This seasons stats.

[Bristolisredd]

[phantom]

Ashley Williams most passes ?????

[Monkeh]

Just now, phantom said:

Ashley Williams most passes ?????

Doesn't surprise me, did you see how many times we passed it around the back only yo launch a long ball?

[RedM]

And we think Eliasson isn’t that defensive, think again!

[BCFCGav]

2 minutes ago, RedM said:

And we think Eliasson isn’t that defensive, think again!

Christ that's an unbelievable stat. Especially for someone in and out the team. Gotta keep him... 

[Monkeh]

7 minutes ago, RedM said:

And we think Eliasson isn’t that defensive, think again!

actually I think that reflects poorly on the tactics we employed,

You could see from the way johnson set up the team tackling wasn't an option, they were told to stand off and try and block,

It also shows how poor defensive we were 

[RedM]

15 minutes ago, BCFCGav said:

Christ that's an unbelievable stat. Especially for someone in and out the team. Gotta keep him... 

Or it’s going to add to his value

[ExiledAjax]

31 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

actually I think that reflects poorly on the tactics we employed,

You could see from the way johnson set up the team tackling wasn't an option, they were told to stand off and try and block,

It also shows how poor defensive we were 

Exactly this. It's an impressive number in the context of our team, but in the Championship as a whole it puts Eliasson 81st for tackles. so there's 80 players who have made more tackles than him...and not one of those 80 is a Bristol City player. Helder Costa has 63 ffs. You can also argue it's clear evidence of how Eliasson is tactically naive and wasn't following LJ's instructions, but that is a little speculative of me.

It's an indictment of our play style. Our defence was based around ushering the opponent around on the edge of the box, and blocking their passes into good positions. Forcing, and allowing, a high number of longer range, lower percentage shots. This didn't work.

Some more context on those stats from the club.

Total shots: 466, that puts us 22nd in the division, ahead of only Luton and Charlton. 

Total tackles: 11th

Interceptions: 1st!!! We won the real quiz! Nope, this just reinforces how I describe our defence above. Conceded possession and hope to intercept and counter. We saw this work oh so few times.

Total passes: 13th (the top 3 all have more than 22,000 passes. Fulham are top with nearly 25,000)

Key Passes: 22nd so for all of our mediocre passing numbers...we barely ever did anything with those passes. Again, this is borne out by looking at our failure to win games when we had more possession. I won't bore everyone with the detail but essentially the more possession we had the less likely we were to win. IMO teams figured this out towards the end, and were happy to let us have the ball. In those first ten games when we went unbeaten we had >50% possession only twice (average of 44%). In LJ's final 10 games we had <50% possession only once (average 53.8%). We'd been worked out as being utterly harmless with the ball.

The club can post the raw numbers but without some context they're useless.

[Silvio Dante]

To play complete devils advocate on Eliasson, I think the number of tackles made actually shows him in a poor light.

The modern way of coaching/playing is that you don’t tackle. Reason for that is that it should be a “last ditch” activity as it means your positioning hasn’t been good enough to start with.

If you look at the premier league, Van Dijk made 23 tackles in 38 games. Laporte 13 in 15. Those figures will be low in part as the overall teams are good, but it illustrates good players don’t need to tackle. A more fair comparison with NE may be someone like Stuart Armstrong at Soton - mid table, unlikely to see over 50% possession - 32 tackles in 30 games.

Eliassons biggest weakness is generally a lack of football intelligence re positioning. That stat backs that up big time when you consider how the game is largely played.

[BCFCGav]

21 minutes ago, RedM said:

Or it’s going to add to his value

If we get a great offer I'd wholly condone selling, it sucks but is good for the club. Dream scenario though, is the new boss (when appointed mid-2024..) sells the idea of the club to both Nic and Fam, gets them new deals, and gets them both playing to the level we know they can. I'm convinced they're both promotion quality and could go somewhere else and make us look silly for selling.  

[RedHienz]

Pretty dire reading,  

Shots - is this counting the ones on target? A few times this season we failed to produce a number in that statistical box!

AW's most passes - game plan of building from the back and keeping possession or not having any outlets? 

However stats only tell half the story, like when Byfield top scored in the playoff final year!

[Silvio Dante]

I have also just noticed that the stat for “Box Entries” is not present.

Shoddy work by the club.

[Major Isewater]

21 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I have also just noticed that the stat for “Box Entries” is not present.

Shoddy work by the club.

Or busiest bees . 

[Major Isewater]

Coming off early with some sort of injury - Surely Bakes wins that as well

Number of WTF moments - Williams closely followed by Fam.

Times left out of match day squad - Watkins . 
 

 

[ExiledAjax]

25 minutes ago, RedHienz said:

Pretty dire reading,  

Shots - is this counting the ones on target? A few times this season we failed to produce a number in that statistical box!

AW's most passes - game plan of building from the back and keeping possession or not having any outlets? 

However stats only tell half the story, like when Byfield top scored in the playoff final year!

Yes it includes shots on target. We had 152 of those at an average of 3.3 per game and putting us 21st in the division for that stat.

We had very few shots on target, but we only drew a 0 once. Forest at home. We had a few more where we failed to register two, but you're misremembering if you think we failed to hit the target on numerous occasions.

[ExiledAjax]

For anyone keen on stat breakdowns, Experimental361 has updated his various metrics and produced season summary pictograms https://experimental361.com/category/divisions/championship/

I may do a full breakdown of these in the future but essentially the stats reinforce what many on here came to see towards the end of the season. We were a counter-attacking side that forgot to attack. Our strikers scored about as many as could be expected, and our defence conceded a respectable number of goals given the number of shots it allowed. The problem was we allowed far too many shots and took far too few. Instead we dicked about in the midfield losing possession, or winning possession but doing nothing with it. No incisive passes forward, no shots from outside the box. Just cautious attacking play where we looked (to use an old cliche) like we were trying to "walk it into the net". 

Every decision this summer must be targeted at us taking 5 more shots than our opponents in every game next season.

[RedM]

39 minutes ago, BCFCGav said:

If we get a great offer I'd wholly condone selling, it sucks but is good for the club. Dream scenario though, is the new boss (when appointed mid-2024..) sells the idea of the club to both Nic and Fam, gets them new deals, and gets them both playing to the level we know they can. I'm convinced they're both promotion quality and could go somewhere else and make us look silly for selling.  

I agree. It would be nice for once if we can hang onto players that we have brought on and use them ourselves instead of seeing them flourish at a competitor. 

Yes I realise there is a pecking order with clubs picking up talent from us, and yes the Premiership is a lure we cannot compete with but I would like to think we are at least able to knock back a few Championship clubs for their services. 

It will be interesting to see what some of our players do under another manager as it seems most who leave us go on to well. 

[ExiledAjax]

2 minutes ago, RedM said:

I agree. It would be nice for once if we can hang onto players that we have brought on and use them ourselves instead of seeing them flourish at a competitor. 

Yes I realise there is a pecking order with clubs picking up talent from us, and yes the Premiership is a lure we cannot compete with but I would like to think we are at least able to knock back a few Championship clubs for their services. 

It will be interesting to see what some of our players do under another manager as it seems most who leave us go on to well. 

Eliasson. Personally I hope we are retaining his services until the new manager gets appointed and can take a look at him. He may not have worked in the 352 under LJ but in certain formations and systems, and under a different man, he could be exceptional. Whether a new manager wants to use such a system none of us can tell, but hopefully we can at least give the new man that decision to make himself.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, RedM said:

And we think Eliasson isn’t that defensive, think again!

1 hour ago, BCFCGav said:

Christ that's an unbelievable stat. Especially for someone in and out the team. Gotta keep him... 

1 hour ago, Monkeh said:

actually I think that reflects poorly on the tactics we employed,

You could see from the way johnson set up the team tackling wasn't an option, they were told to stand off and try and block,

It also shows how poor defensive we were 

55 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

To play complete devils advocate on Eliasson, I think the number of tackles made actually shows him in a poor light.

The modern way of coaching/playing is that you don’t tackle. Reason for that is that it should be a “last ditch” activity as it means your positioning hasn’t been good enough to start with.

If you look at the premier league, Van Dijk made 23 tackles in 38 games. Laporte 13 in 15. Those figures will be low in part as the overall teams are good, but it illustrates good players don’t need to tackle. A more fair comparison with NE may be someone like Stuart Armstrong at Soton - mid table, unlikely to see over 50% possession - 32 tackles in 30 games.

Eliassons biggest weakness is generally a lack of football intelligence re positioning. That stat backs that up big time when you consider how the game is largely played.

 

@Bristolisreddwhat data source are you using?

Wyscout recently changed the name of “tackles” to “sliding tackles”....even though the metric was always  measuring sliding tackles (Just poorly named).  Wyscout has 10 sliding tackles this season for Nic.  40% successful.

Kalas and Webster had one of the lowest “tackles” total last season.  Tackles is not a good judge of defensive capability nor effort.  Context is needed.

[ExiledAjax]

24 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

@Bristolisreddwhat data source are you using?

Wyscout recently changed the name of “tackles” to “sliding tackles”....even though the metric was always  measuring sliding tackles (Just poorly named).  Wyscout has 10 sliding tackles this season for Nic.  40% successful.

Kalas and Webster had one of the lowest “tackles” total last season.  Tackles is not a good judge of defensive capability nor effort.  Context is needed.

Dave, I think OP has just screenshotted or copy and pasted the OS's article on stats. https://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/numbers-game-201920-season/

I think Crawley pulls his numbers from whoscored.com as they match perfectly.

[RedHienz]

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yes it includes shots on target. We had 152 of those at an average of 3.3 per game and putting us 21st in the division for that stat.

We had very few shots on target, but we only drew a 0 once. Forest at home. We had a few more where we failed to register two, but you're misremembering if you think we failed to hit the target on numerous occasions.

Much appreciated, it may have been half time glances at the BBC stats that said 0 , that or 1 really isn't good enough either way.

 

[ExiledAjax]

8 minutes ago, RedHienz said:

Much appreciated, it may have been half time glances at the BBC stats that said 0 , that or 1 really isn't good enough either way.

It was a totally fair conclusion to draw from just watching and trying to remember the past year's performances.

You're correct of course that we're going nowhere if we carry on with just 1 or 2 on target in many games. The top teams tend to average somewhere between 4.5 and 5 shots on target per game  (Leeds crushed it this season with a stunning 5.5 per game. For context that puts them close to Liverpool/Man City levels of dominance. Getting an average like that requires around 220 or more total shots on target over the 46 game season. We were at 152 averaging 3.3 this season, some way off where we aspire to be. It means we really need to be increasing our figures by as much as 50%. Huge.

You want to look at the stats after 10 games next term. If we're averaging 15 shots a game, 5 of which test the keeper, then regardless of results you can be positive about the attacking side of our game.

[Monkeh]

2 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

It was a totally fair conclusion to draw from just watching and trying to remember the past year's performances.

You're correct of course that we're going nowhere if we carry on with just 1 or 2 on target in many games. The top teams tend to average somewhere between 4.5 and 5 shots on target per game  (Leeds crushed it this season with a stunning 5.5 per game. For context that puts them close to Liverpool/Man City levels of dominance. Getting an average like that requires around 220 or more total shots on target over the 46 game season. We were at 152 averaging 3.3 this season, some way off where we aspire to be. It means we really need to be increasing our figures by as much as 50%. Huge.

You want to look at the stats after 10 games next term. If we're averaging 15 shots a game, 5 of which test the keeper, then regardless of results you can be positive about the attacking side of our game.

What it did show was how clinical our strikers were, and how well they did with zero service 

[ExiledAjax]

12 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

What it did show was how clinical our strikers were, and how well they did with zero service 

Agreed, and the deeper stats support that conclusion as well.

Essentially there's not much wrong with the strike force, and they actually did well given the service they were provided. The problem, as you say, was that service. Below is one of Experimental361's best graphics. It shows that Diedhiou, Wells, and Weimann all scored at about the expected rate. Paterson really was on fire once he returned to us and we shouldn't expect him to keep up this rate of goals - he's not going to bang in 30 yard free kicks every game is he.

The shaded “stripe” indicates the long-term shot conversion rate of all finishers except the top and bottom 10%, so we can identify those whose performance may be unsustainable (i.e. unlikely to be repeated next season). Our two main strikers look to be scoring at a sustainable rate (in Famara's case we know this to be true as he has scored consistently for us in every season he has been here). If a player is above the stripe, they’re converting chances at a rate consistent with someone in the top 10% of finishers, and likewise a player below the line is in the worst 10%. Note this graph excludes penalties as those can massively skew a player’s contribution away from the threat they pose from open play.

[TheCulturalBomb]

Eliasson would make a superb wingback in a consistent team.

[Davefevs]

32 minutes ago, TheCulturalBomb said:

Eliasson would make a superb wingback in a consistent team.

Why do you think that?  Interested why.

[TheCulturalBomb]

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Why do you think that?  Interested why.

The tackles and key passes stat? Considering how well full backs or wing backs are doing creatively right now, he could translate easily to that position. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Interesting stats...and a lot of it not good!

Shots conceded would've been useful too, but I digress.

Is this for all competitions? I'm personally most interested in the League as the Cup was nothing that exciting or interesting this year.

Around 10 shots per game is quite woeful.

Under 50% possession and under say 75% passing accuracy is indicative of a lack of control.

16 tackles per game isn't too bad-I'd argue tackling is on the decrease, interceptions and screening part of the direction of travel but stats may well prove me wrong!

The clinical nature of our strikers, with not a lot of creativity- this being borne out with the shots and possession, arguably the passing accuracy too- is heartening. Absolutely. It's something to build on, that and Bentley's high save ratio- he was one of the top 5 or 6 IIRC, which was in part due to the fact we were conceding quite a lot of chances.

These are two positives to build on but there's a lot of work- not necessarily in terms of squad IMO but tactics, setup, mindset- control- to be done!

May have to reassess my views a bit on Williams- I still think he's too old and worry about him in even a medium, let alone higher block- but the most interceptions and passes, credit where it's due there.

[MarcusX]

6 hours ago, TheCulturalBomb said:

The tackles and key passes stat? Considering how well full backs or wing backs are doing creatively right now, he could translate easily to that position. 

Have you read the rest of the comments about the tackling?

[Bernard Lerring]

I'm amazed our pass accuracy was 73%. It really didn't seem as high as that from the stands!