Our stats
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2020 7:41 pmFor any interested, there are a few sites about like Whoscored and Experimental 361 that do some great insights on League Two teams.
Below is the xG table for League Two. What we can take from it is that we're pretty much in the position that we deserve to be in the table. What's interesting is we've been unlucky to concede as many goals as we have done, but that hasn't really effected our results. I think what we can take from that is in the games when we've been battered, we were unfortunate to lose by that many and got done by some very good shooting.
https://experimental361.com/2020/11/15/ ... -nov-2020/
I think what's important to point out is that we've been pretty clinical with our finishing. We've actually marginally outscored our xG. I personally have a bit of a theory that goals on the counter are generally easier finishes relative to their position, as the opposition are less likely to have bodies back blocking shots at goal. I think a big strength of our side is winning the ball in midfield and breaking quickly, meaning we're getting some pretty clear chances. We're seventh in the league for interceptions according to Whoscored.
There's a constant debate about finishing chances/needing a striker etc. The fact is, our finishing has been pretty good. We can see this graph that shows the likes of Phillips/Wildig/CMG have efficiently finished off their chances:
https://experimental361.com/2020/11/15/ ... -nov-2020/
I think what we can take from the graph in regards to strikers is that they are generally not getting a large supply of chances in comparison to our attacking midfielders. This isn't really surprising given it's basically how our system is set up, and the role of our strikers is more team orientated. It would be nice to see us create a few more chances for them though, as we can see from these next graphs:
https://experimental361.com/2020/11/01/ ... -nov-2020/
It shows that we're 'languidly clinical', which I think is probably quite a good description of us. We're not constantly creating chances, but when we do they're generally good chances we're finishing off. I'd say this is because we generally prefer to play on the break. Personally, I think the only game this season when we've been truly wasteful has been against Maldon & Tiptree.
Our defence doesn't look too pretty on the above scatter graphs, but I think some of the excellent finishing against us is a bit of a mitigating factor. Our defence is very aerially dominant (we're fourth in the league for aerial duels won), but I think we can get stretched when chasing a game which ultimately leads to them being very vulnerable to attacks on the deck. It might also be why the opposition have been able to score so many long range/'low xG' chances.
Anyway, make of all that what you will!
Below is the xG table for League Two. What we can take from it is that we're pretty much in the position that we deserve to be in the table. What's interesting is we've been unlucky to concede as many goals as we have done, but that hasn't really effected our results. I think what we can take from that is in the games when we've been battered, we were unfortunate to lose by that many and got done by some very good shooting.
https://experimental361.com/2020/11/15/ ... -nov-2020/
I think what's important to point out is that we've been pretty clinical with our finishing. We've actually marginally outscored our xG. I personally have a bit of a theory that goals on the counter are generally easier finishes relative to their position, as the opposition are less likely to have bodies back blocking shots at goal. I think a big strength of our side is winning the ball in midfield and breaking quickly, meaning we're getting some pretty clear chances. We're seventh in the league for interceptions according to Whoscored.
There's a constant debate about finishing chances/needing a striker etc. The fact is, our finishing has been pretty good. We can see this graph that shows the likes of Phillips/Wildig/CMG have efficiently finished off their chances:
https://experimental361.com/2020/11/15/ ... -nov-2020/
I think what we can take from the graph in regards to strikers is that they are generally not getting a large supply of chances in comparison to our attacking midfielders. This isn't really surprising given it's basically how our system is set up, and the role of our strikers is more team orientated. It would be nice to see us create a few more chances for them though, as we can see from these next graphs:
https://experimental361.com/2020/11/01/ ... -nov-2020/
It shows that we're 'languidly clinical', which I think is probably quite a good description of us. We're not constantly creating chances, but when we do they're generally good chances we're finishing off. I'd say this is because we generally prefer to play on the break. Personally, I think the only game this season when we've been truly wasteful has been against Maldon & Tiptree.
Our defence doesn't look too pretty on the above scatter graphs, but I think some of the excellent finishing against us is a bit of a mitigating factor. Our defence is very aerially dominant (we're fourth in the league for aerial duels won), but I think we can get stretched when chasing a game which ultimately leads to them being very vulnerable to attacks on the deck. It might also be why the opposition have been able to score so many long range/'low xG' chances.
Anyway, make of all that what you will!