Jump to content
IGNORED

Four Four Two season predictions


daored

Recommended Posts

Frankly I can see us having a hugely disappointing season. Especially after the real feel good factor at the start of last season with Massengo, Nagy, Palmer & Afobe signing. I really thought we were going places.

I think we're going into the new season really undercooked especially with players on International duty and it starts in earnest next Saturday with the Exeter match.

We're light at right back (I know there's talk of Pereira coming back), we need another centre half ( again there's talk of Ashley Williams coming back). Our only signing to date in midfield, Joe Williams is injured. What's happening with Maenpaa?

Is Eliasson off? And we need another striker.

All this under the backdrop of an inexperienced Head Coach.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The general theme here is that most people seem to think 442 is right ?

While I was at first ‘under whelmed’ by DH  appointment and what went on (now consigned to history that saga), I am  now actually feeling cautiously optimistic. 

We have a keeper that would be a No 1 in most championship team; We have back  3 or 4 players that would get into most Championship sides, Like TK;JD as examples, we have a forward in NW who barring injury mishaps I will fancy to mixing it with the league top scorers. 

The old ‘elephant’ in the room is the midfield. We have some great talent in LW;JM;HM and no reason at all for the first time to be worried about the midfield. For years we have been calling for a ‘Bannon’ type player. We have that player.   We have added Williams who is a massive upgrade on Korey. 

Why the doom and gloom ? 15th, 16th, 17th spot !  Nah. Top 10 again and who knows. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Swede said:

Frankly I can see us having a hugely disappointing season. Especially after the real feel good factor at the start of last season with Massengo, Nagy, Palmer & Afobe signing. I really thought we were going places.

I think we're going into the new season really undercooked especially with players on International duty and it starts in earnest next Saturday with the Exeter match.

We're light at right back (I know there's talk of Pereira coming back), we need another centre half ( again there's talk of Ashley Williams coming back). Our only signing to date in midfield, Joe Williams is injured. What's happening with Maenpaa?

Is Eliasson off? And we need another striker.

All this under the backdrop of an inexperienced Head Coach.

 

 

 

But of the four players you mention in your first paragraph, three are still with us and presumably, a year on, are better players. Instead of Adobe we have Wells, a proven goal scorer.  We have Vyner, O’Leary, Walsh and Morrell a year further on.  Walsh was player of the year in the team that won league one; Morrell has become an established international; Max is a very good keeper and Vyner has shown what he can do.

It’s a shame about Joe Williams’s injury - massive bad luck - but I find it hard to see the squad as anything but stronger than at the start of last season, so no reason for such pessimism.  We may have a head coach who has not been a head coach before, but overall the coaching staff is much stronger than last season.  I too would like to see a commanding centre half, but I think that signing may come.

No reason to suppose from all this that we are heading for a ‘hugely disappointing season’.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so long as Dean plays to win and not plays to not lose,i think we will do well. a good start is most important to get some confidence and self belief in the players who have been tied down a lot under LJ. one thing i would like to see is one or maybe more bigger harder players on the pitch,the wilbs type who will give a bit back if we are getting bullied

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Shtanley said:

Sick of hearing about xG tables and how we deserved to finish bottom or near to there.

Agreed. xG is pretty much nonsense.  Man City apparently deserved to win the title last season by 8 points and Newcastle deserved to finish bottom. 

Some people love xG but I think a lot of those people are desperate to have opinions about games and teams they haven’t watched 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

Agreed. xG is pretty much nonsense.  Man City apparently deserved to win the title last season by 8 points and Newcastle deserved to finish bottom. 

Some people love xG but I think a lot of those people are desperate to have opinions about games and teams they haven’t watched 

Spurs beat Bayern Munich on xG, whereas Bayern won 7-2 on the actual football on the pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

Agreed. xG is pretty much nonsense.  Man City apparently deserved to win the title last season by 8 points and Newcastle deserved to finish bottom. 

Some people love xG but I think a lot of those people are desperate to have opinions about games and teams they haven’t watched 

XG is misused / misunderstood.  It’s It is a rating of how likely a goal would be scored based on a previous examples of similar chances. Some xG models are more sophisticated than others. If people want to use it justify a result over 90 minutes (a small sample time) then you’ll get skewed results....especially if you then repeat a small sample 38/46 times.

It’s better than shots of target, often used by people to justify results  

If you use it with other variables you can spot trends over a period of games.  Data isn’t for everyone one.  I like it, but mainly to back up what I see with the eye.  Sometimes those things are obvious, sometimes they’re not.

But ultimately it’s about how many times you put the ball in the onion bag as opposed to your opponent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What fevs said, it’s also good to use with other stats if you looked at our xG last season combined with the number of shots created you can see the picture we were trying to create higher value shots according to xG, where others may take pot shots around the edge of the box we’d look to take an extra pass or two to work a better position to shoot from which in turn increases the xG of that shot, fewer chances but of higher quality/value when we do take them. It’s why our conversion rate was so high and amongst the division best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

What fevs said, it’s also good to use with other stats if you looked at our xG last season combined with the number of shots created you can see the picture we were trying to create higher value shots according to xG, where others may take pot shots around the edge of the box we’d look to take an extra pass or two to work a better position to shoot from which in turn increases the xG of that shot, fewer chances but of higher quality/value when we do take them. It’s why our conversion rate was so high and amongst the division best.

Does one need xG to tell them that though? If so, why?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, And Its Smith said:

Does one need xG to tell them that though? If so, why?  

If you watch the team regularly no, but from data you can make assertions about other teams you don’t watch which can then be backed up quicker than having to watch a lot of footage 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

If you watch the team regularly no, but from data you can make assertions about other teams you don’t watch which can then be backed up quicker than having to watch a lot of footage 

Assertions which may well be incorrect.  xG is hugely flawed in my opinion. Pundits will now present xG as fact as well which is ridiculous.  Seems that everyone needs an opinion on everything. Nothing wrong with saying ‘I don’t know as I’ve not seen him/them play’

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, And Its Smith said:

Assertions which may well be incorrect.  xG is hugely flawed in my opinion. Pundits will now present xG as fact as well which is ridiculous.  Seems that everyone needs an opinion on everything. Nothing wrong with saying ‘I don’t know as I’ve not seen him/them play’

Which is why you then watch some video to back the ideas you develop, it just means you can watch less video and save yourself some time if the video matches what you see from data. We’re talking professional level here if you can save yourself hours then it’s worth it. Strikers for example, stick goals scored on one axis of a scatter chart and xG on another axis, draw a line at 45 degrees and see which strikers are out performing their xG, you can then focus on those who are in terms of recruitment to see in video if their finishing is good or the chances merely fell for them but saves time going through all strikers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Which is why you then watch some video to back the ideas you develop, it just means you can watch less video and save yourself some time if the video matches what you see from data. We’re talking professional level here if you can save yourself hours then it’s worth it. Strikers for example, stick goals scored on one axis of a scatter chart and xG on another axis, draw a line at 45 degrees and see which strikers are out performing their xG, you can then focus on those who are in terms of recruitment to see in video if their finishing is good or the chances merely fell for them but saves time going through all strikers.

That assumes the xG is accurate but there are so many variables in football that I don’t believe it is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

That assumes the xG is accurate but there are so many variables in football that I don’t believe it is.  

It seems to me that xG is subjective at best as the reliance is on a third party to create stats which may or not be accurate - and they may or may not be that particular or precise in what must be a very boring job. I'd agree, there are too many variables for me to expect a professional club to take it too seriously. Its a guide based on the interpretation of someone else. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, And Its Smith said:

Assertions which may well be incorrect.  xG is hugely flawed in my opinion. Pundits will now present xG as fact as well which is ridiculous.  Seems that everyone needs an opinion on everything. Nothing wrong with saying ‘I don’t know as I’ve not seen him/them play’

That is why xG gets a bad name. People using it without understanding the concept and context.

Professional recruitment teams are using it, it can’t be that bad!  But they use it with other data, video and old school scouting. It’s part of the mix. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...