players like Cash.

Were reading Chelsea's fans saying send Tammy on loan to Villa with Barkley today, wouldn't that be sweet.

Edited December 3, 2020 by Dave-R

[Keyblade]

9 minutes ago, Dave-R said:

I think it will to Key, if we can add two or three more players come January that would be sweet. I can feel January being an expensive spend to be fair for us.

If it's not it will be hunting in the championship for cheap lovely players like Cash.

Were reading Chelsea's fans saying send Tammy on loan to Villa with Barkley today, wouldn't that be sweet.

Yeah that would be amazing. Unfortunately it's not possible as I think you can only loan 1 player from a team at a time.

[Dave-R]

24 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Yeah that would be amazing. Unfortunately it's not possible as I think you can only loan 1 player from a team at a time.

I thought the limit was three from a league, something like that, I'm probably wrong.

[Enda]

9 hours ago, mikeyjavfc said:

xG

Good post.

One thing that annoys me about xG though is it only counts actual shots. So take Ollie’s offside goal at the end of the match for example. IIRC that will add zero to xG because it was offside so there no “shot” recorded. Same thing with a good whipped ball across the six-yard box that nobody gets a toe on. No shot, so nothing to expected goals.

Or at least that’s how it was explained to me. If it’s true, then expected goals is a “quality adjusted shots on target” measure, not an actual measure of expected goals. And that annoys me.

[Dave-R]

12 hours ago, KenjiOgiwara said:

Definitely. But we are a work in progress. On our day we can beat anyone, but we are such a raw side. We make mistakes, we aren't switched on, we struggle on basic defending, we aren't clinical enough, and much more. But we also have a stupidly high level when we get it right. Finding that consistency needs to be a point of focus going forward.

But in terms of teams inviting us to attack, i.e. they sit deep etc. I think that more easily shows the inexperience, or maybe even naivety, in our team. 

We play exciting football and I love watching the Villa now, and it's a long time since I felt that.

Your post and especially first paragraph is absolutely spot on, that's not like you at all Kenji

[Rightdm00]

4 hours ago, Enda said:

Good post.

One thing that annoys me about xG though is it only counts actual shots. So take Ollie’s offside goal at the end of the match for example. IIRC that will add zero to xG because it was offside so there no “shot” recorded. Same thing with a good whipped ball across the six-yard box that nobody gets a toe on. No shot, so nothing to expected goals.

Or at least that’s how it was explained to me. If it’s true, then expected goals is a “quality adjusted shots on target” measure, not an actual measure of expected goals. And that annoys me.

It's definitely not a foolproof stat. The fact that it doesn't capture chances that generate a shot is a big hole. Not sure how you could integrate chances like you mentioned so it's important to only use it as part of your metric when gauging our performance.