Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: swain_drfc on February 25, 2023, 05:20:32 pm
-
Bench him Schofield! The lad is a shadow of himself. He is making runs to areas of the pitch where he knows he won’t receive the ball. He doesn’t want it. Then when he does get it, it bounces off him. He spends more time looking at the defenders than he does the ball.
-
Both him and Mitchell have cost us more points this season.
No better than Glen Kirkwood
-
Calling for him benched now is ridiculous. He has only been as good as what we can afford. Wasnt good enough for the Barnsley squad yet, straight into our line up. Never been good enough from the start.
-
That was difference today , they had Andy Cook up front , we had Andy Cap.
-
Calling for him benched now is ridiculous. He has only been as good as what we can afford. Wasnt good enough for the Barnsley squad yet, straight into our line up. Never been good enough from the start.
You're right it's ridiculous. It should have happened weeks ago
-
I wasn’t one of the fantasists saying he would be top scorer in league this season or would nail 20 plus goals, but he’s a useful player at this level. That said, he’s on a horrific run so clearly something isn’t working. He’s not scored in 14 and scored 3 in 20. These are terrible numbers.
-
Said it on here a few week ago he needs dropping. Hes been very poor the last 2 months.
-
Yes he's not playing particularly well at the moment.
But singling him out for criticism is unfair.
What chance does he, or anyone else, have up front in a system in which he is totally and utterly isolated.
Criticism should be aimed at the manager and his hopeless tactics.
-
Clearly not physical enough, he makes it so easy for the defender.
-
That was difference today , they had Andy Cook up front , we had Andy Cap.
Andy Cook was f*cking terrible apart from one header, scored against a defence that can't defend headers. I wouldn't want him in our team either.
What a bloody dreadful league this is.
-
His touch is atrocious, his hood up play is woeful, his runs are terrible, decision making questionable, the lad has been poor for weeks now, he hasn’t had anything to feed on, but as a striker you have to work hard, hold the ball up and drag the team up with you, he’s offering nothing.
-
Yes he's not playing particularly well at the moment.
But singling him out for criticism is unfair.
What chance does he, or anyone else, have up front in a system in which he is totally and utterly isolated.
Criticism should be aimed at the manager and his hopeless tactics.
He’s isolated because he doesn’t offer many options to the midfielders.
We should have signed a strong physical striker in January. It’s league 2.
-
But who would you replace him with?
Agard
Barlow
Griffiths
Laverey
Seriously?
-
We can’t write him off yet but it is getting on for four years since Marquis left and we’ve made a real mess of replacing him - Kwame, Rakish, Sterling, Tulloch, John-Jules, Cukur, Dodoo, Hiwula, Agard, Griffiths, Andrews. Probably more. All a total waste of our money.
-
The amount of absolute f**king gash in that list is mind-boggling.
-
John-Jules was good
-
Miller is not quite big enough to bully defenders, not quite quick enough to out run them, not quite good enough to link play consistently, and not quite clever enough to outthink them. Having said that if you don't get players close enough to him and running beyond him you will always struggle to threaten a solid defence.
-
John-Jules was good
A decent player yes but injured far too much and as a result scored five goals for us in a season. Not enough to remotely replace Marquis.
-
But who would you replace him with?
Agard
Barlow
Griffiths
Laverey
Seriously?
Precisely.
We've signed half a dozen VW Polos and the fans are moaning that we don't pull away from the lights very quickly.
Unless folk engage with just how f**king awful our recruitment has been for 2 years, they are going to carry on being pissed off with the performances. You have to grit your teeth and expect a two year rebuilding job.
-
Didn’t do much wrong today but also didn’t impact game at all. Too often the ball bobbles off him but he’s outnumbered on his own
-
Griffiths must smoke cigars in training if he can't get near this side
-
Or maybe he's really not very good?
-
Last time I saw Griffiths play he moved like a wardrobe.
-
Last time I saw Griffiths play he moved like a wardrobe.
Plus he lacks height. We need a tallboy.
-
Last time I saw Griffiths play he moved like a wardrobe.
Plus he lacks height. We need a tallboy.
Sack the (side) board.
-
Last time I saw Griffiths play he moved like a wardrobe.
Plus he lacks height. We need a tallboy.
Sack the (side) board.
We need wins, not drawers.
-
The table doesn't lie.
-
Don't think Miller is this issue.
We're neat and tidy in the first two thirds of the pitch and then utterly clueless in the final third. We don't create chances which means we don't generate shots which means we don't score many goals. It's glaringly obvious but nothing seems to change.
I think given the right service and the ball played into the right areas Miller will score. Its no fluke he scored goals in the first third/half of the season.
Bradford take a different approach. Very direct. Aim for the big lad up front, that either generates a chance by itself or they feed off the knock downs and second balls. We gifted them their only corner of the match and they made it pay.
On one hand I can see what DS is trying to do, on the other hand I really wonder whether it will come together in L2, even if we could get the right players in.
Look at Stevenage, you know for a fact they aren't emulating the way Man City play. Leyton Orient similar.
-
But who would you replace him with?
Agard
Barlow
Griffiths
Laverey
Seriously?
Precisely.
We've signed half a dozen VW Polos and the fans are moaning that we don't pull away from the lights very quickly.
Unless folk engage with just how f**king awful our recruitment has been for 2 years, they are going to carry on being pissed off with the performances. You have to grit your teeth and expect a two year rebuilding job.
If the rebuild job keeps bringing us Lavery’s then we’re going to be waiting a damn sight longer than two years for things to turn around.
-
Cannot see him scoring another goal this season.
-
Miller is good at making runs in behind and feeding off throughballs. He is bad at playing with his back to goal receiving the ball into feet.
The way we play means that he has to do a lot more of the latter than the former. We didn't even think to look for a striker in January who could play this role well.
Maybe we are still useless when it comes to aligning recruitment with how we actually want to play.
-
Consistently amazes me we buy players and only then try to make them fit into a system. Fejiri couldn’t play with his back to the goal. Dodoo to the extent he could play, was a wider player. Miller needs ball in front of him. All of these made to play in a way they are patently not suited to playing.
-
Interesting that Mark Hughes was watching, a former striker who played exactly that role , receiving the ball with his back to the goal, holding off/ beating a couple of defenders and putting the ball in the net.
Many ,many times for United and Wales.
I can't remember the last time I saw Rovers do that.
I think he was thinking, why try and play to that system when you haven't got strikers that can do that ?
-
The logic must be that the one up can hold the ball up and play with the 2/3 behind him to bring them into play. This doesn’t happen as Miller is not a player to hold the ball up, and nobody ever runs past him. He’s totally isolated so that when he inevitably loses the ball, it goes straight to the opposition with no press to put them straight under pressure. It’s the worst of both worlds really.
-
“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”
-
Which one Miller or Lavery ?
-
League 2 big chances missed
https://www.fotmob.com/leagues/109/stats/season/17836/players/big_chance_missed/league-two-players
-
The logic must be that the one up can hold the ball up and play with the 2/3 behind him to bring them into play. This doesn’t happen as Miller is not a player to hold the ball up, and nobody ever runs past him. He’s totally isolated so that when he inevitably loses the ball, it goes straight to the opposition with no press to put them straight under pressure. It’s the worst of both worlds really.
You can play one up top who isn’t a back to goal type. Leicester did it with Vardy for a while. Needs us to play quickly to get in behind early though. Useless if we want to boss possession
-
League 2 big chances missed
https://www.fotmob.com/leagues/109/stats/season/17836/players/big_chance_missed/league-two-players
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=286088.msg1189527#msg1189527
Miller getting chances at a rate of 0.3xG per game. That’s been consistent all season. His goals return matches this.
-
The logic must be that the one up can hold the ball up and play with the 2/3 behind him to bring them into play. This doesn’t happen as Miller is not a player to hold the ball up, and nobody ever runs past him. He’s totally isolated so that when he inevitably loses the ball, it goes straight to the opposition with no press to put them straight under pressure. It’s the worst of both worlds really.
You can play one up top who isn’t a back to goal type. Leicester did it with Vardy for a while. Needs us to play quickly to get in behind early though. Useless if we want to boss possession
I don’t think he’s quick enough to play that way either. Vardy in his prime was lightning.
-
Agree probably not got the lightning pace to really scare teams. But we a in L2 the centre half’s are slower too
-
It is an inescapable fact that Miller has scored only 2 goals subsequent to the Crewe game at which point Schofield had only just arrived. He got the two goals in question at Grimsby which was more free-flowing than the style which is now embedded.
So it is legitimate to question whether Miller fits into the present scheme. Obviously his inability to adapt to the DS system is not DS’s fault. Not adapting to it is costing us though and it points up both the player’s and the manager’s limitations. As scoring goals is vital it is surely simpler for the Head Coach to modify things to accommodate the player.
You could say that it has cost us 8+ Miller goals at least.
-
Given that DS would have known what players we had when he came here and that we were unlikely to be able to bring in another regular goal scoring forward (because other clubs would usually pay more wages than we can afford for such a player) then I think he is in the wrong by not putting together a system which suits the players.
-
League 2 big chances missed
https://www.fotmob.com/leagues/109/stats/season/17836/players/big_chance_missed/league-two-players
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=286088.msg1189527#msg1189527
Miller getting chances at a rate of 0.3xG per game. That’s been consistent all season. His goals return matches this.
Genuine question.
Does the xG figure for Miller take into account the fact that he's totally unable to shoot with his left foot, and therefore is limited as a finisher? Or does it only take into account the quality of the chance and how many goals an average striker would score from those.
If it's the former, I can see why the xG isso low as he's had a hell of a lot of really, really good chances that he's spurned through not using his left foot.
If the xG is NOT making an allowance for his left foot failings, but rather just considering the quality of the chances, xG of 0.3 (9.9 goals so far this season in his 30 games) does seem very low. That footmob data of him missing 13 good chances doesn't feel wrong. You'd expect a reasonable striker to be converting several of those. And my recollection is that few of the 9 he has scored were one in a million efforts, most of them being fairly routine finishes. So from what I've seen of his chances, I'd have expected a good finisher to have scored more like 14-15 goals and have an xG of around 0.5.
Which says to me that as a side, we are creating chances for our main striker. He's just been poor at converting them.
-
League 2 big chances missed
https://www.fotmob.com/leagues/109/stats/season/17836/players/big_chance_missed/league-two-players
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=286088.msg1189527#msg1189527
Miller getting chances at a rate of 0.3xG per game. That’s been consistent all season. His goals return matches this.
Genuine question.
Does the xG figure for Miller take into account the fact that he's totally unable to shoot with his left foot, and therefore is limited as a finisher? Or does it only take into account the quality of the chance and how many goals an average striker would score from those.
If it's the former, I can see why the xG isso low as he's had a hell of a lot of really, really good chances that he's spurned through not using his left foot.
If the xG is NOT making an allowance for his left foot failings, but rather just considering the quality of the chances, xG of 0.3 (9.9 goals so far this season in his 30 games) does seem very low. That footmob data of him missing 13 good chances doesn't feel wrong. You'd expect a reasonable striker to be converting several of those. And my recollection is that few of the 9 he has scored were one in a million efforts, most of them being fairly routine finishes. So from what I've seen of his chances, I'd have expected a good finisher to have scored more like 14-15 goals and have an xG of around 0.5.
Which says to me that as a side, we are creating chances for our main striker. He's just been poor at converting them.
People seem to be in denial about what the stats say. See Mitchell distribution thread.
-
League 2 big chances missed
https://www.fotmob.com/leagues/109/stats/season/17836/players/big_chance_missed/league-two-players
https://www.drfc-vsc.co.uk/index.php?topic=286088.msg1189527#msg1189527
Miller getting chances at a rate of 0.3xG per game. That’s been consistent all season. His goals return matches this.
Genuine question.
Does the xG figure for Miller take into account the fact that he's totally unable to shoot with his left foot, and therefore is limited as a finisher? Or does it only take into account the quality of the chance and how many goals an average striker would score from those.
If it's the former, I can see why the xG isso low as he's had a hell of a lot of really, really good chances that he's spurned through not using his left foot.
If the xG is NOT making an allowance for his left foot failings, but rather just considering the quality of the chances, xG of 0.3 (9.9 goals so far this season in his 30 games) does seem very low. That footmob data of him missing 13 good chances doesn't feel wrong. You'd expect a reasonable striker to be converting several of those. And my recollection is that few of the 9 he has scored were one in a million efforts, most of them being fairly routine finishes. So from what I've seen of his chances, I'd have expected a good finisher to have scored more like 14-15 goals and have an xG of around 0.5.
Which says to me that as a side, we are creating chances for our main striker. He's just been poor at converting them.
What % chance would you think they class a good chance as? It’s usually 25-30% probability of scoring. Probably lower than people would presume.
I said it at the start of the season and I’ll say it again with the numbers to back me up. Miller will score at around 0.3 goals per game in an average L2 side, which is not terrible, but his all round play is terrible which makes him a pretty average L2 player. Absolutely no parts of his game would translate to a higher level meaning his potential resale value is pretty much zero.
I’d he was playing in a two up top as a second striker with a really good player next to him, then ok, he could be ok BUT how many teams play two up top? Not many. Another reason that if he did fluke up and get 20 in a season, teams wouldn’t be queueing up to sign him.
-
Apologies Gaz, I don't think I made my question clear.
Is the 0.3 figure the goals you'd expect a typical striker to score from the chances Miller had had, or the goals you'd specifically expect Miller to score?
-
Apologies Gaz, I don't think I made my question clear.
Is the 0.3 figure the goals you'd expect a typical striker to score from the chances Miller had had, or the goals you'd specifically expect Miller to score?
Average conversion from that shot location. Not individual to a specific player.
-
The whole set up of the team relies upon miller holding the ball up to allow others to get into forward positions. He doesn’t do this and therefore we don’t have any sustained possession in the final third.
He’s not the answer in this system but that’s not to say he doesn’t have a part to play in the future.
-
Apologies Gaz, I don't think I made my question clear.
Is the 0.3 figure the goals you'd expect a typical striker to score from the chances Miller had had, or the goals you'd specifically expect Miller to score?
Average conversion from that shot location. Not individual to a specific player.
Interesting.
Do you have access to his xG figures for specific matches? I'm thinking of the Rochdale away game this year as an example.
-
Have we replaced Tomlin as the main provider of chances from midfield?, no we haven’t.
The manager plays wingers that cut inside so no crosses into the box. We haven’t had a regular assist midfielder behind the strikers.
So Miller has to somehow score from long punts up the field. He has to battle 2-3 centre halves on his own. Is it any wonder he isn’t scoring goals?
-
Have we replaced Tomlin as the main provider of chances from midfield?, no we haven’t.
The manager plays wingers that cut inside so no crosses into the box. We haven’t had a regular assist midfielder behind the strikers.
So Miller has to somehow score from long punts up the field. He has to battle 2-3 centre halves on his own. Is it any wonder he isn’t scoring goals?
Agreed that we need some more creativity. Mansfield signed Keillor-Dunn, he would have been ideal.
-
Miller gets into very good positions and we do create (actually, often HE does create) good chances. I really don't think creating chances for him is the core of our problem. It's his finishing that has collapsed. That's why I'm intrigued about the xG figures.
On the Footystats site, they say that against Sutton, the xG for the entire side was 1.00. But Miller had a chance 4 yards from goal, unmarked, no-one in front of him with the keeper 6 yards to the side of him. That was in the top 5% of easiest chances a striker will ever have. Given the fact that we also had 4-5 headers and shots from good positions in that game, I can only assume that someone has put that Miller chance down as a no more than 0.50 xG chance (because the other chances would have added up to a reasonable fraction of the overall 1.00). That makes me think that the xG score that each individual chance is rated at cannot possibly be taking the detail of the chance into account. Is it just working on the location that the shot is taken from, and not factoring in where the defenders are, whether the striker is stretching to reach the ball or well under control etc?
Back to that chance at Sutton. I watched the video again last night. It really could not have been a simpler finish if he'd taken it with his left foot. Literally an open goal. And it was coming to him just right to meet it with his left foot. Instead he's actually readjusted his step to let the ball come across onto his right foot. That has given the defender coming in on his blindside the chance to make the block.
One such instance of that reluctance to use his left foot would be a worry. But it's not even the most glaring instance this season, after that scarcely believable one at Rochdale. I don't suppose anyone has the stats but I'd be fascinated to see just how often he has shot with his left foot this season.
Point being that if we could work on his confidence with his left foot, I genuinely think he would be a 20 goal a season striker. He does get into excellent positions, but the finishing is letting him down.
-
Have we replaced Tomlin as the main provider of chances from midfield?, no we haven’t.
The manager plays wingers that cut inside so no crosses into the box. We haven’t had a regular assist midfielder behind the strikers.
So Miller has to somehow score from long punts up the field. He has to battle 2-3 centre halves on his own. Is it any wonder he isn’t scoring goals?
the wing backs provide the width for us and they’re the ones putting in most of the crosses, brown especially has put in a lot since he joined, Maxwell likes to come inside if the chance is there but if he does do that hurst normally stays wide.
-
Have we replaced Tomlin as the main provider of chances from midfield?, no we haven’t.
The manager plays wingers that cut inside so no crosses into the box. We haven’t had a regular assist midfielder behind the strikers.
So Miller has to somehow score from long punts up the field. He has to battle 2-3 centre halves on his own. Is it any wonder he isn’t scoring goals?
the wing backs provide the width for us and they’re the ones putting in most of the crosses, brown especially has put in a lot since he joined, Maxwell likes to come inside if the chance is there but if he does do that hurst normally stays wide.
Maxwell put the cross in for that Miller chance at Sutton.
This is what the chance looked like by the way. That's the moment Miller would have been making contact with the ball if he'd stepped onto it to strike with his left foot. Excellent attacking play, and very, very good striker's instinct from Miller to find space. Just the left foot thing...
-
Confirms my post at the time that he didn't have a shot blocked. He missed an open goal giving the defender behind him the opportunity to clear the ball.
-
Is xG then just a expectation of for example all shots taken from that spot how many score? Does if account for position the player who shoots is I.e. more chance of a striker than a defender scoring. And does it take account of playing level? I’d expect prem players to have higher scores than L2 where you need more chances to score per goal normally.
I suppose this is all in the data somewhere but if we’re saying so and so has good/bad xG and basing opinions off that it’d be good to know the numbers aren’t skewed by these types of thing.
-
Decent article here which I think answers my questions.
https://jobsinfootball.com/blog/what-is-expected-goals-xg/#:~:text=xG%20is%20calculated%20using%20a,scale%20between%200%20and%201.
Key sections:
One thing that's important to note is that different xG models can be used by different organisations and competitions. Each model has its own characteristics, although they generally all rely on the same major factors: distance to goal, angle to goal, body part with which the shot is taken, plus the type of assist or prior action (eg. cross, through-ball, set-piece, short pass, dribble etc.) Models use all the information they have on shots with similar characteristics to come up with a mathematical value relating to how much a player would be expected to score the relevant chance.
...
There are limitations in terms of the data available. For instance, there's a lack of information on the exact state of play when a shot is taken. As the years go on and the data continues to get better, these limitations will gradually be removed or at least reduced.
That's kind of what I thought. So Miller's miss against Rochdale will have been graded as "20 yards out, shot, player running with ball". For which I'd guess you'd expect a goal maybe once in ten? Whereas in fact it was an absolutely open net and if taken with the left foot, you'd expect a goal 19 times out of 20.
Similarly with the Sutton chance. Shot from cross in front of goal 4 yards out might be xG=0.3. But factor in the goalkeeper being 6 yards off to the side, no defender either in front to block or making a challenge and it would be xG=0.95.
I guess the idea is that over a season, these factors even out. I'm not sure that's the case with Miller though, where he has frequently created or got on the end of really good chances and fluffed them because of the left foot thing. I'd say with the chances he's made, I'd expect a decent finisher to be scoring every other game (xG = 0.5).
-
I would say that a striker who scores every other game is considerably better than being a decent finisher.
There aren’t many players who have a scoring record of a goal every other game.
-
Confirms my post at the time that he didn't have a shot blocked. He missed an open goal giving the defender behind him the opportunity to clear the ball.
So by giving the defender the chance to get in a block, he didn't have a shot blocked? staggering logic.
Yes, he should have buried it, but there's some impressive mental gymnastics going on there.
-
Either the system changes or he takes some time out for me. All we seem to be achieving is destroying the fellas confidence. It's always the case that when a player's confidence is shot they cannot achieve even the most basic of commands such as shoot, regardless of which foot its on, he's also started to really struggle to receive and control any ball sent through to him, this has had the result of killing stone dead any attacking intent we attempt to achieve with him playing the front hold up role.
If we don't aim to change our playing strategy then i'd say Lavary should get the nod for the next few games to show what he has, looks the more likely prospect at the minute, no one else on the horizon who can improve us.
-
Decent article here which I think answers my questions.
https://jobsinfootball.com/blog/what-is-expected-goals-xg/#:~:text=xG%20is%20calculated%20using%20a,scale%20between%200%20and%201.
Key sections:
One thing that's important to note is that different xG models can be used by different organisations and competitions. Each model has its own characteristics, although they generally all rely on the same major factors: distance to goal, angle to goal, body part with which the shot is taken, plus the type of assist or prior action (eg. cross, through-ball, set-piece, short pass, dribble etc.) Models use all the information they have on shots with similar characteristics to come up with a mathematical value relating to how much a player would be expected to score the relevant chance.
...
There are limitations in terms of the data available. For instance, there's a lack of information on the exact state of play when a shot is taken. As the years go on and the data continues to get better, these limitations will gradually be removed or at least reduced.
That's kind of what I thought. So Miller's miss against Rochdale will have been graded as "20 yards out, shot, player running with ball". For which I'd guess you'd expect a goal maybe once in ten? Whereas in fact it was an absolutely open net and if taken with the left foot, you'd expect a goal 19 times out of 20.
Similarly with the Sutton chance. Shot from cross in front of goal 4 yards out might be xG=0.3. But factor in the goalkeeper being 6 yards off to the side, no defender either in front to block or making a challenge and it would be xG=0.95.
I guess the idea is that over a season, these factors even out. I'm not sure that's the case with Miller though, where he has frequently created or got on the end of really good chances and fluffed them because of the left foot thing. I'd say with the chances he's made, I'd expect a decent finisher to be scoring every other game (xG = 0.5).
It depends on the site, StatsBomb are probably the market leaders, their xG takes into account defenders/goalkeepers positioning, others will too. StatsBomb also offer post shot xG figures such as shot velocity which can show how good a player is at finishing.
-
Decent article here which I think answers my questions.
https://jobsinfootball.com/blog/what-is-expected-goals-xg/#:~:text=xG%20is%20calculated%20using%20a,scale%20between%200%20and%201.
Key sections:
One thing that's important to note is that different xG models can be used by different organisations and competitions. Each model has its own characteristics, although they generally all rely on the same major factors: distance to goal, angle to goal, body part with which the shot is taken, plus the type of assist or prior action (eg. cross, through-ball, set-piece, short pass, dribble etc.) Models use all the information they have on shots with similar characteristics to come up with a mathematical value relating to how much a player would be expected to score the relevant chance.
...
There are limitations in terms of the data available. For instance, there's a lack of information on the exact state of play when a shot is taken. As the years go on and the data continues to get better, these limitations will gradually be removed or at least reduced.
That's kind of what I thought. So Miller's miss against Rochdale will have been graded as "20 yards out, shot, player running with ball". For which I'd guess you'd expect a goal maybe once in ten? Whereas in fact it was an absolutely open net and if taken with the left foot, you'd expect a goal 19 times out of 20.
Similarly with the Sutton chance. Shot from cross in front of goal 4 yards out might be xG=0.3. But factor in the goalkeeper being 6 yards off to the side, no defender either in front to block or making a challenge and it would be xG=0.95.
I guess the idea is that over a season, these factors even out. I'm not sure that's the case with Miller though, where he has frequently created or got on the end of really good chances and fluffed them because of the left foot thing. I'd say with the chances he's made, I'd expect a decent finisher to be scoring every other game (xG = 0.5).
It depends on the site, StatsBomb are probably the market leaders, their xG takes into account defenders/goalkeepers positioning. They also offer post shot xG figures such as shot velocity which can show how good a player is at finishing.
I'd be very interested to see what they had Miller's xG figures to be for the Sutton and Rochdale away games then.
-
Decent article here which I think answers my questions.
https://jobsinfootball.com/blog/what-is-expected-goals-xg/#:~:text=xG%20is%20calculated%20using%20a,scale%20between%200%20and%201.
Key sections:
One thing that's important to note is that different xG models can be used by different organisations and competitions. Each model has its own characteristics, although they generally all rely on the same major factors: distance to goal, angle to goal, body part with which the shot is taken, plus the type of assist or prior action (eg. cross, through-ball, set-piece, short pass, dribble etc.) Models use all the information they have on shots with similar characteristics to come up with a mathematical value relating to how much a player would be expected to score the relevant chance.
...
There are limitations in terms of the data available. For instance, there's a lack of information on the exact state of play when a shot is taken. As the years go on and the data continues to get better, these limitations will gradually be removed or at least reduced.
That's kind of what I thought. So Miller's miss against Rochdale will have been graded as "20 yards out, shot, player running with ball". For which I'd guess you'd expect a goal maybe once in ten? Whereas in fact it was an absolutely open net and if taken with the left foot, you'd expect a goal 19 times out of 20.
Similarly with the Sutton chance. Shot from cross in front of goal 4 yards out might be xG=0.3. But factor in the goalkeeper being 6 yards off to the side, no defender either in front to block or making a challenge and it would be xG=0.95.
I guess the idea is that over a season, these factors even out. I'm not sure that's the case with Miller though, where he has frequently created or got on the end of really good chances and fluffed them because of the left foot thing. I'd say with the chances he's made, I'd expect a decent finisher to be scoring every other game (xG = 0.5).
It depends on the site, StatsBomb are probably the market leaders, their xG takes into account defenders/goalkeepers positioning. They also offer post shot xG figures such as shot velocity which can show how good a player is at finishing.
I'd be very interested to see what they had Miller's xG figures to be for the Sutton and Rochdale away games then.
I have WyScout and if it's the chance at the beginning of the second half that's 0.7, as a team we got 1.3 for the game. I believe Gaz has Instat so his figure may vary from that slightly.
-
Ah now. Assuming you're referring to the Sutton game, the question then is, is that 0.7 calculated from the chance that it became, when he took the ball with his right foot and brought the defender into play? Or the chance it should have been if he'd simply stepped into the ball with his left and eliminated the defender from the issue?
Seems to me it must be the former. Because the latter really is as easy a chance as a striker could ever hope for. I simply don't believe that an average striker would miss that 3 times in 10.
-
Ah now. Assuming you're referring to the Sutton game, the question then is, is that 0.7 calculated from the chance that it became, when he took the ball with his right foot and brought the defender into play? Or the chance it should have been if he'd simply stepped into the ball with his left and eliminated the defender from the issue?
Seems to me it must be the former. Because the latter really is as easy a chance as a striker could ever hope for. I simply don't believe that an average striker would miss that 3 times in 10.
Miller did miss it, so it's clearly easier to miss then you assume. 70% of the time that chance is scored is a very good percentage. Other than a penalty I doubt you'll get many higher percentage chances.
-
He missed it because he didn't trust his own left foot. That's my point. He made it into a far harder chance. Just as he did at Rochdale, with that chance that I would have genuinely backed myself at 56 and with a shit left foot to have scored.
Having taken up that position and being prepared to use a left foot, that chance was nigh on impossible to miss.
Not actually impossible of course, because bizarre things happen. But I simply do not believe that a decent Tier 4 striker with a left foot he has any confidence in whatsoever would fail to score 30% of the time in that position.
-
Some really amazing players available if ever the forum puts out a football team.
Including a penalty taker who would never miss the target
-
We're missing a trick here. Why don't the scouts look closer to home and give BST a run-out? Either that or see what Daniel Day-Lewis is doing these days.
-
BB.
I think you missed the bit where I gave praise to Miller's creation of chances. Why doesn't that surprise me?