Jump to content
IGNORED

The difference: pre & post Wolves

Fordy62

By Fordy62
in Football Chat

Recommended Posts

Fordy62

Fordy62

Posted
Posted

So, risking my marriage in the pursuit of answers, I’m sat here at Barcelona Port on my 8th Wedding anniversary being all statistic-y!

Our season very clearly became derailed against Wolves and we’re now limping over the line in a Derek Redmond type fashion...

So what changed? We all seem to be making a big deal of the shots on target statistic, so I looked specifically at that...

In the 24 games prior to Wolves we had 119 shots on target. We scored 39 of them. Pretty much 33%.

Thats 4.95 shots on target per game.

 

In the Wolves & beyond 17 games we’ve had 56 shots on target and scored 17 goals. That’s 30%, so not too much different.

but that’s 3.3 shots on target per game, notably lower.

 

pre Wolves our opponents scored 25 out of 87 shots on target or 29%, 3.6 shots on goal per game.

Wolves and after our opponents scored 23 out of 67 or 34%  and averaged 3.94 shots on target per game.

 

what does this all mean? I’ve absolutely no idea  other than my wife is narky because I’m glued to my phone working out stats on our anniversary.

So, off to Ibiza tomorrow, I wonder if I’ll see any of the players on the beach because they might as well ******* be there.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davefevs

Davefevs

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

So, risking my marriage in the pursuit of answers, I’m sat here at Barcelona Port on my 8th Wedding anniversary being all statistic-y!

Our season very clearly became derailed against Wolves and we’re now limping over the line in a John Regis type fashion...

So what changed? We all seem to be making a big deal of the shots on target statistic, so I looked specifically at that...

In the 24 games prior to Wolves we had 119 shots on target. We scored 39 of them. Pretty much 33%.

Thats 4.95 shots on target per game.

 

In the Wolves & beyond 17 games we’ve had 56 shots on target and scored 17 goals. That’s 30%, so not too much different.

but that’s 3.3 shots on target per game, notably lower.

 

pre Wolves our opponents scored 25 out of 87 shots on target or 29%, 3.6 shots on goal per game.

Wolves and after our opponents scored 23 out of 67 or 34%  and averaged 3.94 shots on target per game.

 

what does this all mean? I’ve absolutely no idea  other than my wife is narky because I’m glued to my phone working out stats on our anniversary.

So, off to Ibiza tomorrow, I wonder if I’ll see any of the players on the beach because they might as well ******* be there.

 

If you look at Experimental 361’s xG stuff, you’ll see a trend that our offensive xG has gone down, takes us more shots to score, and our defensive xG has gone up, opponents are taking less shots to score.  Couple that with our decreasing number of shots taken and there’s definitely a drop off explained to a degree.

I suggest you take Mrs Fordy for a ramble up the Ramblas and forget City and OTIB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fordy62

Fordy62

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

If you look at Experimental 361’s xG stuff, you’ll see a trend that our offensive xG has gone down, takes us more shots to score, and our defensive xG has gone up, opponents are taking less shots to score.  Couple that with our decreasing number of shots taken and there’s definitely a drop off explained to a degree.

I suggest you take Mrs Fordy for a ramble up the Ramblas and forget City and OTIB.

Yeh, just down the Ramblas Dave. Lovely, lovely city this is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nickolas

nickolas

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

So, risking my marriage in the pursuit of answers, I’m sat here at Barcelona Port on my 8th Wedding anniversary being all statistic-y!

Our season very clearly became derailed against Wolves and we’re now limping over the line in a Derek Redmond type fashion...

So what changed? We all seem to be making a big deal of the shots on target statistic, so I looked specifically at that...

In the 24 games prior to Wolves we had 119 shots on target. We scored 39 of them. Pretty much 33%.

Thats 4.95 shots on target per game.

 

In the Wolves & beyond 17 games we’ve had 56 shots on target and scored 17 goals. That’s 30%, so not too much different.

but that’s 3.3 shots on target per game, notably lower.

 

pre Wolves our opponents scored 25 out of 87 shots on target or 29%, 3.6 shots on goal per game.

Wolves and after our opponents scored 23 out of 67 or 34%  and averaged 3.94 shots on target per game.

 

what does this all mean? I’ve absolutely no idea  other than my wife is narky because I’m glued to my phone working out stats on our anniversary.

So, off to Ibiza tomorrow, I wonder if I’ll see any of the players on the beach because they might as well ******* be there.

 

Easy. 

We no longer chase to get the ball back. We sit off and wait to be cut open. 

We also no longer play quick one touch football allowing teams to get back into a settled formation meaning we dont break anyone down now. 

Its either very lazy players or a complete alteration to our pre christmas tactics. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fordy62

Fordy62

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Short answer, we were probably overperforming up to and including that Wolves game...

Do we believe that? Because if this is our level now, we’re heading for league in the not too distant future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fordy62

Fordy62

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, Davefevs said:

Go to some of the backstreets for eating out....you’ll find some lovely authentic Catalonian food, and much cheaper too.

Yep. Did that too. Had some very nice Tapas which put me back in credit with Mrs Fordy. Now just about to set sail, so grabbing my OTIB fix prior to setting sail. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
milo1111

milo1111

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Ser Davos Ciderworth said:

I’m convinced that the Wolves result and the manner of the defeat changed our season. A real sliding doors moment when  Frankie came out and 1-0 ten men against 11 became 1-1 ten vs ten :grr:

Decent sides with balls and mental strength don’t let incidents like that define their season. Especially when they happen in December.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BRISTOL86

BRISTOL86

Posted
Posted

I think psychologically Wolves was a real sucker punch. I said at the time that it felt so much bigger than just that one night. The cup euphoria that was probably giving players an extra 10% was all over, then we travelled to Villa less than 48 hours later in a deflated mindset, and from then we just never really recovered.

Psychology plays such a big part. You could almost see the confidence drain from the squad. 

I think there was probably a physical side to it too, we looked absolutely spent against Villa - bearing in mind by December we'd played more football than any other team in the league. Players out of position and patched up due to a horrible run of injuries....I think there was a spell when it just hit home that we couldn't run on empty forever.

A few bad results and the mood changed drastically, we've never looked to get back to having that belief that set us apart in the first half of the season. We went out and played against Man City genuinely believing we could beat them....now we seem a million miles away from that sort of confidence and belief in our ability. 

Oh and happy anniversary :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

How can you 'overperform' for half a season?

A few games yes, a couple of months maybe, but  half a season?

Way more too it than that.

Probably a part of it though. Analytics to track performances....becoming a big part of the game, looking at Experimental 3-6-1 is a good tool.

How it could apply to us is that there is an average of a typical shots to goals ratio- both scored and conceded.

If, as I suspect to have been the case, our underlying numbers saw us convert more chances- and perhaps concede less than anticipated- in 9 out of 10 cases that's generally unsustainable and more typical outcomes follow down the line.

In a sentence, similar shots but a more normal ratio means worse, or more expected outcomes. Hence the regression to the mean.

In some ways, I'd argue it's becoming less the beautiful game and more the numbers game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pillred

pillred

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

If you look at Experimental 361’s xG stuff, you’ll see a trend that our offensive xG has gone down, takes us more shots to score, and our defensive xG has gone up, opponents are taking less shots to score.  Couple that with our decreasing number of shots taken and there’s definitely a drop off explained to a degree.

I suggest you take Mrs Fordy for a ramble up the Ramblas and forget City and OTIB.

take her up the ramblas oh err mrs!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

I think psychologically Wolves was a real sucker punch. I said at the time that it felt so much bigger than just that one night. The cup euphoria that was probably giving players an extra 10% was all over, then we travelled to Villa less than 48 hours later in a deflated mindset, and from then we just never really recovered.

Psychology plays such a big part. You could almost see the confidence drain from the squad. 

I think there was probably a physical side to it too, we looked absolutely spent against Villa - bearing in mind by December we'd played more football than any other team in the league. Players out of position and patched up due to a horrible run of injuries....I think there was a spell when it just hit home that we couldn't run on empty forever.

A few bad results and the mood changed drastically, we've never looked to get back to having that belief that set us apart in the first half of the season. We went out and played against Man City genuinely believing we could beat them....now we seem a million miles away from that sort of confidence and belief in our ability. 

Oh and happy anniversary :)

Fully agree about the hammer blow that was the Wolves game, and that we were badly running on empty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Laner

Laner

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Ser Davos Ciderworth said:

I’m convinced that the Wolves result and the manner of the defeat changed our season. A real sliding doors moment when  Frankie came out and 1-0 ten men against 11 became 1-1 ten vs ten :grr:

Keeping Flint up front after we scored was the key moment for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr Popodopolous

Mr Popodopolous

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, cheshire_red said:

How could we possibly over perform against every club in the division ?

Wasn't every team...

Analyse game by game, then we will see a notable dropoff I suspect in our clinical finishing in front of goal, whereas before Christmas it was probably higher. On the flipside, we are now conceding a lot more chances, especially since Easter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
General Zod

General Zod

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Ser Davos Ciderworth said:

I’m convinced that the Wolves result and the manner of the defeat changed our season. A real sliding doors moment when  Frankie came out and 1-0 ten men against 11 became 1-1 ten vs ten :grr:

Wolves does seem pivotal but I struggle that the players and managers have let a blip turn into a season destroying run.  Blame surely has to sit squarely with LJ for that.

I think Cardiff v Wolves on Friday had similarities to City v wolves.  With Fulham breathing down their necks I’m genuinely interested to see if an experienced manager like NW has the tricks to get his players to bounce back quickly or like us it has a massive impact on where they end up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Olé

Olé

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Fordy62 said:

Yeh, just down the Ramblas Dave. Lovely, lovely city this is. 

The pickpockets are going to be so upset when all they find is a Playfair annual, a calculator and napkins covered in City results.

In the meantime, WhoScored has the most incredible array of Championship team and situational stats (shots, tackles, dribbles, crosses, interceptions etc made and conceded per game, and from where on the pitch). I don't think you can easily split pre- and post- Wolves, but I have a gander from time to time simply to see what numbers are out of whack relative to our peer group (teams around us for league position):

https://www.whoscored.com/Regions/252/Tournaments/7/Seasons/6848/Stages/15177/TeamStatistics/England-Championship-2017-2018

The answer is not a lot - our stats are not unusual to the teams around us (i.e. neither highest or lowest in our peer group, nor markedly off the teams above us) which is what you'd expect, with a few exceptions (like you, also presented without any inferred meaning at this point, besides that they're particular weaknesses):

  • Shots conceded per game (13.3) higher than everyone in the top half of the table, and 8th worst in division, in the range most common among teams in 16th-24th
  • Tackles per game (14.9) is 4th least in the division
  • % of shots against us from the right hand side (19%) is second worst in the division, while from left hand side (15%) is second best. Other teams concede goals more uniformly from both sides (and through the middle) so this isn't an overall weakness, more evidence of an imbalance with the left of our defence

And that's it - everything else, both defensive and attacking, our stats are in the range of the teams around us 5th-10th. I thought it was interesting that nothing on the attacking side stuck out like a sore thumb initially given the sense that is where things are going wrong, however there are a couple of lesser anomalies on the attacking side if you look more closely:

  • Shots made per game (12) while similar to some of our peer group (Derby and Middlesbrough) is in of itself actually 8th worst in the division
  • Shots made inside the six yard box per game (0.8) while also similar to some of our peer group (Preston and Brentford) is in of itself 6th worst in the division

Headline: we concede more shots than everyone in our peer group (clear flaw), and have less shots ourselves than most in our peer group (added flaw).

Enjoy Ibiza.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
glynriley

glynriley

Posted
Posted

All this statistical analysis is all well and good but there could be a simpler explanation. 

Over the new year period, some joker snuck into the changing rooms and swapped LJ's tactics board for SOD's....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kid in the Riot

Kid in the Riot

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, Fordy62 said:

So, risking my marriage in the pursuit of answers, I’m sat here at Barcelona Port on my 8th Wedding anniversary being all statistic-y!

Freaky. I was at a bar enjoying a cold Estrella opposite Barcelona Port when you posted this yesterday.

Can tick 'Messi hat trick' off the football bucket list after Saturday night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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