Stats

[boltonboris]

@BWFCI I bet if you drill down on player stats, we'll see that Keiron Lee is probably one of the best at winning the ball in this division

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

This is why I feel we need that ball winner who can be mobile round the pitch. We are good at pressing but don’t win the ball back enough.

And on a side note when we do we don’t make enough of it.

PPDA is "possession-winning duels, tackles, interceptions, fouls" so we are literally winning the ball back quicker than any other team in the division.

Your second point stands, though. We aren't doing enough with it (yet?). Although the 40m mark may be a little high (close to the oppo goal) for where our triggers are.

I would also expect more high-turnover moves to happen when we get Bod and/or Dapo back in the team. If Kacha wins the ball he dribbles sideways. If Charles wins the ball he shoots. If Baka wins the ball he falls over....

@BWFCI I bet if you drill down on player stats, we'll see that Keiron Lee is probably one of the best at winning the ball in this division

Evatt evangelises Lee and Kacha as our best two pressers. I don't know if that's an unsubtly coded message to Dapo, but wasn't he one of our hardest workers last season?

[BWFC_Insane]

This is why I feel we need that ball winner who can be mobile round the pitch. We are good at pressing but don’t win the ball back enough.

And on a side note when we do we don’t make enough of it.

PPDA is "possession-winning duels, tackles, interceptions, fouls" so we are literally winning the ball back quicker than any other team in the division.

Your second point stands, though. We aren't doing enough with it (yet?). Although the 40m mark may be a little high (close to the oppo goal) for where our triggers are.

I would also expect more high-turnover moves to happen when we get Bod and/or Dapo back in the team. If Kacha wins the ball he dribbles sideways. If Charles wins the ball he shoots. If Baka wins the ball he falls over....

@BWFCI I bet if you drill down on player stats, we'll see that Keiron Lee is probably one of the best at winning the ball in this division

Evatt evangelises Lee and Kacha as our best two pressers. I don't know if that's an unsubtly coded message to Dapo, but wasn't he one of our hardest workers last season?

Yes but I mean we don’t effect enough high turnovers and I feel that a more mobile version of Williams or a stronger Dempsey type would improve that.

We have Lee who I agree is a master at it but he won’t play week in week out.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Fair. I admit I've been surprised by how much Lee *has* played. He's played the seventh-most minutes, which might not sound that impressive but he's only behind Traf, the usual back three plus Bradley and Iredale, ie the standard wingbacks. He's played more than Sadlier and Lee combined. He's started the last four non-Pizza games.

We might see Morley and Dempsey return Saturday but it wouldn't surprise me if Lee starts and is asked to give us an hour. Assuming he won't play in the Pizza next Tuesday, he's got a game-free fortnight to recover thanks to the Pompey call-off. And we have five subs now, so no one switch is as much of a 'card played' for the manager.

[The_Gun]

Quite amazing that we managed to sign Kieran Lee is League Two, isn't it?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Quite amazing that we managed to sign Kieran Lee is League Two, isn't it?

And that nobody had signed him for the six months previously. Worthwhile leap of faith. And we checked him out thoroughly.

[Prufrock]

Fair. I admit I've been surprised by how much Lee *has* played. He's played the seventh-most minutes, which might not sound that impressive but he's only behind Traf, the usual back three plus Bradley and Iredale, ie the standard wingbacks. He's played more than Sadlier and Lee combined. He's started the last four non-Pizza games.

We might see Morley and Dempsey return Saturday but it wouldn't surprise me if Lee starts and is asked to give us an hour. Assuming he won't play in the Pizza next Tuesday, he's got a game-free fortnight to recover thanks to the Pompey call-off. And we have five subs now, so no one switch is as much of a 'card played' for the manager.

I don't think that's right (but am interested who you meant... Dempsey?)

The man is a Rolls Royce.

[KeyserSoze]

Maybe Sadlier's played so little his contribution actually counts as negative minutes.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

LOL!! Sads and *John* combined.

Screenshot 2022-09-15 at 17.05.54.png (91.03 KiB) Viewed 4809 times

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Set pieces, then...

Given recent convos (and indeed games) I thought I'd have the threatened dig into set-piece outcomes - at both ends. Usual stats caveats apply, but source for all data is WhoScored so we have to assume it's standardised and consistent.

GOALS
In the League Two season we scored 7 goals off set-pieces - technically joint-22nd, but nobody scored fewer. We conceded 17 (5th-worst).

Last season we scored 9 (joint 20th-best, only two teams scored fewer). We conceded 16 (joint 8th-worst).

This season we’ve scored 3 (joint 14th-best). We’ve conceded 3 (joint 14th-worst).
We’ve played 15 games of the 46 so 3 x 46/15 = 9.2 (scored and conceded)
- meaning we’re on track for scoring around the same but conceding far fewer - almost half.
.

BWFC set pieces goals smaller.jpg (18.22 KiB) Viewed 4602 times

.
SHOTS
It’s not just about goals - you can play for set pieces and pepper the oppo with attempts without scoring. WhoScored also records each team’s attempts on goal (obviously could be headers, but let’s call it shots). Sadly it doesn’t record “shots against” over the season, as far as I can see – happy to be pointed that way if someone can find it.

In the League Two season we had 118 attempts on goal - 23rd-best (only Southend had fewer).

Last season we had 147 shots from set pieces - joint 14th-best.

This season we’ve had 45 shots from set-pieces - 19th in the division. (Ipswich are top on 83 - they’re also 20 clear of the rest on shots from open play.) 45 x 46/15 = 138 so we’re tracking slightly below last season’s attempts on goal.
.

BWFC set pieces shots smaller.jpg (16.62 KiB) Viewed 4602 times

.
Obviously this is disappointing and we need to keep seeking ways to improve it - the recent emergence of the Love Train / Bus Queue suggests thoughts are being had and plans hatched (is that where the motor cars race?); and considering we're tracking for slightly more goals, from apparently slightly fewer shots, we might be getting slightly better at conversion...

That's all arguable but we can at least be happy that despite very recent appearances, we are conceding far fewer from set pieces than in Evatt’s two previous seasons. Long may that improvement continue.

[Worthy4England]

Quick question, is attempt on goal and shots on target the same thing? Or are we still analysing the things like Big Ric's shot that knocked the North Stand into Scan Computer's car park as an attempt on goal?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Quick question, is attempt on goal and shots on target the same thing? Or are we still analysing the things like Big Ric's shot that knocked the North Stand into Scan Computer's car park as an attempt on goal?

LOL. Shots/attempts include those off target unless specifically designated "on target," which is naturally a subset. I hadn't really thought about it before but "shots on goal" does mean "efforts of any accuracy, including minimal"

That is the case in the post above - "Shots" means all attempts including floodlight-threatening swingers and tame headers wide. Plus ones requiring saves, and even goals - still a shot, innit. (Unless it's an own goal. Don't go there.)

Apologies for the confusion - I'll try to be clearer in future.

[Worthy4England]

Cheers mate. I've never understood the rationale for counting things that are never troubling the score board (unless they happen to hit it )

Chances is (to me) an awful metric, put forwards as some sort of mitigation to generally not creating opportunities that you score from. "Look at how good we were" whilst their keeper doesn't need to put his kit in the wash. People make careers from measuring shit that has no outcome...

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

heh. I hear you, but it has some worth.

If you have 100 shots per game without scoring, you need shooting practice. If you have zero shots per month, the problem lies elsewhere.

It's a metric with flaws - aren't they all? - but it can reveal some things, I think. You're allowed to think differently, of course... but the thread title suggests it might be deliberately curmudgeonly

[Prufrock]

Set pieces, then...

Given recent convos (and indeed games) I thought I'd have the threatened dig into set-piece outcomes - at both ends. Usual stats caveats apply, but source for all data is WhoScored so we have to assume it's standardised and consistent.

GOALS
In the League Two season we scored 7 goals off set-pieces - technically joint-22nd, but nobody scored fewer. We conceded 17 (5th-worst).

Quite possibly me being thick, but how does that work?

Is a fair summary on set pieces: better than we were but still shit?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

GOALS
In the League Two season we scored 7 goals off set-pieces - technically joint-22nd, but nobody scored fewer. We conceded 17 (5th-worst).

Quite possibly me being thick, but how does that work?

Three teams scored 7 goals, so we're all joint 22nd-best - or 1st-worst, if you prefer.

Is a fair summary on set pieces: better than we were but still shit?

Ha. It's funnier than it is fair. Let me put it a different way.

If the league table were suddenly, retrospectively decided on "goals scored from set pieces" rather than "points", then we'd have been joint-bottom in Evatt's first season, just above relegation (joint 20th) last season, lower mid-table (joint 14th) this season. So "better but still not very good", unless your shit-gradation has lower levels like Very Shit and Exceedingly Shit.

If the league table were suddenly, retrospectively decided on "goals conceded from set pieces" rather than "points", then we'd have been just above relegation (5th-worst) in Evatt's first season, lower mid-table (joint 8th-worst) last season and just below the playoffs (joint 14th-worst) this. So yeah, still plenty improvement to make...

[Prufrock]

GOALS
In the League Two season we scored 7 goals off set-pieces - technically joint-22nd, but nobody scored fewer. We conceded 17 (5th-worst).

Quite possibly me being thick, but how does that work?

Three teams scored 7 goals, so we're all joint 22nd-best - or 1st-worst, if you prefer.

Is a fair summary on set pieces: better than we were but still shit?

Ha. It's funnier than it is fair. Let me put it a different way.

If the league table were suddenly, retrospectively decided on "goals scored from set pieces" rather than "points", then we'd have been joint-bottom in Evatt's first season, just above relegation (joint 20th) last season, lower mid-table (joint 14th) this season. So "better but still not very good", unless your shit-gradation has lower levels like Very Shit and Exceedingly Shit.

If the league table were suddenly, retrospectively decided on "goals conceded from set pieces" rather than "points", then we'd have been just above relegation (5th-worst) in Evatt's first season, lower mid-table (joint 8th-worst) last season and just below the playoffs (joint 14th-worst) this. So yeah, still plenty improvement to make...

So yes I was being thick, and need to learn what 14th worst means

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

So yes I was being thick, and need to learn what 14th worst means

Ha! I was aware when writing that it might be slightly confusing, but then so is saying "10th-best record of conceding goals"...

[Worthy4England]

heh. I hear you, but it has some worth.

If you have 100 shots per game without scoring, you need shooting practice. If you have zero shots per month, the problem lies elsewhere.

It's a metric with flaws - aren't they all? - but it can reveal some things, I think. You're allowed to think differently, of course... but the thread title suggests it might be deliberately curmudgeonly

Oh quite. There are plenty of stats that have some value, somewhere (so yeah to your 100 shots per game without scoring stat.) Where I don't like it is when Managers play the "look at all the chances we created" blx, when the only time the GK had to bend down, was to tie his boots before kick-off. Like we should be pleased that the main purposes of the sport - score more goals than the opposition - is somehow secondary to the artform of creating chances...

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Oh quite. There are plenty of stats that have some value, somewhere (so yeah to your 100 shots per game without scoring stat.) Where I don't like it is when Managers play the "look at all the chances we created" blx, when the only time the GK had to bend down, was to tie his boots before kick-off. Like we should be pleased that the main purposes of the sport - score more goals than the opposition - is somehow secondary to the artform of creating chances...

Yeah. If any manager tells you chance creation is more important than goalscoring he's clearly talking out of his hoop or he has an agenda.

Except that...

If you have one shot per game and win three successive games 1-0, it's highly unlikely to continue. Whereas if you're having 100 shots per game and keep losing 1-0, it's definitely fixable.

Obviously reductio ad absurdum but there's some sort of truth there.

It's a bit like the old winning/sexy football matrix: losing long-ball < losing nice-ball < winning long-ball < winning nice-ball.

In this case, no shots and no goals < many shots and few goals < many shots and many goals.