LOLiverpooLOL - Next Season

[BR0B0T]

According to various xG models,

Liverpool have 15/16 points more* than they should have!

Man City have around 4 less* than they should and...

Leicester also have about 12 points more than they should.

[Simmops]

According to various xG models,

Liverpool have 15/16 points more* than they should have!

Man City have around 4 less* than they should and...

Leicester also have about 12 points more than they should.

Xg is a load of shite

[Sanguine]

According to various xG models,

Liverpool have 15/16 points more* than they should have!

Man City have around 4 less* than they should and...

Leicester also have about 12 points more than they should.

Xg is a load of shite

Only to the unintelligent. It's just a data tool. It's not trying to 'prove' anything, it's a reference against which you can compare team's and player's performances (for example, Liverpool's expected goals conceded last season was something like 8 or 9 higher than actual, i.e. that was the data-based contribution of Alisson to the team).

The clear inference for this season is that Liverpool have been absolutely clinical.

[Sutekh]

According to various xG models,

Liverpool have 15/16 points more* than they should have!

Man City have around 4 less* than they should and...

Leicester also have about 12 points more than they should.

Xg is a load of shite

Only to the unintelligent. It's just a data tool. It's not trying to 'prove' anything, it's a reference against which you can compare team's and player's performances (for example, Liverpool's expected goals conceded last season was something like 8 or 9 higher than actual, i.e. that was the data-based contribution of Alisson to the team).

The clear inference for this season is that Liverpool have been absolutely clinical.

We need statistics to tell us that?

[Simmops]

According to various xG models,

Liverpool have 15/16 points more* than they should have!

Man City have around 4 less* than they should and...

Leicester also have about 12 points more than they should.

Xg is a load of shite

Only to the unintelligent. It's just a data tool. It's not trying to 'prove' anything, it's a reference against which you can compare team's and player's performances (for example, Liverpool's expected goals conceded last season was something like 8 or 9 higher than actual, i.e. that was the data-based contribution of Alisson to the team).

The clear inference for this season is that Liverpool have been absolutely clinical.

Are you inferring I am unintelligent?

[Sanguine]

Xg is a load of shite

Only to the unintelligent. It's just a data tool. It's not trying to 'prove' anything, it's a reference against which you can compare team's and player's performances (for example, Liverpool's expected goals conceded last season was something like 8 or 9 higher than actual, i.e. that was the data-based contribution of Alisson to the team).

The clear inference for this season is that Liverpool have been absolutely clinical.

Are you inferring I am unintelligent?

I'm suggesting that xG can't be 'a load of shite', given that it isn't supposed to really do anything except collect up data and calculate stuff based thereon. And once you understand the point of xG, and its related data, you stop calling it 'a load of shite'. It's like calling a roadmap 'a load of shite' because it doesn't show you how to get into the pub once you've found the car park.

[Simmops]

Only to the unintelligent. It's just a data tool. It's not trying to 'prove' anything, it's a reference against which you can compare team's and player's performances (for example, Liverpool's expected goals conceded last season was something like 8 or 9 higher than actual, i.e. that was the data-based contribution of Alisson to the team).

The clear inference for this season is that Liverpool have been absolutely clinical.

Are you inferring I am unintelligent?

I'm suggesting that xG can't be 'a load of shite', given that it isn't supposed to really do anything except collect up data and calculate stuff based thereon. And once you understand the point of xG, and its related data, you stop calling it 'a load of shite'. It's like calling a roadmap 'a load of shite' because it doesn't show you how to get into the pub once you've found the car park.

..i understand it now. Thanks for enlightenment.

[BR0B0T]

According to various xG models,

Liverpool have 15/16 points more* than they should have!

Man City have around 4 less* than they should and...

Leicester also have about 12 points more than they should.

Xg is a load of shite

Only to the unintelligent. It's just a data tool. It's not trying to 'prove' anything, it's a reference against which you can compare team's and player's performances (for example, Liverpool's expected goals conceded last season was something like 8 or 9 higher than actual, i.e. that was the data-based contribution of Alisson to the team).

The clear inference for this season is that Liverpool have been absolutely clinical.

I think Messi is the ONLY player to consistently outperform xG (i.e. over a number of seasons)

Everybody else mean-reverts over time (i.e variance) suggesting it's not being clinical

However, it's extremely difficult to argue against Liverpool's actual record

[BR0B0T]

According to various xG models,

Liverpool have 15/16 points more* than they should have!

Man City have around 4 less* than they should and...

Leicester also have about 12 points more than they should.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50822875

Was thinking about Liverpool in relation to xG...xG only measures shots so...

...the dangerous deliveries you get from TAA and Robertson etc are not recorded

[Sutekh]

For reference how is xG for a team calculated?

[BR0B0T]

For reference how is xG for a team calculated?

A large database of shot position and whether they were successful or not

...allows you to ascertain the probability of a shot going in

...distance and angle being obvious factors, shot taker doesn't really matter*

For an individual team, you just add up all the probabilities of the shots

i.e 4 shots with probability of 0.2 per shot = 0.8 xG

[Sanguine]

According to various xG models,

Liverpool have 15/16 points more* than they should have!

Man City have around 4 less* than they should and...

Leicester also have about 12 points more than they should.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50822875

Was thinking about Liverpool in relation to xG...xG only measures shots so...

...the dangerous deliveries you get from TAA and Robertson etc are not recorded

Indeed, albeit maybe the chances created by their crosses are afforded a higher probability of leading to a goal. But the explanation would certainly fit the gap between model and actuals.

[Sanguine]

I do like how football throws up these stats/events - in the unlikely event that Liverpool's long unbeaten run continues through the next couple of months (I personally think it'll go at Spurs), they will travel to Manchester City trying to equal Arsenal's record of 49 games unbeaten.

[BR0B0T]

According to various xG models,

Liverpool have 15/16 points more* than they should have!

Man City have around 4 less* than they should and...

Leicester also have about 12 points more than they should.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50822875

Was thinking about Liverpool in relation to xG...xG only measures shots so...

...the dangerous deliveries you get from TAA and Robertson etc are not recorded

Indeed, albeit maybe the chances created by their crosses are afforded a higher probability of leading to a goal. But the explanation would certainly fit the gap between model and actuals.

Something like this wouldn't be measured as there is no shot...but it's an incredibly dangerous attack

[Old Man Andrews]

Sheffield United putting up a valiant fight at Anfield. 1-0 Liverpool after 3 minutes.

[Sanguine]

Sheffield United putting up a valiant fight at Anfield. 1-0 Liverpool after 3 minutes.

They actually played pretty well, just stuck to their gameplan and had a few chances. But Liverpool won comfortably, which shows how far ahead of the rest they are at the moment. Unbeaten in 51 now at Anfield - albeit what is nuts is that they are still around two years shy of Mourinho's long unbeaten run at Stamford Bridge.

[Sutekh]

Sheffield United putting up a valiant fight at Anfield. 1-0 Liverpool after 3 minutes.

They actually played pretty well, just stuck to their gameplan and had a few chances. But Liverpool won comfortably, which shows how far ahead of the rest they are at the moment. Unbeaten in 51 now at Anfield - albeit what is nuts is that they are still around two years shy of Mourinho's long unbeaten run at Stamford Bridge.

Long unbeaten home runs have been done before in the top division (let alone the lower divisions). Didn’t Liverpool themselves manage an 80 odd run of games in the late 70s/early 80s?

[Sanguine]

Sheffield United putting up a valiant fight at Anfield. 1-0 Liverpool after 3 minutes.

They actually played pretty well, just stuck to their gameplan and had a few chances. But Liverpool won comfortably, which shows how far ahead of the rest they are at the moment. Unbeaten in 51 now at Anfield - albeit what is nuts is that they are still around two years shy of Mourinho's long unbeaten run at Stamford Bridge.

Long unbeaten home runs have been done before in the top division (let alone the lower divisions). Didn’t Liverpool themselves manage an 80 odd run of games in the late 70s/early 80s?

I did wonder. It's annoyingly difficult to find lists of all-time English football records, everything refers to 'of the Premier League era', albeit it does appear Chelsea's 86-game unbeaten home run under Mourinho is an all-time English league record. Liverpool's 51 is second since the Premier League's inception.

[Ark Royal]

They actually played pretty well, just stuck to their gameplan and had a few chances. But Liverpool won comfortably, which shows how far ahead of the rest they are at the moment. Unbeaten in 51 now at Anfield - albeit what is nuts is that they are still around two years shy of Mourinho's long unbeaten run at Stamford Bridge.

Long unbeaten home runs have been done before in the top division (let alone the lower divisions). Didn’t Liverpool themselves manage an 80 odd run of games in the late 70s/early 80s?

I did wonder. It's annoyingly difficult to find lists of all-time English football records, everything refers to 'of the Premier League era', albeit it does appear Chelsea's 86-game unbeaten home run under Mourinho is an all-time English league record. Liverpool's 51 is second since the Premier League's inception.

Reading once held the Football League record for home games without defeat: 55 set in 1935. Millwall beat the record in 1967.

[Sutekh]

Long unbeaten home runs have been done before in the top division (let alone the lower divisions). Didn’t Liverpool themselves manage an 80 odd run of games in the late 70s/early 80s?

I did wonder. It's annoyingly difficult to find lists of all-time English football records, everything refers to 'of the Premier League era', albeit it does appear Chelsea's 86-game unbeaten home run under Mourinho is an all-time English league record. Liverpool's 51 is second since the Premier League's inception.

Reading once held the Football League record for home games without defeat: 55 set in 1935. Millwall beat the record in 1967.

Got it! The previous top flight unbeaten home record was Liverpool who went 85 games unbeaten from 7 February 1978 to 31 January 1981.

Ridiculous you have to do extra digging as all the media think football only started in 1992.