Jump to content

Miguel Almiron


wykikitoon
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, PaddockLad said:


Dave’s ignored this so I looked it up…now, am no expert obviously, but it would appear to me that Miggys xG * has gone up this season by nearly 300% :lol: Well colour me flabbergasted… I think we can now officially call xG “counting the number of goals scored “ :good: 

 

https://understat.com/player/7420

 

* other stats are available which am sure are invaluable to football professionals. xG isn’t one of them though, it’s just fuckin counting :) 

Hey, it's one of those rare occasions where I've actually got work to do. (beginning of the month and I have to update some of the triggers on my automated scripts :good: )

 

xG for Miggy was decent in his first 2 seasons, around 0.2 per 90, or a goal every 5 games. This season's small sample size has him doubling his xG, but you'd expect him to revert to the mean. At the minute, given the quality of chances he's had, he's scored 2 more goals than you'd expect. He's 4th in the league for outperforming expectations. Haaland, Maddison and Trossard ahead of him, however each of them have consistently out performed their xG, Miggy hasn't. So you'd expect him to fall back to his average a bit. This is a purple patch, not a sign that he's going to improve.

 

End of the day, the eye test is great and all, but it's subjective. I've stood in the ground while people bitch and moan and call Saint Maximin worse than shit, when in fact he's fucking run the show. Heard people rave about Jacob Murphy, when the lads did nowt. Facts don't care about your feelings.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Not just chances that end up in a goal, but yeah, lots of criteria, including but not limited to; distance from goal, angle, body part, how the chance comes about (cross/pass/dribble/rebound), where the goal keeper is, where the defenders are and so on.

 

Collect all of those data points from 1,000s of chances in 1,000s of matches in various competitions.

 

It ignores subjective opinions of ability because keeping things level means that a player that consistently outperforms his xG has his superiority reflected in his goals vs expected goals, and someone who consistently underperforms the xG has his inferiority reflected.

 

Yeah ok. It's really useful then IMO.

 

@PaddockLad would you accept this - xG may not tell you anything you couldn't see yourself (IMO it could but I will accept you may just be a more astute observer than I am, wouldn't be difficult) but given that it collects -everything- in this context across all players, it therefore proves its use by converting the analysis into a quantitative form that can be easily manipulated/sorted to quickly offer the same level of insight that you'd otherwise have to spend hours of time watching games to replicate. Therefore, it's a great tool for assessing players who we don't normally get to watch much playtime of - maybe it does indeed have more diminished impact at a club where you watch every game though.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Yeah ok. It's really useful then IMO.

 

@PaddockLad would you accept this - xG may not tell you anything you couldn't see yourself (IMO it could but I will accept you may just be a more astute observer than I am, wouldn't be difficult) but given that it collects -everything- in this context across all players, it therefore proves its use by converting the analysis into a quantitative form that can be easily manipulated/sorted to quickly offer the same level of insight that you'd otherwise have to spend hours of time watching games to replicate. Therefore, it's a great tool for assessing players who we don't normally get to watch much playtime of - maybe it does indeed have more diminished impact at a club where you watch every game though.

 

xG is (sometimes) interesting but the belief that football can be predicted accurately by a selection of statistics is facile.

It's benefit only lies in illustrating what has already happened to the weak of mind

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus Christ and folk were moaning about me and Craig with the St James, St James’, St James’s thing.

Surely, to pare back it all, football is an entertainment (bread and circuses and all that bollocks) and this self-indulgent quantitative* stats analysis is only relevant to coaches, scouts, boring bastards on irrelevant TV programs and the finance managers at football clubs.

Who gives a flying fuck about this shite. It is fucking awful craic. Awful.

 

 

 

 

* relating to, measuring, or measured by the quantity of something rather than its quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Fish said:

Hey, it's one of those rare occasions where I've actually got work to do. (beginning of the month and I have to update some of the triggers on my automated scripts :good: )

 

xG for Miggy was decent in his first 2 seasons, around 0.2 per 90, or a goal every 5 games. This season's small sample size has him doubling his xG, but you'd expect him to revert to the mean. At the minute, given the quality of chances he's had, he's scored 2 more goals than you'd expect. He's 4th in the league for outperforming expectations. Haaland, Maddison and Trossard ahead of him, however each of them have consistently out performed their xG, Miggy hasn't. So you'd expect him to fall back to his average a bit. This is a purple patch, not a sign that he's going to improve.

 

End of the day, the eye test is great and all, but it's subjective. I've stood in the ground while people bitch and moan and call Saint Maximin worse than shit, when in fact he's fucking run the show. Heard people rave about Jacob Murphy, when the lads did nowt. Facts don't care about your feelings.

 

 


As usual, you’re ascribing things to me that I haven’t said. I don’t tend to heavily criticise Newcastle players. At the start of the season I said Miggy would be very important to the side in terms of work rate etc away from home when others were criticising him . You’re right, there’s no other way of describing his form at the moment other than a purple patch. But 6 goals in a month vs 1 goal last season doesn’t require a graph to come to that conclusion does it? 

 

1 hour ago, Rayvin said:

 

Yeah ok. It's really useful then IMO.

 

@PaddockLad would you accept this - xG may not tell you anything you couldn't see yourself (IMO it could but I will accept you may just be a more astute observer than I am, wouldn't be difficult) but given that it collects -everything- in this context across all players, it therefore proves its use by converting the analysis into a quantitative form that can be easily manipulated/sorted to quickly offer the same level of insight that you'd otherwise have to spend hours of time watching games to replicate. Therefore, it's a great tool for assessing players who we don't normally get to watch much playtime of - maybe it does indeed have more diminished impact at a club where you watch every game though.

 


I think it only even vaguely works for me when it’s used in comparison ie Player A v Player B, but Dave has given me examples of this where I’ve come to the same conclusion as him without needing a slide rule :lol: 

 

The earlier example about Everton’s defence is interesting though, it suggests there should be some stats around that suggest old T Rex’s form is improved from last season. Can you provide anything @The Fish?? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

 

 

The earlier example about Everton’s defence is interesting though, it suggests there should be some stats around that suggest old T Rex’s form is improved from last season. Can you provide anything @The Fish?? 

 

No Way Reaction GIF

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, spongebob toonpants said:

xG is (sometimes) interesting but the belief that football can be predicted accurately by a selection of statistics is facile.

It's benefit only lies in illustrating what has already happened to the weak of mind

Who is saying it's about predicting accurately? Stats show what's happened and suggest from that, what is likely to happen. That's it. Stats would show that the sun has risen every day for the last 4.5bn years, based off that, it's pretty likely it'll come up tomorrow. 

 

If that was it's only benefit, explain to me why multi million pound sports clubs around the world, in various disciplines, pump so much money into it? Not just scouting, but training, physiotherapy, psychotherapy, and all that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, PaddockLad said:


As usual, you’re ascribing things to me that I haven’t said. I don’t tend to heavily criticise Newcastle players. At the start of the season I said Miggy would be very important to the side in terms of work rate etc away from home when others were criticising him . You’re right, there’s no other way of describing his form at the moment other than a purple patch. But 6 goals in a month vs 1 goal last season doesn’t require a graph to come to that conclusion does it? 

Nice use of stats there. Glad to see you coming around.

17 hours ago, PaddockLad said:

 


I think it only even vaguely works for me when it’s used in comparison ie Player A v Player B, but Dave has given me examples of this where I’ve come to the same conclusion as him without needing a slide rule :lol: 

 

The earlier example about Everton’s defence is interesting though, it suggests there should be some stats around that suggest old T Rex’s form is improved from last season. Can you provide anything @The Fish?? 

I can, not right now, but I definitely can. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, The Fish said:

Nice use of stats there. Glad to see you coming around.

I can, not right now, but I definitely can. 

 


I use stats all the time. Just not xG. It’s utter bollocks, which am fairly sure you know but would never publicly acknowledge  :cuppa: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, PaddockLad said:

The earlier example about Everton’s defence is interesting though, it suggests there should be some stats around that suggest old T Rex’s form is improved from last season. Can you provide anything @The Fish?? 

GA/90= Actual Goals against per 90

xGA/90= Chances against per 90

+/- 90 = difference between Expected and Chances against

PSxG/90 = Effectively the average quality of the shot, per 90

GA v PSxG = Difference between Actual Goals against and Quality of the shot.

image.png.97c4e64af9501776a548a4fa55a1ee6d.png

 

6 season prior to this one Pickford averaged

image.png.62ef0fe9e08fe96d3e0c59166b1213cb.png

 

So on average he concedes 1.4 goals a game, very similar but perhaps a tiny bit worse than you'd expect given the quality of chance. The quality of the shots he faces are about on par with the standard of chances (so he's not facing a stack of dribbled efforts when the attacker is in a good position).

 

This season Everton are conceding the highest number of chances per game, from the past 7 seasons. The quality of shots he's facing haven't changed, and yet he's conceding the fewest amount of goals per 90. Purple patch.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.