Team shape, tactics and personnel

[CVByrne]

5 hours ago, TRO said:

My Brain hurts.

I think fantasy football, gets dragged in to reality football and swathes of considerations get overlooked.

I am not against stats per se.....just dubious without the "eye test" in conjunction, the stats can be challenged for their authenticity.

For me there is no substitute for watching a game live, sometimes the TV leaves area's of the play out, inadvertently and a limited view can be had.

I think the danger here is, making a simple game, too complicated by over analytics.....and important human factors being overlooked.

Personally, I still put huge emphasis on the human elements, and that has noting to do with my age or how long I have followed AVFC....Its simply my view.

I am also aware of its a team game, with individual performances within it.....that can vary as we seen so well, in the England game against Ivory Coast, where players individual performances varied, depending on whom they were playing with.

Football Analytics has become an industry where, commercial gain is at the forefront of their work.......I am still an advocate of go, watch the game, learn for yourself, after all analysts still have their own opinions on the interpretation of compiling the stats, just like live fans have, in watching the events.

I liken it to driving a car.......some analyst can go on a journey with you and take note of every stat, on the journey......but you take in so much information all at the same time, with your experience and your brain computes all of that....It usually takes in all the relevant information and disgards the chaff, thats what experience does.....Stats can take in irrelevant information along with the relevant stuff.

I try to go by the acronym K.I.S.S..................Keep it simple, stupid.

I'm very happy our club doesn't just go on the "eye test" and Keep it Simple. 

Data is incredibly useful and important. It's an added piece to the puzzle. Nobody is going to just look at data and never watch the actual games. You take it all in.

For example how we set up and play with and without the ball is clear from watching a few football matches, especially if you watch them in person as you have the choice of where to look. 

You can then look at things pike the passing networks and avg position maps to see over the course of the full game how we executed the plan. Stats like xG for and against show how a side is getting into scoring chances and stopping opponents from scoring chances. It strips some of the randomness from the games to see if underlying approach is working. 

For example, Wolves are doing really well this season due in large part to blind luck. They've an xG against of 41, which is the same as Villa and yet they only conceded 26 goals to our 40. They are giving opponents the exact same scoring opportunities as we have and have conceded so much less and that is almost entirely down to just total randomness and luck that whatever the opposition the fluffed the chances repeatedly. 

 

Eyes and stats and good analysis all combines 

[CVByrne]

23 minutes ago, briny_ear said:

I may be missing something here but the only difference between your ineffective front 5 with no goals and the better one with plenty of goals seems to be Ings in place of Buendia.

Does his inclusion really change the situation to "More goal scorers"?

If so, how?

Well Ings swapped for Buendia and also the formation change. Coutinho has more freedom in sole 10 role and we have 2 CFs trying to score goals as opposed to two 10s trying to create gold for one CF 

[KentVillan]

12 hours ago, PieFacE said:

 

 

I was a bit baffled by the formation he put up, as I don't think of that as the archetypal Gerrard formation that's given us our best results. But he's right, actually, that that's the one we've played the most (although he's got McGinn and Ramsey the wrong way round)...

Just looking at our starting lineups since Coutinho joined:

• 15 Jan, Man Utd - 4-3-3 with Watkins, Ings, Buendia up front
• 22 Jan, Everton - 4-3-2-1 with Coutinho, Watkins, Buendia
• 9 Feb, Leeds - 4-3-2-1 with Coutinho, Watkins, Buendia
• 13 Feb, Newcastle - 4-3-2-1 with Coutinho, Watkins, Buendia
• 19 Feb, Watford - 4-3-2-1 with Coutinho, Watkins, Buendia
• 26 Feb, Brighton - 4-3-1-2 (or 4-4-2 diamond) with Coutinho 10 and Watkins & Ings front 2
• 5 Mar, Southampton - 4-3-1-2 / diamond with Coutinho 10 and Watkins & Ings front 2
• 10 Mar, Leeds - 4-3-1-2 / diamond with Coutinho 10 and Watkins & Ings front 2
• 13 Mar, West Ham - 4-3-1-2 / diamond with Coutinho 10 and Watkins & Ings front 2
• 19 Mar, Arsenal - 4-3-2-1 with Coutinho, Watkins, Buendia (I think this is the only game where McGinn played LCM and Ramsey RCM)

So tbh Gerrard has a couple of systems. And the one with Coutinho and Buendia isn't a classic 4-3-3, it's definitely a 4-3-2-1 with the two "wide" men playing very deep and narrow.

I think we've looked best with that 4-3-1-2 / 4-4-2 diamond shape, and imagine most people here agree. But it does depend on Ings's fitness, and it does mean leaving Buendia on the bench.

Don't think we'll really know what Gerrard wants to do until he's found a "destroyer" DM or Nakamba returns. Is the 4-3-2-1 just a way of squeezing Buendia and Coutinho into the same side, or is it his philosophy?

[Anything11]

10 hours ago, TRO said:

My Brain hurts.

I think fantasy football, gets dragged in to reality football and swathes of considerations get overlooked.

I am not against stats per se.....just dubious without the "eye test" in conjunction, the stats can be challenged for their authenticity.

For me there is no substitute for watching a game live, sometimes the TV leaves area's of the play out, inadvertently and a limited view can be had.

I think the danger here is, making a simple game, too complicated by over analytics.....and important human factors being overlooked.

Personally, I still put huge emphasis on the human elements, and that has noting to do with my age or how long I have followed AVFC....Its simply my view.

I am also aware of its a team game, with individual performances within it.....that can vary as we seen so well, in the England game against Ivory Coast, where players individual performances varied, depending on whom they were playing with.

Football Analytics has become an industry where, commercial gain is at the forefront of their work.......I am still an advocate of go, watch the game, learn for yourself, after all analysts still have their own opinions on the interpretation of compiling the stats, just like live fans have, in watching the events.

I liken it to driving a car.......some analyst can go on a journey with you and take note of every stat, on the journey......but you take in so much information all at the same time, with your experience and your brain computes all of that....It usually takes in all the relevant information and disgards the chaff, thats what experience does.....Stats can take in irrelevant information along with the relevant stuff.

I try to go by the acronym K.I.S.S..................Keep it simple, stupid.

I have no idea what you are on about. I didn't mentioned stats or fantasy football. I spoke about 'visibly' improving - which is a reference to what i can see when i watch the game and how part of the video backed up what I am seeing.

 

[Laughable Chimp]

5 hours ago, CVByrne said:

I'm very happy our club doesn't just go on the "eye test" and Keep it Simple. 

Data is incredibly useful and important. It's an added piece to the puzzle. Nobody is going to just look at data and never watch the actual games. You take it all in.

For example how we set up and play with and without the ball is clear from watching a few football matches, especially if you watch them in person as you have the choice of where to look. 

You can then look at things pike the passing networks and avg position maps to see over the course of the full game how we executed the plan. Stats like xG for and against show how a side is getting into scoring chances and stopping opponents from scoring chances. It strips some of the randomness from the games to see if underlying approach is working. 

For example, Wolves are doing really well this season due in large part to blind luck. They've an xG against of 41, which is the same as Villa and yet they only conceded 26 goals to our 40. They are giving opponents the exact same scoring opportunities as we have and have conceded so much less and that is almost entirely down to just total randomness and luck that whatever the opposition the fluffed the chances repeatedly. 

 

Eyes and stats and good analysis all combines 

It's more due to Jose Sa, not blind luck.

[CVByrne]

6 hours ago, Laughable Chimp said:

It's more due to Jose Sa, not blind luck.

No goal keeper regardless of how good they are can make a 15 goal difference. It's primarily opposition missing their chances. It's part of the randomness of football. Not that Jose Sa is by a significant distance the best player in the history of the sport and should cost hundreds of millions in a transfer fee because he alone can reduce your goals conceded by 20+ over a season

[Laughable Chimp]

4 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

No goal keeper regardless of how good they are can make a 15 goal difference. It's primarily opposition missing their chances. It's part of the randomness of football. Not that Jose Sa is by a significant distance the best player in the history of the sport and should cost hundreds of millions in a transfer fee because he alone can reduce your goals conceded by 20+ over a season

He's saved 10 more goals than the average goalkeeper according to fbref post-shot xG stats. Not quite 15, but still explains more than half of the xG and actual goals conceded discrepancy. Sa is just having a crazy season shot-stopping wise. 

Edited March 31, 2022 by Laughable Chimp

[CVByrne]

10 minutes ago, Laughable Chimp said:

He's saved 10 more goals than the average goalkeeper according to fbref post-shot xG stats. Not quite 15, but still explains more than half of the xG and actual goals conceded discrepancy. Sa is just having a crazy season shot-stopping wise. 

Wolves have conceded 15 less goals than their xG against. GK is just one factor in it. 

[Laughable Chimp]

4 minutes ago, CVByrne said:

Wolves have conceded 15 less goals than their xG against. GK is just one factor in it. 

I agree. My point is that it is a pretty major factor in it and certainly a bigger factor than just "blind luck".

 

 

Edited March 31, 2022 by Laughable Chimp

[CVByrne]

25 minutes ago, Laughable Chimp said:

I agree. My point is that it is a pretty major factor in it and certainly a bigger factor than just "blind luck".

 

 

It's quite funny that you quoted post shot expected goals against which fbref describe as "positive numbers suggest better luck or an above average ability to stop shots"

You see the answer is there for you on fbref 3 lines below the stat you quoted. It's post shot expected goals per shot on target. This will tell you how well he has done based on how difficult the shots on goal have been. While he's in the top 1% in the above stat (due to the blind luck part) he is bottom 27 % in this.

So this clearly shows. Wolves goals against this season is down almost entirely to blind luck. 

[Laughable Chimp]

1 hour ago, CVByrne said:

It's quite funny that you quoted post shot expected goals against which fbref describe as "positive numbers suggest better luck or an above average ability to stop shots"

You see the answer is there for you on fbref 3 lines below the stat you quoted. It's post shot expected goals per shot on target. This will tell you how well he has done based on how difficult the shots on goal have been. While he's in the top 1% in the above stat (due to the blind luck part) he is bottom 27 % in this.

So this clearly shows. Wolves goals against this season is down almost entirely to blind luck. 

Nope, that stat only measures the difficulty of the shots the keeper faces on average. It tells us nothing about how well he has done.

I'll hold my hands up on your first paragraph though. I forgot that I'm not looking at p90 stats here in which case you could argue that the luck factor averages out.

It doesn't however mean that the stat is necessarily high due to blind luck, rather that we can't separate how much of this is due to blind luck and how much is due to shot-stopping although we can make educated guesses.

I don't want to keep this conversation in this thread since it's obviously off topic, if you wish to continue this, tag me in a relevant other football thread. I would do so myself but it's rather difficult on my phone whilst still quoting your post.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CVByrne]

2 minutes ago, Laughable Chimp said:

Nope, that stat only measures the difficulty of the shots the keeper faces on average. It tells us nothing about how well he has done.

I'll hold my hands up on your first paragraph though. I forgot that I'm not looking at p90 stats here in which case you could argue that the luck factor averages out.

It doesn't however mean that the stat is necessarily high due to blind luck, rather that we can't separate how much of this is due to blind luck and how much is due to shot-stopping although we can make educated guesses.

I don't want to keep this conversation in this thread since it's obviously off topic, if you wish to continue this, tag me in a relevant other football thread. I would do so myself but it's rather difficult on my phone whilst still quoting your post.

 

Look people can work it out themselves. They can hover of the stats to get the descriptions

PSxG is 67th percentile

His PSxG - GA is 99th Percentile

His PSxG / SoT is 13th Percentile 

José Sá Scouting Report | FBref.com

 

Being so low in the PSxG / SoT shows that the majority of the xG he's faced players are missing the target. 

[TRO]

10 hours ago, Anything11 said:

I have no idea what you are on about. I didn't mentioned stats or fantasy football. I spoke about 'visibly' improving - which is a reference to what i can see when i watch the game and how part of the video backed up what I am seeing.

 

Apologies, if I read you wrong.

[TRO]

11 hours ago, KentVillan said:

I was a bit baffled by the formation he put up, as I don't think of that as the archetypal Gerrard formation that's given us our best results. But he's right, actually, that that's the one we've played the most (although he's got McGinn and Ramsey the wrong way round)...

Just looking at our starting lineups since Coutinho joined:

• 15 Jan, Man Utd - 4-3-3 with Watkins, Ings, Buendia up front
• 22 Jan, Everton - 4-3-2-1 with Coutinho, Watkins, Buendia
• 9 Feb, Leeds - 4-3-2-1 with Coutinho, Watkins, Buendia
• 13 Feb, Newcastle - 4-3-2-1 with Coutinho, Watkins, Buendia
• 19 Feb, Watford - 4-3-2-1 with Coutinho, Watkins, Buendia
• 26 Feb, Brighton - 4-3-1-2 (or 4-4-2 diamond) with Coutinho 10 and Watkins & Ings front 2
• 5 Mar, Southampton - 4-3-1-2 / diamond with Coutinho 10 and Watkins & Ings front 2
• 10 Mar, Leeds - 4-3-1-2 / diamond with Coutinho 10 and Watkins & Ings front 2
• 13 Mar, West Ham - 4-3-1-2 / diamond with Coutinho 10 and Watkins & Ings front 2
• 19 Mar, Arsenal - 4-3-2-1 with Coutinho, Watkins, Buendia (I think this is the only game where McGinn played LCM and Ramsey RCM)

So tbh Gerrard has a couple of systems. And the one with Coutinho and Buendia isn't a classic 4-3-3, it's definitely a 4-3-2-1 with the two "wide" men playing very deep and narrow.

I think we've looked best with that 4-3-1-2 / 4-4-2 diamond shape, and imagine most people here agree. But it does depend on Ings's fitness, and it does mean leaving Buendia on the bench.

Don't think we'll really know what Gerrard wants to do until he's found a "destroyer" DM or Nakamba returns. Is the 4-3-2-1 just a way of squeezing Buendia and Coutinho into the same side, or is it his philosophy?

Personally, I think too much is made of the system, and not enough of the players themselves playing in it.....I am not saying the system doesn't matter, but I am alluding to your point, until the quality CDM comes in, we will continue fidgeting around with a compensatory system, that in my view is just not there.....Try as we must, we cannot make up for not having an all encompassing CDM.

It simply won't go away.

[TRO]

16 hours ago, CVByrne said:

I'm very happy our club doesn't just go on the "eye test" and Keep it Simple. 

Data is incredibly useful and important. It's an added piece to the puzzle. Nobody is going to just look at data and never watch the actual games. You take it all in.

For example how we set up and play with and without the ball is clear from watching a few football matches, especially if you watch them in person as you have the choice of where to look. 

You can then look at things pike the passing networks and avg position maps to see over the course of the full game how we executed the plan. Stats like xG for and against show how a side is getting into scoring chances and stopping opponents from scoring chances. It strips some of the randomness from the games to see if underlying approach is working. 

For example, Wolves are doing really well this season due in large part to blind luck. They've an xG against of 41, which is the same as Villa and yet they only conceded 26 goals to our 40. They are giving opponents the exact same scoring opportunities as we have and have conceded so much less and that is almost entirely down to just total randomness and luck that whatever the opposition the fluffed the chances repeatedly. 

 

Eyes and stats and good analysis all combines 

I totally agree.....but that's not what you said in an earlier post, which prompted me to say what I did......you said stats are facts, implying nothing else matters.

I agree with stats matter, otherwise the club, would not invest money in to it, but they still have scouts too, so they must see a benefit in live visuals.

Stats for me help in confirming or ruling out, what we all see and they can prompt a scouting mission, where the odds are in favour of a player worth watching......sure opinions vary in the visual, but the collation of stats can too, and it takes many analysts to formulate those stats, that can be deemed as "too many cooks spoil the broth" just as appropriate is "many hands make light work"......Its all opinions, in my view.

Nothing wrong with opinions, thats what these sites are all about, its nice to share them......as we do.

[sparrow1988]

Not entirely sure where to put this but the 5 sub rule has been approved for next season.

[CVByrne]

 

The section on Arsenal out of possession. They keep Martinelli and saka high and wide for the counter attack threat while when we play the Christmas Tree formation we've Watkins alone and isolated up top. When we play with the 2 forwards we have that counter attacking threat and if we played with Bailey and Watkins up top surely this will stretch the opposition from a tight pressing block meaning we have more space to play from back or we have the direct balls in counter attack. 

With Coutinho and Buendia they both want to get on the ball on the turn and look up for the pass. When we have both of them in the team the only player to pass to is Watkins so it's easy for opposition to mark him. I cannot see the value in the Christmas tree formation without one of the players being totally adaptable as a wide forward or a 10 and can alter mid game. 

[Tom13]

I would love to see one game with all our most natural/intelligent footballers starting, but it'll be difficult.

For me our most natural footballers are Buendia, Coutinho, Traore, Ramsey, Douglas Luiz, and it looks like Sanson will be in this bracket as well.

I think a midfield of:

Sanson-Luiz-Coutinho

Could be tried, meaning Ramsey will be the one missing out, but I think a rest for him would be good.

Front three would then be:

Traore-Ings-Buendia

Problem is both Buendia and Traore play RW. So maybe Bailey LW, Buendia RW and Traore coming on? I dunno, I'd just like to see all our players who are actually comfortable on the ball link-up. Then you'd have the intelligent runs of Ings as the focal point. Who's not a slouch technically himself.

[nnock1984]

                  Martinez 

Cash Chambers Mings Digne 

              Sanson    Luiz 

      Buendia  Countinho Chuk

                          Ings

 

McGinn and JJ need a rest 

[romavillan]

To play the 2 tens formation at this level we need world class fullbacks. In Scotland it probably wasn't necessary but in our league I think it is. We don't have world class fullbacks...