Shrimpsvoices

Very cool set of graphs showing relative performance vs actual output and from that, over/under-achievement:

https://experimental361.com/2021/02/07/ ... -feb-2021/

Big things are obviously DA coming in and stabilising, before the January signings seeing a massive improvement. A few games to get settled this season but an upward trajectory since then, which is great!

In terms of scoring, we've been clinical at the start of the season but have since been a little more wasteful, but most importantly we continue to create chances.

Defence wise we've been unfortunate in terms of the goal we've conceded, but the overall trend shows we have tightened up a lot over the course of the season and our luck has improved a little recently (could also point to Turner being dropped).

Overall, we are underachieving a bit in but still performing well. Much better to be this way round than overachieving, as that often sees a big drop off at some point (Colchester are a perfect example). Shows we're creating chances and keeping tighter at the back.

Couple of general observations - Salford are lucky/have an excellent keeper bailing them out, Hoolahan/Mullin have dragged Cambridge to the top, Forest Green are weird, and Carlisle look pretty set to get promotion.

Hopefully a few people checked this out - very interesting, if not a little highbrow for DinosaurVoices

This stats based approach infiltrating the game is basically how Brentford assess performance, more so than actual results - they were one of the first clubs to look at expected goals (this link summarises over time) which impacts actual output. Last season when they weren't getting results, they reviewed the data and concluded that there was nothing to worry about and that they would finish in the play-offs (which they did). What started out as an Americanism, seems to be working well for them!

Little Shrimp wrote:
Forest Green are weird,

They have a section that reviews chairmen too? That's in depth!