Championship xg table.

[PhyllisStant]

Re: Championship xg table.

Yes, it has its uses although it isn't the magic riddle that solves football. I see people thinking that 55% possession means the team deserved to win, which is a much worse way to interpret a statistic.

If you think of xG as just how many shots did the teams have, and how good were those shots (six yards out vs 30 yard speculative) then that's it. They doomed themselves from the off by calling it 'expected goals'.

That's not really what XG is. It's all about the quality of the chances created rather than the end product. It's a complex formulae and is often misunderstood. Source: I've done statistical analysis for a living for 20 years

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: Championship xg table.

Just been looking at each club's top scorers. Apart from us, only Barnsley failed to get anyone into double figures. Flint and Colwill were top for us with 6. (Barnsley's top scorer had 9 - so almost double figures).

You're probably already aware of this anyway, but one of Colwill's goals came in the FA Cup, so City's top Championship scorers this season were:

6 - Aden Flint
5 - Rubin Colwill
5 - Kieffer Moore
4 - Jordan Hugill

That's pretty grim.

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: Championship xg table.

It's a complex formulae and is often misunderstood.

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may well be), but doesn't xG differ from site to site? Aren't the figures open to interpretation and based on opinion rather than fact (ie: one person's view of what is a clear opportunity by comparion with another's)?

As far as I'm aware, there's no central, definitive xG source. Is that right?

[PhyllisStant]

Re: Championship xg table.

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may well be), but doesn't xG differ from site to site? Aren't the figures open to interpretation and based on opinion rather than fact (ie: one person's view of what is a clear opportunity by comparion with another's)?

As far as I'm aware, there's no central, definitive xG source. Is that right?

I'm pretty sure there a standard algorithm provided by Opta.

[PhyllisStant]

Re: Championship xg table.

I'm pretty sure there a standard algorithm provided by Opta.

There's an "interesting" article about it here https://theanalyst.com/eu/2021/07/wh...cted-goals-xg/

[lardy]

Re: Championship xg table.

That's not really what XG is. It's all about the quality of the chances created rather than the end product. It's a complex formulae and is often misunderstood. Source: I've done statistical analysis for a living for 20 years

Maybe I didn't explain myself clearly but that's what I meant. A shot from the six yard box is higher quality than a 30 yarder from a centre back. They might both be on target but the closer one is more likely to go in, and xG 'grades' that

[tforturton]

Re: Championship xg table.

I know a few guys who us xg when it comes to making their weekend bets, and I can see how that might help. I can also see that your average pundit might make use of the additional information. But I'm more interested in the Expected Points column, where we came up short by 16 points.

[PaulWent76]

Re: Championship xg table.

You're probably already aware of this anyway, but one of Colwill's goals came in the FA Cup, so City's top Championship scorers this season were:

6 - Aden Flint
5 - Rubin Colwill
5 - Kieffer Moore
4 - Jordan Hugill

That's pretty grim.

We’ve undoubtedly had a crap season but thinking back to our championship winning season, our top scorers only got 8. Personally I’d be more than happy with every member of the squad scoring 5 or 6.

[Rjk]

Re: Championship xg table.

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may well be), but doesn't xG differ from site to site? Aren't the figures open to interpretation and based on opinion rather than fact (ie: one person's view of what is a clear opportunity by comparion with another's)?

As far as I'm aware, there's no central, definitive xG source. Is that right?

yes there are different people calculating their own versions of xG. some of which take into account different things.

the most basic are just looking at the position on the pitch the shot was taken from and comparing it with how many shots from that position in their database went in.

other ones also take into account various other things, like proximity of defenders, position of goalkeeper, where the pass has come from, body position of the player striking the ball etc.
it usually depends on what data is available for the League you are interested in, the lower down the pyramid the less data.
all of these are usually pulled directly from the video feeds by AI rather than humans manually adding the data, which can be a source of error as well.

that said even the most basic version of the stat can be very useful, and the most complex even more so. and there are a range of even more abstract stats like xT or xgChain that have different uses too, often more practical.

lots of the xG content we get in the public domain is often weak, and presented by people with a limited understanding of stats i.e. individual shot xG calculations for a basic style xG might look interesting, but the error bars on them due to the other factors mean that they're not actually very helpful.
looking at rolling xG for like 10 games or more helps to average out some of the problems with the data. "better" xG would possibly need less games (i.e. less shots) to minimise those errors.

one of the big problems with it is how affected by game state it is. we know the first goal in a game changes the way teams set up dramatically.
if we looked at xG teams were creating only while the scores were level (as I've seen some people do) then I think we'd be fairly near the bottom.

[Rjk]

Re: Championship xg table.

I'm pretty sure there a standard algorithm provided by Opta.

that's the most commonly seen one, but there are others

[Undercoverinwurzelland]

Re: Championship xg table.

You're probably already aware of this anyway, but one of Colwill's goals came in the FA Cup, so City's top Championship scorers this season were:

6 - Aden Flint
5 - Rubin Colwill
5 - Kieffer Moore
4 - Jordan Hugill

That's pretty grim.

True

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: Championship xg table.

We’ve undoubtedly had a crap season but thinking back to our championship winning season, our top scorers only got 8.

That's true, but the goals were spread right across the attacking unit:

8 - Helguson
8 - Gunnarsson
8 - Whittingham
7 - Campbell
7 - Noone
6 - Mason
5 - Gestede
5 - Connolly (???)
4 - Bellamy

This time around it was 6 from a centre-back (who scored those goals in 4 games), 5 from a young midfielder who the manager bounces in and out of the team like a yo-yo and 5 from a striker who left in January.

We can only hope that these signings Morison apparently has lined up include at least a couple of strikers.

[PaulWent76]

Re: Championship xg table.

Amen to that.

[Cleve van Leef]

Re: Championship xg table.

The only thing that matters is where a team finishes. End of, that’s the real xg or whatever it’s called.

[Bobby Dandruff]

Re: Championship xg table.

But still ten times better than our other options

I agree.

I’m sorry to see him go as he was easily our best striker and the only one who could control the ball, hold it up and bring other teammates into play (pretty basic requirements admittedly!)

I’m really not sure who they are going to replace him with as Harris just isn’t up to it, and I need to see MUCH more from Watters to be convinced. So who exactly is going to be an upgrade on Hugill?