Team shape, tactics and personnel

[Tomaszk]

One game xG, no, no, no.

Long-term xG, yes, yes, yes.

[DJBOB]

Long term I would say over the course of 100 games yes. But any team can get in form and outperform their xG for a whole season. 
 

Liverpool 2019-2020 title winning season outperformed their xG by 15. City regularly outperform their xG by around 10. Arsenal are currently outperforming their xG by 9 even though previous seasons have been equal. 
 
So yes - xG will even out over the long term - but the definition of long term is very opaque in football

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

I thought the way Man City deployed Stones the other night against Bayern was interesting.

It seemed like he was almost a CB/Full back with a free role to get into midfield and even advance further forward?

I wonder if we could do something similar with the likes of Diego Carlos in future?

EDIT: Mings is already capable of this IMO, and i love when he sometimes bursts forward.

Edited April 14, 2023 by JAMAICAN-VILLAN

[DJBOB]

4 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

I thought the way Man City deployed Stones the other night against Bayern was interesting.

It seemed like he was almost a CB/Full back with a free role to get into midfield and even advance further forward?

I wonder if we could do something similar with the likes of Diego Carlos in future?

EDIT: Mings is already capable of this IMO, and i love when he sometimes bursts forward.

Stones does very well in Pep’s system and he was used primarily as a double pivot when in possession and a CB out of possession. Pep made this change as there was previous confusion assignment when a FB would slot into the midfield 2 or 3. Stones going from CB to CM then back to CB out of possession was simpler than a fullback moving into midfield then back covering the flanks in transition. 
 
I don’t think either Carlos or Mings could fulfill that role. Kamara has games logged as CB but I don’t think Unai typically deploys this CB to CM. Much more like for a Foyth type to make a back 3 but play fullback out of possession. 

[TRO]

On 13/04/2023 at 07:37, allani said:

I think the other thing here is that because the team is better balanced under Emery - if / when we concede a chance the opposition are generally under more pressure than they were under Gerrard or (I hate to say) Smith.  We aren't (generally) leaving midfielders free on the edge of the box with time to control the ball, pick their spot and stick it in the back of the net (with the notable exceptions of Leicester and the first 45 minutes against Man City).  Our defenders are winning more of the second balls so that if we do concede a shot then the opposition aren't getting as many simple tap-ins from rebounds.  Emi is also in terrific form and has made some great saves - but many you would now expect him to save more often than not (so as long as we keep him you'd expect that ratio of saves to remain high / higher than the average PL keeper).

We are clearly outperforming the strength of our individual players at the moment (no way that we have the third / fourth best team on paper).  But I don't think we have been reliant on being lucky - it is too long a streak already to be based on luck.  And then if we have sneaked a couple of lucky results - we can also point to some hard luck in the matches we haven't won (Arsenal being a classic case in both regards).

It should also be pointed out that similar things have been said about other Emery teams in the past too.  He has a career habit of winning more matches than stats alone might suggest.  That and the fact that I think with three quality signings, hopefully injury free seasons for Kamara and Carlos and the re-birth of Mings, McGinn and Ollie (to name but a few) our squad depth and "fit" for the Emery style of play will be even better next season.  I'm not saying we will match our current points return but I am certainly looking at next season thinking that we'd be "expecting" a much higher number of points from it than we've managed for a long time.

My other thought is that Emery seems better able to adapt when things are going against us.  Gerrard's main issue (apart from the fact that his Plan A was pretty flawed) was that he had no Plan B and so when results were going against us he found it impossible to reverse the trend.  Smith was the same - if you analyse our form under Smith we had a habit of either running very hot or very cold (there aren't that many examples of us winning one, losing one) - he seemed to find it hard to adapt when Plan A wasn't working.  After the City, Arsenal and Leicester results - Emery made a couple of slight changes and found a way to turn things around.  Not long ago the "experts" were talking about how many goals we'd conceded and yet we've gone from that to 5 clean sheets in 7 (whilst still playing some dangerous opposition).

"The harder you work, the luckier you get".....There is some truth in it.

[supermon]

Anyone else not give a shit about xG?

[duke313]

3 minutes ago, supermon said:

Anyone else not give a shit about xG?

 

[DJBOB]

21 minutes ago, supermon said:

Anyone else not give a shit about xG?

I’m sure if it were in our favor, the videos and stats would trend the other way. 
 
It would surprise me if Unai didn’t have a similar stats and metrics person on the team. Just the way of modern football.  
 
Stats and data shouldn’t be used to predict games though because they all lack context and are poor predictors game to game. It can tell a story (Villa have been lucky) - sure - but the conclusion they land on - no matter how many qualifiers they try to use - isn’t true.

“But in the next 8 matches, Villa will regress to form.”

[duke313]

So what is this xG analysis all about? Are they saying we shouldn't have scored some of the goals we did? And should have conceded some we didn’t?

[viivvaa66]

57 minutes ago, duke313 said:

So what is this xG analysis all about? Are they saying we shouldn't have scored some of the goals we did? And should have conceded some we didn’t?

It is sort of an improvement on shots/shots on target, that takes into account the distance, angel, was it a header or hit with the foot and so on. It then compare that goal scoring opportunity with similar goal scoring opportunities from the past and uses that to estimate a probability for that goal scoring opportunity to result in a goal. Let’s say 20 of 100 similar goal scoring opportunities in the past resulted in a goal, that goal scoring opportunity is given the xG of 0.2. Then they take all the goal scoring opportunities for the entire match and you get the xG for the match. 

If a team is better to get the ball in the net than the average, they will score more goals than the calculated xG. In the end of the day it is goal scored that counts, xG is just a number to give some indication to how good the goal scoring opportunities were during the match. If the xG=1.3 and we scored three goals it just mean we have been very efficient. Or under Gerrard when xG=0.3 and we scored no goals, it meant we were doomed. 

[Delphinho123]

10 hours ago, duke313 said:

 

@Kiwivillan

[duke313]

1 hour ago, viivvaa66 said:

It is sort of an improvement on shots/shots on target, that takes into account the distance, angel, was it a header or hit with the foot and so on. It then compare that goal scoring opportunity with similar goal scoring opportunities from the past and uses that to estimate a probability for that goal scoring opportunity to result in a goal. Let’s say 20 of 100 similar goal scoring opportunities in the past resulted in a goal, that goal scoring opportunity is given the xG of 0.2. Then they take all the goal scoring opportunities for the entire match and you get the xG for the match. 

If a team is better to get the ball in the net than the average, they will score more goals than the calculated xG. In the end of the day it is goal scored that counts, xG is just a number to give some indication to how good the goal scoring opportunities were during the match. If the xG=1.3 and we scored three goals it just mean we have been very efficient. Or under Gerrard when xG=0.3 and we scored no goals, it meant we were doomed. 

But doesn’t it also matter who’s having the shot? Isn’t it more likely that Haaland will score from a particular shot than Keinan Davis? Is that taken into consideration?

[Tomaszk]

12 hours ago, duke313 said:

 

If he honestly thinks that, which he doesn't, it'll be the reason he's won so much less in the last 10 years. 

If you aren't always learning, you'll fall behind.

[TRO]

12 hours ago, duke313 said:

 

I think there is a bit of truth in that......Stats play a part, thats all....but you could level that at anything in life....Sales Stats tell only part of the story too, in Sales.

Watching a game, gives an awful lot of insight in to a conclusion, but of course that comes down to the calibre of the observer.

There is no one, go to, element....its an amalgamation of many things.

Edited April 15, 2023 by TRO

[TRO]

3 hours ago, duke313 said:

So what is this xG analysis all about? Are they saying we shouldn't have scored some of the goals we did? And should have conceded some we didn’t?

I think there is too much spontaneity in football , to be too hung up about Stats.

Stats are ok to a certain extent, but they get carried over in to area's that make them dubious....I think xG could be such an area.

Football prediction, is just light hearted fun.....only betting companies take it seriously, lets not be influenced by them.

[sne]

45 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

If he honestly thinks that, which he doesn't, it'll be the reason he's won so much less in the last 10 years. 

If you aren't always learning, you'll fall behind.

[The_Steve]

There’s value in it to a degree, but it also only tells a certain side of how the game is played. Might we have a high xG if we crossed more? But that’s not how Unai sets the team up.
 

I think some are right to be a little annoyed, as I don’t recall so much emphasis on luck would play a factor in say Newcastle over performing last year. Of course form comes and goes. 
 

I do enjoy a tactical breakdown, but like with shot stats they don’t always tell you everything. 

 

[sne]

Anyone who only looks at the stats is a moron and anyone who totally ignores them is a moron.

Moving on.

[duke313]

3 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

There’s value in it to a degree, but it also only tells a certain side of how the game is played. Might we have a high xG if we crossed more? But that’s not how Unai sets the team up.
 

I think some are right to be a little annoyed, as I don’t recall so much emphasis on luck would play a factor in say Newcastle over performing last year. Of course form comes and goes. 
 

I do enjoy a tactical breakdown, but like with shot stats they don’t always tell you everything. 

 

It’s the wording of the video, that its down to luck. They mention Arsenal having a similar xPTS difference, are they going to do a video on how lucky Arsenal are if they win the league?

[Tomaszk]

24 minutes ago, The_Steve said:

Might we have a high xG if we crossed more.

If we got some shots away from them, yes.

It's 99% based on shot location. One of the many reasons it's not to be taken verbatim as any sort of indicator of "good play".