Snog, Marry, Avoid: Summer 2023 Transfer Window

[Worthy4England]

For all the stats, all the opinions and all the arguments, we can parse it down to one question to ask why we didn't score enough: Did we miss too many chances or did we not make enough?

From the eye and gut test, to this observer, it feels like a bit of both. While I have faith in the system, I never quite got the "we're gonna score in a minute" feeling, and as Boris says, even when a clear chance came about (and for the one striker who could be anywhere close to 'reliable' last season), I still wasn't arms-aloft in expectation.

Agree mate. I'd like Opta to get rid of "big chances" and "xG", in favour of a stat called "fcuk me how's he missed that?"....There should be a little voting button on the seats. Then we'd all know where we stand, other than the xG mob, who'd spend 30 minutes explaining why the header 6 yards out towards the open goal wasn't in fact a chance at all.

[BWFC_Insane]

I agree it’s a mix of both. There aren’t many goals we scored where I can remember thinking ‘what a finish’ bar the obvious long range midfield efforts.

I think that maybe shows that we weren’t taking enough chances or half chances.

But it’s also clear we need to create more openings.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

For all the stats, all the opinions and all the arguments, we can parse it down to one question to ask why we didn't score enough: Did we miss too many chances or did we not make enough?

From the eye and gut test, to this observer, it feels like a bit of both. While I have faith in the system, I never quite got the "we're gonna score in a minute" feeling, and as Boris says, even when a clear chance came about (and for the one striker who could be anywhere close to 'reliable' last season), I still wasn't arms-aloft in expectation.

Agree mate. I'd like Opta to get rid of "big chances" and "xG", in favour of a stat called "fcuk me how's he missed that?"....There should be a little voting button on the seats. Then we'd all know where we stand, other than the xG mob, who'd spend 30 minutes explaining why the header 6 yards out towards the open goal wasn't in fact a chance at all.

Quants gonna quant. Although I do not know how they quantify it (and it's not a hill I'll die on either way), I think the Big Chance metric is their version of your FMHHMT? suggestion.

[GhostoftheBok]

I think that maybe shows that we weren’t taking enough chances or half chances.

If we didn't score any Big Chances and we didn't score enough half chances how the feck did we score any goals at all?

[GhostoftheBok]

Although I do not know how they quantify it

They map out every shot going back forever and a day to figure out how often efforts (from specific positions and in specific circumstances) go in and then assign it a value. All new data automatically feeds into the system and values adjust over time.

So when people say it's a subjective value judgement it's not. It's how often the chances get finished in real life (though obviously saying "That was like that time" is subjective, so you're not producing some kind of perfectly pure maths). Penalties is the obvious one. For every 100 penalties taken in the top divisions 76 are scored, so a penalty value is fixed at 0.76. Big Chances are (or at least used to be) classed as those efforts that produce an xG 0.3 or higher.

It's actually one way you can demonstrate that technique has improved in English football in the past 20 years. Some kinds of finishes are now much more likely to go in than they used to be, because players cock them up less. Over time those efforts have gone up in value.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Interesting, ta

[GhostoftheBok]

Interesting, ta

Generous use of the word "interesting", but I'll take it.

[Worthy4England]

Although I do not know how they quantify it

They map out every shot going back forever and a day to figure out how often efforts (from specific positions and in specific circumstances) go in and then assign it a value. All new data automatically feeds into the system and values adjust over time.

So when people say it's a subjective value judgement it's not. It's how often the chances get finished in real life (though obviously saying "That was like that time" is subjective, so you're not producing some kind of perfectly pure maths). Penalties is the obvious one. For every 100 penalties taken in the top divisions 76 are scored, so a penalty value is fixed at 0.76. Big Chances are (or at least used to be) classed as those efforts that produce an xG 0.3 or higher.

It's actually one way you can demonstrate that technique has improved in English football in the past 20 years. Some kinds of finishes are now much more likely to go in than they used to be, because players cock them up less. Over time those efforts have gone up in value.

It's accuracy is only based on the things it's measuring (rather than the things it's not), so there is a part where you can say it's based on real data and then a gap where a whole host of factors aren't taken into consideration. It's not unreasonable to fix the penalty value at 0.76 for example as a baseline, but this doesn't reflect and specific penalty on any given day in any given situation - it's a blunt average. Would the 0.76 xG apply to penalties at Burton, where the pitch is usually a wreck - I dunno - and if it is, is that down to individual players compensating? Is the xG of penalties in play-offs where the pressure is likely higher still 0.76?

In part this is why I'm not convinced by xG as an absolute. The other thing is there is more than one xG model (they produce different outputs). It's an improving science, but when a player is off their xG, you still have to apply subjective judgements about whether it's reasonable for them to be so...

[Prufrock]

Dion scored 11 non-pen goals in 40 starts, so yeah I'm not thrilled by that.

The fact remains, Charles is a very good striker for this level. As much as I struggle to praise any striker who is 1 in 4 discounting penalties.

I don't disagree but his minutes per goal will be relatively better than that suggests. He only played 90 minutes 8 times.

[Prufrock]

It's not subjective it's just very reductive. And (klaxon) it isn't a "statistic" in the normal sense of the word. It's a predictive model. It's useful as a comparison over a large number of data points to reduce how extremely noisy (and still simple, though improving) it is. It's next to pointless for analysis of single games or individual chances.

[BWFC_Insane]

So story out of Australia is that Baccus turned us down over wages and the fact the Aussie national team told him he’d possibly miss out on call ups from league one.

Which to be honest sounds more likely than what we’ve been told thus far.

I guess though it’s pretty amateurish to have got as far as through a medical without having some basic terms thrashed out with the agent already.

[boltonboris]

Maybe we did and he moved the goalposts.

[BWFC_Insane]

Maybe we did and he moved the goalposts.

Possible. The story claims he ‘baulked’ at our offer which would suggest not if true.

[boltonboris]

But came down for a medical? Like you say, I think there's some legs in the medical thing and he's protecting himself. There's no way he's down having a medical without terms being at least close to being agreed.

[boltonboris]

Or we've agreed terms, noticed an issue and reduced the risk by reducing the outlay on him afterwards

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

You'd think Archie Collins and Josh Key would be on the list of people we'd spoken to.

Collins signed by Posh for a "big six-figure fee" (source: Peterborough's gobshite owner)

[BWFC_Insane]

You'd think Archie Collins and Josh Key would be on the list of people we'd spoken to.

Collins signed by Posh for a "big six-figure fee" (source: Peterborough's gobshite owner)

Key wanted by Swansea.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

You'd think Archie Collins and Josh Key would be on the list of people we'd spoken to.

Collins signed by Posh for a "big six-figure fee" (source: Peterborough's gobshite owner)

Key wanted by Swansea.

Aye. Both of which moves prove Ghost's nose for a player...

[GhostoftheBok]

Aye. Both of which moves prove Ghost's nose for a player...

I think the moves make sense. Like I said at the time Collins is much better than Exeter, but maybe not quite ready to jump into the Championship. Key is more developed and has more physicality to his game, so a move to Swansea makes sense.

For what it's worth, once Cogley arrived and Sheehan stayed I'd not have targeted those two to add to the group.

Cogley, Key and Bradley (whilst obviously being different from one another in many ways) are similar types of player and different from players like Kane Wilson. I think we targeted very well with the combination of Wilson and Cogley, which probably wasn't an accident; so I imagine we'll be looking for a similar type to Wilson again.

In midfield Collins is more of an all-rounder who you'd prefer to be going forward than backwards. We have close matches in the group. He's a better age profile than our lads and can probably reach a higher level, but we need different things now.

Posh will be very happy. I imagine they are/were also chasing Key as he fits their needs, but I don't think that's the right move for him.

[GhostoftheBok]

So story out of Australia is that Baccus turned us down over wages and the fact the Aussie national team told him he’d possibly miss out on call ups from league one.

Which to be honest sounds more likely than what we’ve been told thus far.

I guess though it’s pretty amateurish to have got as far as through a medical without having some basic terms thrashed out with the agent already.

I read it as an agent planting a story to cover up a medical issue, personally; but you could be right.