Do We Concede More Than We should?

[andrewjohnsmith]

I always had the impression that we don't convert enough chances and that we concede goals too easily. Popey has said the same a couple of times on the Don't Go To Bed podcast. His words were something like - it seems we have to do a whole lot to score a goal whereas our opponents seem to score way too easily.

Looking at xG (expected goals). it's quite the opposite

Our xG per game is 1.68. Our goals scored is 1.72. That means that we score more goals than we're expected to score. I always have the impression we don't convert enough chances. But watching the Liverpool/City game yesterday there were a lot of good chances missed by both teams. It happens to everyone. As xG says, that we're not doing as badly (on average) at converting our chances.

xG can be deceptive. But it's based on stats that happen across all football games. It takes the position the striker is in and collects data that tells us how often the striker scores from that position.

On the other side, our xG against is 0.89, whereas goals conceded is 0.72. That means our opponents score less goals than they're expected to score.

In short, we do better than average with the chances we create and our opponents do worse than average with the chances they create. It's completely the opposite of what I thought it would be.

An explanation is that we get caught up with emotion. We naturally think we're unlucky and deserve better than what we got. Goals for and against say we're 2.4 times better than our opponents. That's rather impressive. xG says we should be 1.9 times better than our opponents. So, according to xG, we do a better job of converting our chances than our opponents do.

[1964white]

The opposition don't need many chances to score against us.

Lump it in our box & chaos occurs.

We actually make silly errors, gifting goals.

I can't recall us conceding sublime goals.

[mentalcase]

This season we aren't conceding too many well worked goals, we are however conceding from set pieces which our opponents know, free kicks and corners are their main tactics, then pump the ball in the air where we are at our weakest.

[Cjay]

I always had the impression that we don't convert enough chances and that we concede goals too easily. Popey has said the same a couple of times on the Don't Go To Bed podcast. His words were something like - it seems we have to do a whole lot to score a goal whereas our opponents seem to score way too easily.

Looking at xG (expected goals). it's quite the opposite

Our xG per game is 1.68. Our goals scored is 1.72. That means that we score more goals than we're expected to score. I always have the impression we don't convert enough chances. But watching the Liverpool/City game yesterday there were a lot of good chances missed by both teams. It happens to everyone. As xG says, that we're not doing as badly (on average) at converting our chances.

xG can be deceptive. But it's based on stats that happen across all football games. It takes the position the striker is in and collects data that tells us how often the striker scores from that position.

On the other side, our xG against is 0.89, whereas goals conceded is 0.72. That means our opponents score less goals than they're expected to score.

In short, we do better than average with the chances we create and our opponents do worse than average with the chances they create. It's completely the opposite of what I thought it would be.

An explanation is that we get caught up with emotion. We naturally think we're unlucky and deserve better than what we got. Goals for and against say we're 2.4 times better than our opponents. That's rather impressive. xG says we should be 1.9 times better than our opponents. So, according to xG, we do a better job of converting our chances than our opponents do.

jose-mourinho-sweet-trouble.gif (453.52 KiB) Viewed 1821 times

[The Subhuman]

I don't think we do.

[The Subhuman]

We don't create enough chances to guarantee goals.

[andrewjohnsmith]

We don't create enough chances to guarantee goals.

We certainly do. All in all our stats are good in terms of shots on goal, goals scored, and expected goals scored

We have second most goals (31) - Boro have 32.

We have the highest xg in the championship:

https://footystats.org/england/championship/xg

And we are second in shots on goal (to Middlesboro):

https://footystats.org/england/championship/shots

[GreennWhite]

In most of our games that we haven't won, last season and this one there is always fans saying if only we had taken our chances, we would have been on easy street during the game. I wonder what games some people actually watch at times.

[andrewjohnsmith]

In most of our games that we haven't won, last season and this one there is always fans saying if only we had taken our chances, we would have been on easy street during the game. I wonder what games some people actually watch at times.

The numbers suggest that we do better than expected in converting our chances. We're actually 7th best in converting chances. That puts us above Sheff United and Burnley.

Norwich, Watford, Sunderland, Middlesboro, and Blackburn (all contenders) are teams that do better than us at converting chances.

[The Subhuman]

The numbers suggest that we do better than expected in converting our chances. We're actually 7th best in converting chances. That puts us above Sheff United and Burnley.

Norwich, Watford, Sunderland, Middlesboro, and Blackburn (all contenders) are teams that do better than us at converting chances.

Which suggests we don't create enough chances

[marie67]

We have the best goal difference in the division.

[andrewjohnsmith]

Which suggests we don't create enough chances

We're second in the division in chances created

If there's any issue it's probably in goals conceded. 13. Sheff U 9. Burnley 6.

And as I said, opponents are not getting lucky. Our goals conceded is better than it should be according to xG. Hence we're giving our opponents too many chances. That was certainly the case against Blackburn.

[The Subhuman]

We're second in the division in chances created

Well that's not a great stat in a division riddled with poor or mediocre teams... We should be top and well clear. Second is under achieving given our game day superiority.

[andrewjohnsmith]

Well that's not a great stat in a division riddled with poor or mediocre teams... We should be top and well clear. Second is under achieving given our game day superiority.

Most of the numbers are good. We create plenty of chances. We have a good conversion rate and we score enough goals

Problems are probably more at the back. We have conceded way more goals than the top 2. 13 vs 9 and 6.

And as the numbers how, our opponents are not getting cheap goals. They're underperforming on xG. So the issue has to be that we're giving opponents too many looks at goal. That was certainly the case against Blackburn.

The only thing I was trying to illustrate was that we are performing better than we think we are in front of goal and we are not conceding too many cheap goals at the back, like we thought we were. The biggest problem (looking at Burnley and Blades numbers) is that we give opposition too many looks at goal. In hindsight 0-0 would have been a great result against Blackburn.

[The Subhuman]

Most of the numbers are good. We create plenty of chances. We have a good conversion rate and we score enough goals

Problems are probably more at the back. We have conceded way more goals than the top 2. 13 vs 9 and 6.

And as the numbers how, our opponents are not getting cheap goals. They're underperforming on xG. So the issue has to be that we're giving opponents too many looks at goal. That was certainly the case against Blackburn.

The only thing I was trying to illustrate was that we are performing better than we think we are in front of goal and we are not conceding too many cheap goals at the back, like we thought we were. The biggest problem (looking at Burnley and Blades numbers) is that we give opposition too many looks at goal. In hindsight 0-0 would have been a great result against Blackburn.

As I say we play with just 2 defenders .. we're going to be more venerable. But I still maintain we don't create enough chances. Blackburn created our best 2 on Saturday, neither of which was a gimmie

[marie67]

We're second in the division in chances created

If there's any issue it's probably in goals conceded. 13. Sheff U 9. Burnley 6.

And as I said, opponents are not getting lucky. Our goals conceded is better than it should be according to xG. Hence we're giving our opponents too many chances. That was certainly the case against Blackburn.

6 and 9 goals conceded in 18 games is exceptional. If they continue that ratio they will be difficult to match.

[andrewjohnsmith]

As I say we play with just 2 defenders .. we're going to be more venerable. But I still maintain we don't create enough chances. Blackburn created our best 2 on Saturday, neither of which was a gimmie

The only point to this thread was to say we do better than expected in converting chances and our opponents do worse than expected in converting theirs.

We score 1.72 per game (expected 1.68)
We conceded 0.72 per game (expected 0.89)

If you ask anyone they'd say we concede too easily and miss too many chances. But the truth is the opposite.

[Carrick Dave]

Most of the numbers are good. We create plenty of chances. We have a good conversion rate and we score enough goals

Problems are probably more at the back. We have conceded way more goals than the top 2. 13 vs 9 and 6.

And as the numbers how, our opponents are not getting cheap goals. They're underperforming on xG. So the issue has to be that we're giving opponents too many looks at goal. That was certainly the case against Blackburn.

The only thing I was trying to illustrate was that we are performing better than we think we are in front of goal and we are not conceding too many cheap goals at the back, like we thought we were. The biggest problem (looking at Burnley and Blades numbers) is that we give opposition too many looks at goal. In hindsight 0-0 would have been a great result against Blackburn.

Thing is. 6 of our 13 goals were conceded in just 2 games, where we won one and drew the other.

Averaging across all games can be misleading.

How have the xG and xGC looked in the 3 games we've lost?

[Cjay]

The only point to this thread was to say we do better than expected in converting chances and our opponents do worse than expected in converting theirs.

We score 1.72 per game (expected 1.68)
We conceded 0.72 per game (expected 0.89)

If you ask anyone they'd say we concede too easily and miss too many chances. But the truth is the opposite.

The thing about xG is if you are a side that dominate the ball your xG will generally always be higher than the opponent because of volume.

Teams with more possession will generally have more shooting opportunities.

We probably had a higher xG against Millwall than them but that's because they had a decent chance and scored then shut up shop and just soaked up our pretty feeble attempt to create anything.

I don't think for the amount of possession we have we create the volume of good chances we should.

A lot of huff and puff.

We do though generally give away a good chance or two every game, but because of volume of chances it doesn't often reflect.

Luton is a good example, they had 2 or 3 what I imagine is defined as "big chances" but probably still had an xG of below 1.

Not surprised by the things you say about xG and xG against because we generally do give away a few decent chances a game and don't create huge volumes of great chances.

[The Subhuman]

The only point to this thread was to say we do better than expected in converting chances and our opponents do worse than expected in converting theirs.

We score 1.72 per game (expected 1.68)
We conceded 0.72 per game (expected 0.89)

If you ask anyone they'd say we concede too easily and miss too many chances. But the truth is the opposite.

Agree with that to a degree. For all our dominance and quality we don't create much though.