Shot Shy City

[Red-Robbo]

11 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

 

My theory is that our coaching squad decided, after observing the players in training, that this particular set of professional footballers weren't the best at shooting on sight, snap shots, or long shots, and so would have the best chance of scoring the most goals if the were instructed to only shoot from certain positions. Perhaps this is overthinking it, perhaps it give LJ too much credit. It's an unprovable theory without having a very candid chat with the men in charge.

 

 

Personally I think it's more a case of being less criticised for being over-cautious than for missing a shot. I doubt it was a coached-in strategy.

I always think, if you can see two-thirds of the goal netting in front of you and you're within range, have a pop.

[Mr Popodopolous]

It's not just shots though, it's shots 'allowed'- it's possession, it's control, it's stability- in isolation these things are fine but when they all stack up/come together as they did under LJ, it's worrying!

[Reigate Red]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I looked at average shot length too, but it wasn’t really conclusive, nor is it really the kind of indicator I was trying to get across in a very small sample of games.

There are a few other things for me to look at though.

I believe there are some "analyst" vacancies at Ashton Gate at the moment 

[IAmNick]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Ok:

Holden 5 vs (Johnson last 5)

Points per game: 1.6 (0.4)

Goals For per game: 1.4 (0.6)

Goals Agst per game: 1.0 (1.6)

xG For: 1.28 (0.95)

xG Agst: 1.40 (1.28)

Shots For: 10.6 (8.6)

Shots Agst: 14.4 (11.6)

Possession Ratio: 56:44 (50.5:49.5)

Passes Made: 440 (344)

Success: 82% (78%)

Passes Allowed: 329 (336) negligible

Summary:

• much better with the ball and keeping it
• allow too many chances (but goals against more efficient)

Of course you need to understand not only our own trends, but also weight it to take into account what the teams we faced usually allow... and whether Afobe had diarrhoea or not 

I'm kidding of course, but over only 5 games while interesting I don't think the stats mean much personally... or at least shouldn't be used as predictors (as eager as we all are to understand what Holden's city might look like)!

Having said that one thing I'm a bit surprised as is that we only averaged 2 more shots per game under Holden - my impression from watching is that the team were shooting a lot more, and from further out.

[Davefevs]

@IAmNick I think we saw games against a good mix of opposition styles, ignoring league form and ignoring form....not forgetting our own form!  I think our system held up well.  My buzzword was “encouraging”.  Let’s see how everything shapes up.

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, IAmNick said:

Having said that one thing I'm a bit surprised as is that we only averaged 2 more shots per game under Holden - my impression from watching is that the team were shooting a lot more, and from further out.

We shot more than in the recent games under LJ. But we were still out shot by the opposition in every game Holden managed, including Hull and Boro. Hull for example had 18 shots to our 9, although we had 5 on target and they had 4, so the sprayed and prayed and we took our chances. Efficiency won the day. The other Holden games were closer generally, but on the final day of the season (a weird game I'll admit) we let Preston shoot 22 times to our 13.

It's worth dredging up some GCSE maths and talking a little about what we mean by "average". Generally when people say "average" they mean they've added up the total and divided it by the count. It's useful, but doesn't always tell the whole story as it can be swayed by a few very large or very small values. Say a team loses 4 games 2-1 but then wins the fifth game 9-0. They've got an average goals for of 13/5 = 2.6 goals per game and an average against of 1.6. Are they good though? No not really. 

Instead look at the Mode, the most common value returned. That will be 1 scored and 2 conceded, which is much more in line with their points return. The Median wold return the same.

Apply that to our shots. The Mode for our shots this season gone was 8. Eight. It actually happened 7 times; on 7 occasions we shot just 8 times in a match. For shots against it was 16. Median figures were 10 and 15 respectively. Both these stats return a greater disparity than the raw average does and so suggest, to me, a greater gulf in performance than we perhaps see when we consider the simple "average".

Just to note that Mode and Median are less useful the smaller your sample size, and you can't even derive a Mode for Holden's 5 games as no value repeats itself, but the Median comes out as an extra 2 shots for and an extra 2 against.

Dodgy stats lesson over (and apologies if I've taught you to suck eggs) I'm cagier about Holden-ball than @Davefevs. He saw some bright spots that were "encouraging", but that I have struggled to spot. I guess my prediction for 2020/21, if it's worth anything as it's based on pretty crude analysis of a tiny sample, is that if Holden continues playing a similar system to the one he used in his last 5 games, with the same players, then we may see more shots taken by us, but we'd see more against us as well. Assuming the quality of all those shots and all the players involved stays roughly the same (which it won't) then you might expect to see us score more but also concede more. Goal difference would still be 2 or 3 either side of 0 and therefore I'd expect we'd end up somewhere around mid-table again with something like 59 points. Lot's of caveats in there but there it is.

Biggest caveat of all: football's not played on paper or spreadsheets, so who knows what might happen.

[marmite]

6 hours ago, bcfc01 said:

Thanks.

Confirms what we saw under Holden - we played a much more pressing, possession based game in those 5 games, but looked a bit dodgy defensively.

Promising though (even though it was only 5 games) as the players looked comfortable in that set up and played with a bit of freedom - not as rigid as under LJ. 

This is what Im hoping for under Holden, more freedom for players to express themselves.  LJ's players were far to rigid and sometimes looked like they had gone out of their allocated zone. If Dean Holden can give them the freedom and confidence that the Cotts team had, then with enthusiastic youngsters, eager to impress, playing a forward thinking style,  maybe they can put the smile back on our faces. Its going to be an interesting ride for sure.

[IAmNick]

14 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

We shot more than in the recent games under LJ. But we were still out shot by the opposition in every game Holden managed, including Hull and Boro. Hull for example had 18 shots to our 9, although we had 5 on target and they had 4, so the sprayed and prayed and we took our chances. Efficiency won the day. The other Holden games were closer generally, but on the final day of the season (a weird game I'll admit) we let Preston shoot 22 times to our 13.

It's worth dredging up some GCSE maths and talking a little about what we mean by "average". Generally when people say "average" they mean they've added up the total and divided it by the count. It's useful, but doesn't always tell the whole story as it can be swayed by a few very large or very small values. Say a team loses 4 games 2-1 but then wins the fifth game 9-0. They've got an average goals for of 13/5 = 2.6 goals per game and an average against of 1.6. Are they good though? No not really. 

Instead look at the Mode, the most common value returned. That will be 1 scored and 2 conceded, which is much more in line with their points return. The Median wold return the same.

Apply that to our shots. The Mode for our shots this season gone was 8. Eight. It actually happened 7 times; on 7 occasions we shot just 8 times in a match. For shots against it was 16. Median figures were 10 and 15 respectively. Both these stats return a greater disparity than the raw average does and so suggest, to me, a greater gulf in performance than we perhaps see when we consider the simple "average".

Just to note that Mode and Median are less useful the smaller your sample size, and you can't even derive a Mode for Holden's 5 games as no value repeats itself, but the Median comes out as an extra 2 shots for and an extra 2 against.

Dodgy stats lesson over (and apologies if I've taught you to suck eggs) I'm cagier about Holden-ball than @Davefevs. He saw some bright spots that were "encouraging", but that I have struggled to spot. I guess my prediction for 2020/21, if it's worth anything as it's based on pretty crude analysis of a tiny sample, is that if Holden continues playing a similar system to the one he used in his last 5 games, with the same players, then we may see more shots taken by us, but we'd see more against us as well. Assuming the quality of all those shots and all the players involved stays roughly the same (which it won't) then you might expect to see us score more but also concede more. Goal difference would still be 2 or 3 either side of 0 and therefore I'd expect we'd end up somewhere around mid-table again with something like 59 points. Lot's of caveats in there but there it is.

Biggest caveat of all: football's not played on paper or spreadsheets, so who knows what might happen.

No apology necessary - I agree 100% about the mean/median/mode thing. I often use the example of the average salary in the room before and after a CEO walks in with the guys on my team at work! It often doesn't really mean much.

I hadn't looked at the  actual individual numbers though so thanks for doing that - much appreciated.

Edit: out of interest, where are you getting the stats from? Is there a decent site with a public API?

 

[bcfcredandwhite]

I read somewhere that LJ didn’t like his players shooting from outside the box. He wanted us to ‘walk’ the ball into the net like Arsenal used to. His reasoning being that we kept the ball and the attack going instead of firing it into row Z. 
I don’t know if that’s true and can’t remember the source, but it could explain the few number of shots. 

[Davefevs]

@ExiledAjax good post.  The crudity of simple maths, especially in a 5 game sample can highlight anomalies.

Most of my analysis is done with the eyes.  Now that I watch on tv (rather than at AG) and express my views on Forever BC pod, I’ve gotten into the habit of writing notes.  Looks a bit sad if you do that at AG, and my memory is pretty good, so avoided until watching in my living room.  The drinks break has been a good intermission to check my notes (what I’ve witnessed) and check some stats.

And the encouragement came from passing moves that I saw that showed a bit of freedom, but also awareness of the situation.  Under LJ it appeared that passing moves were developed based on position on the pitch, and woe betide if you were in the wrong that LJ had decreed.  The problem was, LJ forgot that the opposition don’t necessarily do what the blue bibs do in training and therefore players realising the ball to a teammate (that worked in training) isn’t on in a match, so lump them ball, or lose it.

[Simon79]

So are we saying that when the pressure was off, we performed slightly better? Is that really a real shock to anyone? Or am I missing something? COYR 

[Davefevs]

Just now, Simon79 said:

So are we saying that when the pressure was off, we performed slightly better? Is that really a real shock to anyone? Or am I missing something? COYR 

I’m not.  I’m saying the caretaker head-coach implemented a system quickly that got more out the playing squad than the previous incumbent did.

[ExiledAjax]

19 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

@ExiledAjax good post.  The crudity of simple maths, especially in a 5 game sample can highlight anomalies.

Most of my analysis is done with the eyes.  Now that I watch on tv (rather than at AG) and express my views on Forever BC pod, I’ve gotten into the habit of writing notes.  Looks a bit sad if you do that at AG, and my memory is pretty good, so avoided until watching in my living room.  The drinks break has been a good intermission to check my notes (what I’ve witnessed) and check some stats.

And the encouragement came from passing moves that I saw that showed a bit of freedom, but also awareness of the situation.  Under LJ it appeared that passing moves were developed based on position on the pitch, and woe betide if you were in the wrong that LJ had decreed.  The problem was, LJ forgot that the opposition don’t necessarily do what the blue bibs do in training and therefore players realising the ball to a teammate (that worked in training) isn’t on in a match, so lump them ball, or lose it.

No worries. We've all written notes whilst watching a game....haven't we!?!?

I saw differences, the wide CBs pushed wider, and I'd agree that the passing looked nicer to the eye. I think from your stats from earlier in this thread it was the passing stats rather than the shooting stats that looked better. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

27 minutes ago, bcfcredandwhite said:

I read somewhere that LJ didn’t like his players shooting from outside the box. He wanted us to ‘walk’ the ball into the net like Arsenal used to. His reasoning being that we kept the ball and the attack going instead of firing it into row Z. 
I don’t know if that’s true and can’t remember the source, but it could explain the few number of shots. 

Possession stats of below 50%- show a slight flaw with that plan!

Think saw in this thread we had 56% possession was it on average under Holden, you take that out of the equation and our stats for the season are worse than even the 48% we finished with! ie Under LJ.

[IAmNick]

35 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m not.  I’m saying the caretaker head-coach implemented a system quickly that got more out the playing squad than the previous incumbent did.

Did he implement a system, or just reduce/remove some of the issues in the existing system? Genuine question - I have no knowledge of how quickly a coach can make those kind of changes.

I'd have assume not much would change and it would have been more of an "Look lads, Lee's gone, shackles are off, Jay you can push forward more, Nahki - try shooting more mate, and don't hold on to it for the sake of it - get it up the pitch more quickly" kind of job but maybe that's a bit old fashioned.

I suppose the five games were over a few weeks which is enough time to begin making changes, but for an professional it must take a lot of hours for things to become second nature and really enter the patterns of play on the pitch.

[Simon79]

9 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m not.  I’m saying the caretaker head-coach implemented a system quickly that got more out the playing squad than the previous incumbent did.

Not convinced with that in all honesty Dave. I said it at the time, it’s easy to play with the freedom we saw in those games when the pressure is off. I put the slight upturn in performance down to that more so than any tactical switch. Although the 3-5-2 formation is my preferred way forward & fair play to Dean for implementing that. I would also add that the opposition for the most part were poor in those 5 games, but obviously you can only beat what is put in front of you. So this is not me in anyway righting off Dean, but I’m taking those performances with a pinch of salt at this stage. I’ll be looking at the first 5 games of the new season when the points actually mean something. COYR 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, IAmNick said:

Did he implement a system, or just reduce/remove some of the issues in the existing system? Genuine question - I have no knowledge of how quickly a coach can make those kind of changes.

He moved us from various back 4 systems deployed in the 4 games post-covid under LJ to a back 3 and WBs.  That’s a fundamental change in itself, but it wasn’t starting from scratch because we’d used it several times this season.

I'd have assume not much would change and it would have been more of an "Look lads, Lee's gone, shackles are off, Jay you can push forward more, Nahki - try shooting more mate, and don't hold on to it for the sake of it - get it up the pitch more quickly" kind of job but maybe that's a bit old fashioned.
I think you under-estimate what a modern day Championship coach puts into training / prep, it’s not “football manager player instructions”!

I suppose the five games were over a few weeks which is enough time to begin making changes, but for an professional it must take a lot of hours for things to become second nature and really enter the patterns of play on the pitch.
swings and roundabouts.  If you have players with good football intelligence then that helps, and don’t forget as above, it’s not an alien system to them.

Comments above

1 hour ago, Simon79 said:

Not convinced with that in all honesty Dave. I said it at the time, it’s easy to play with the freedom we saw in those games when the pressure is off.

what pressure was off?  The season over?  It wasn’t (quite).  Or Lee Johnson gone?  Dean Holden’s career was on the line.  Might easily have ended up jobless had he not galvanised them. I think it’s too easy to just put it down to having a bit of freedom.

I put the slight upturn in performance down to that more so than any tactical switch. Although the 3-5-2 formation is my preferred way forward & fair play to Dean for implementing that. I would also add that the opposition for the most part were poor in those 5 games, but obviously you can only beat what is put in front of you.

in what way were they poor, might they all have fancied beating Bristol City, 9 games without a win, caretaker manager in place, nothing to play for (), worst form in the division over those 9 games?  Even Hull must’ve fancied their chances.  Every point earned in the Championship is hard earned.  Stoke went on to beat Brentford and Forest.

So this is not me in anyway righting off Dean, but I’m taking those performances with a pinch of salt at this stage.

I’ll be looking at the first 5 games of the new season when the points actually mean something. 

Comments above too

but all about opinions.

[wendyredredrobin]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Comments above

Comments above too

In Holden's first game in charge, I was impressed by the way we were playing one touch football, making first time passes, going forward more and closing down well.  I was a bit disappointed that this did not continue in the remaining games and wonder why.

[Davefevs]

18 minutes ago, wendyredredrobin said:

In Holden's first game in charge, I was impressed by the way we were playing one touch football, making first time passes, going forward more and closing down well.  I was a bit disappointed that this did not continue in the remaining games and wonder why.

Versus Stoke, I thought both sides looked a bit tired....we’d gone unchanged pretty much and I think into the second half we lost our levels for 10 minutes....but thought we ended strongly.

I thought against PNE it would be easy at 1-0 down to go on and lose by 2 or 3, especially at its Preston! But we thought back.

It wasn’t perfect.  I keep saying that....but it was a damm sight more entertaining imho than recent times under LJ.

[Simon79]

23 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Comments above

Comments above too

Unless some sort of minor miracle occurred, the season was over. That’s why LJ got the chop. I’m not sure he did galvanise them, I never got the impression that they weren’t galvanised before in all honesty, possibly over coached? When I talk about pressure, I’m talking about the players mainly, not Dean & whether he will be the next to lose his job. You mention Stokes results & I totally agree about your comments reference the Championships & picking up points on the whole, although I stand by the fact that I thought Middlesbrough & Hull were poor. But it’s not a coincidence that those results came once they were safe & the pressure was off. & on the flip side of that, the best team by far in the Play offs (Brentford) couldn’t handle the pressure. Going back to City, Deans first game I was quite impressed ( new manager bounce?) but there’s no denying it fell away as the season came to an end.  COYR 

[bcfc01]

10 minutes ago, Simon79 said:

Unless some sort of minor miracle occurred, the season was over. That’s why LJ got the chop. I’m not sure he did galvanise them, I never got the impression that they weren’t galvanised before in all honesty, possibly over coached? When I talk about pressure, I’m talking about the players mainly, not Dean & whether he will be the next to lose his job. You mention Stokes results & I totally agree about your comments reference the Championships & picking up points on the whole, although I stand by the fact that I thought Middlesbrough & Hull were poor. But it’s not a coincidence that those results came once they were safe & the pressure was off. & on the flip side of that, the best team by far in the Play offs (Brentford) couldn’t handle the pressure. Going back to City, Deans first game I was quite impressed ( new manager bounce?) but there’s no denying it fell away as the season came to an end.  COYR 

If you mean when we played Hull and Boro, that is patently not correct.

The following shows the table before we played each of them;

https://www.11v11.com/league-tables/league-championship/07-july-2020/

https://www.11v11.com/league-tables/league-championship/10-july-2020/

 

 

[Simon79]

22 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

If you mean when we played Hull and Boro, that is patently not correct.

The following shows the table before we played each of them;

https://www.11v11.com/league-tables/league-championship/07-july-2020/

https://www.11v11.com/league-tables/league-championship/10-july-2020/

 

 

Sorry, should of made that a little clearer. I was referring to the Stoke results Dave mentioned, when they beat Brentford & Forest. COYR 

[bcfc01]

2 minutes ago, Simon79 said:

Sorry, should of made that a little clearer. I was referring to the Stoke results Dave mentioned, when they beat Brentford & Forest. COYR 

Nope.

Stoke needed a result as well to make sure of safety;

https://www.11v11.com/league-tables/league-championship/14-july-2020/

 

 

[Simon79]

6 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Nope.

Stoke needed a result as well to make sure of safety;

https://www.11v11.com/league-tables/league-championship/14-july-2020/

 

 

They were all but safe. After Stoke drew with us, they were 5 points ahead of Hull & Luton. As well as being 16 & 20 goals better of respectively. With 4 other teams between them & the last relegation spot, I would say that’s as good as safe with 2 games to go. COYR 

[bcfc01]

25 minutes ago, Simon79 said:

They were all but safe. After Stoke drew with us, they were 5 points ahead of Hull & Luton. As well as being 16 & 20 goals better of respectively. With 4 other teams between them & the last relegation spot, I would say that’s as good as safe with 2 games to go. COYR 

After, not before - they needed a result.

As did Hull.

As did Boro.

As did Swansea.

 

 

[Bar BS3]

12 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Here are the 5 games vs the 46 games.  I really haven’t got the inclination to do 5 games v 41 game comparison.

(Whole season in brackets)

Goals for: 1.4 (1.3)

Goaks against: 1.0 (1.4)

xG for: 1.25 (1.16)

xG Against: 1.4 (1.43)

Shots for: 10.6 (9.6)

shots against: 14.4 (13.57)

Possession: 56:44 (48:52)

Passes Made: 440 (360)

Successful: 82% (78.5%)

Passes allowed: 329 (402)

But the man overseeing this improvement is a disaster, isn't he..?! 

I'm sure I've seen that said somewhere on here. Not sure if I'd be able to find it again though...! 

[Simon79]

32 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

After, not before - they needed a result.

As did Hull.

As did Boro.

As did Swansea.

 

 

Sorry, lost me now, maybe I need some sleep! Dave said how difficult this league can be & used Stoke beating Brentford & Forest to back up his thoughts. I also used those fixtures/results to back up what I was saying about playing with no pressure. As Stoke beat those two teams after they had all but confirmed safety by drawing with us.  Therefore playing with little pressure & then playing well. Or possibly I’m missing something? COYR 

[bcfc01]

7 minutes ago, Simon79 said:

Sorry, lost me now, maybe I need some sleep! Dave said how difficult this league can be & used Stoke beating Brentford & Forest to back up his thoughts. I also used those fixtures/results to back up what I was saying about playing with no pressure. As Stoke beat those two teams after they had all but confirmed safety by drawing with us.  Therefore playing with little pressure & then playing well. Or possibly I’m missing something? COYR 

Well, I've made the points I wanted to make and you've made yours, all good 

 

[Superjack]

7 hours ago, bcfcredandwhite said:

I read somewhere that LJ didn’t like his players shooting from outside the box. He wanted us to ‘walk’ the ball into the net like Arsenal used to. His reasoning being that we kept the ball and the attack going instead of firing it into row Z. 
I don’t know if that’s true and can’t remember the source, but it could explain the few number of shots. 

Good job David Seal didn't play for him then.

[bcfcredandwhite]

8 hours ago, Superjack said:

Good job David Seal didn't play for him then.

Ah Silver Lady - a great track - and he was great in Starsky & Hutch too.....