I don't usually read too much into these kind of tables, but.........................

[the other bob wilson]

we hardly look like potential record breakers for the lowest ever points total in a Premier League season here;-

http://blog.twelve.football/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Screenshot-2018-10-23-08.43.21.png

[Eric the Half a Bee]

There's also another way of looking at it. The table is suggesting we should have won (nearly) 3 games, scored 10 and conceded 14. Maybe there's something to suggest that we haven't got what we've deserved and these things will even themselves out over the course of the season. There's also the suggestion that we're not as good up front and in defence as we should be and that will more likely result in one thing.

[StraightOuttaCanton]

What do each of the columns mean?

[cardiff55]

But isn't it the real table that counts? We are where we are.

[lardy]

What do each of the columns mean?

x usually means expected, so things are ranked. instead of having 6 shots on target as the stat, an easy five yarder while unmarked will have a bigger expected goal ranking than a 35 yard overhit free kick which bounces to the keeper. Both would be shots on target but this tells you more about the difficulty of the chance.

So expected goals is worked out from how many goals a team would be expected to score from the chances they had in that game and expected win or loss is basically that from both sides. Who was expected to score the most?

I'd imagine that the Burnley game was an expected win for us.

[lardy]

But isn't it the real table that counts? We are where we are.

Yes but it's the equivalent of saying "on another day we'd have won that game" which 99% of fans have said at some point.

[Wales-Bales]

But isn't it the real table that counts? We are where we are.
Let them have their fun in an alternative reality!

[StraightOuttaCanton]

x usually means expected, so things are ranked. instead of having 6 shots on target as the stat, an easy five yarder while unmarked will have a bigger expected goal ranking than a 35 yard overhit free kick which bounces to the keeper. Both would be shots on target but this tells you more about the difficulty of the chance.

So expected goals is worked out from how many goals a team would be expected to score from the chances they had in that game and expected win or loss is basically that from both sides. Who was expected to score the most?

I'd imagine that the Burnley game was an expected win for us.

Ok - that’s helpful. Cheers

[the other bob wilson]

Burnley has to be one of the matches we are reckoned to have "won", my guess is Huddersfield is the other one.

[binman]

Its not right

It should read Wolves should have won every one of their games by at least 3 goals.

[jamieccfc]

Wait until always away sees this :facepalm:

[Penarth Blues]

Wait until always away sees this :facepalm:

I think the basis of his argument was sound despite the amusement it has caused for some, and this table reflects what I've felt about this season so far i.e we're better than our points and position suggest

[sneggyblubird]

Not sure about this,it's a bit of an exercise in hindsight.I expect we'll get tuned this weekend but if we get a result I'll be the first to say I expected a good performance.:hehe:

[Lawnmower]

Burnley has to be one of the matches we are reckoned to have "won", my guess is Huddersfield is the other one.

Or Newcastle.

At Huddersfield we were 2nd best for most of the game until the sending off.

V Newcastle it was the opposite !

I certainly feel we were unlucky up until last Saturday, when we finally got a few breaks go our way

[Rjk]

Last time out in the premier league, us and Fulham were comfortably adrift of the rest in terms of xG throughout the season, even when we were clear of the bottom three, and we ended up finishing as the worst two sides.

So there is room for cautious optimism here, although that should be tempered with the understanding that 9 games is still a very small sample size, and you would expect reasonably high volatility for a while yet.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

The Premier League and all that surrounds it is incredibly hyperbolic. Anyone would have thought that City players were wandering around on their knuckles every Saturday afternoon if you listen to the media pundits.

[jamieccfc]

I think the basis of his argument was sound despite the amusement it has caused for some, and this table reflects what I've felt about this season so far i.e we're better than our points and position suggest

That’s all well and good but I would rather not play that well for 38 games and pick up enough points to stay up than play well in most games and fall short, I know RJK is in to all this type of stuff but it’s meaningless imo

[Penarth Blues]

That’s all well and good but I would rather not play that well for 38 games and pick up enough points to stay up than play well in most games and fall short, I know RJK is in to all this type of stuff but it’s meaningless imo

The table is the final judge, that's for certain, but there is no doubt that luck plays a part in football and these type of statistics support the view that we've not been getting the amount of luck we might be due.

When rjk rolled these out last year in the Championship they were very clear in showing why we were winning games despite what everyone else thought, and that was because we were creating far more chances with a good chance of scoring than almost anyone else AS WELL AS being really tight in defence.

So far it's not really worked for us this year but it does seem that there may be hope in the way we are approaching matches

[Jimmy the Jock]

Burnley has to be one of the matches we are reckoned to have "won", my guess is Huddersfield is the other one.

Newcastle? They were awful.
We have competed in every game , some games we simply didn't have the quality, but the effort has been superb.
I am hopeful we can survive, surprise quite a few of our detractors , if endeavour counts , European football next season...
It doesn't ...I know....

[lardy]

That’s all well and good but I would rather not play that well for 38 games and pick up enough points to stay up than play well in most games and fall short, I know RJK is in to all this type of stuff but it’s meaningless imo

I don't particularly love xG, it's still being refined but it's an interesting way to look at the game.

You've described luck there - play badly but pick up points and stay up. A team will do that by having luck. xG tries to quantify luck, in a way. Which teams are being lucky or unlucky.

Gamblers can use it to identify teams who are underpriced, which ones are 'due' a change in fortune or will start winning if they keep doing what they're doing.

It's certainly less meaningless than looking at a 55-45 possession stat and saying "we were the better team, should have won". Last season the board was full of our possession stats, almost celebrations when we got over 50 as if it was a cause for concern. That's meaningless.

[jamieccfc]

I don't particularly love xG, it's still being refined but it's an interesting way to look at the game.

You've described luck there - play badly but pick up points and stay up. A team will do that by having luck. xG tries to quantify luck, in a way. Which teams are being lucky or unlucky.

Gamblers can use it to identify teams who are underpriced, which ones are 'due' a change in fortune or will start winning if they keep doing what they're doing.

It's certainly less meaningless than looking at a 55-45 possession stat and saying "we were the better team, should have won". Last season the board was full of our possession stats, almost celebrations when we got over 50 as if it was a cause for concern. That's meaningless.

Honestly I don’t really understand the full workings of it but surely possession would increase/decrease XG? I also think stats are meaningless. I don’t bet myself but see your point. Just seems football is getting so complex when it shouldn’t

[lardy]

Honestly I don’t really understand the full workings of it but surely possession would increase/decrease XG? I also think stats are meaningless. I don’t bet myself but see your point. Just seems football is getting so complex when it shouldn’t

No because possession is just proportion of passes completed. If there are 1,000 passes in a match, Cardiff do 600 and Liverpool do 400 then it's 60-40. That's why Swansea always had 75-80%, it was mainly Vorm and Williams knocking it about.

They don't even count time on the ball. That George Weah goal when he ran with the ball for about 12 seconds from his own corner flag would count for 0 because he didn't pass it :hehe: