I don't think that's true

It's not an opinion, it's predicting the future based on what has happened in the past.

My understanding is xG is based on a database of hundreds of thousands of chances / goals that have gone before it, that are similar to the chance being considered.

I.e. the database identifies how often a goal is scored when, taking slimane's goal as Henclrikus is talking about it, a shot is taken first time from the edge of the box from a cross field pass, based on all the other times it has a record of a similar shot being taken.

I'm sure there are variables that are not taken into account, e.g. positioning of defenders, how firmly the cross field pass was struck etc. that mean it isn't scientific, but it's not supposed to be.

Posted By: SimonOTBC on November 27th 2024 at 15:10:58

Message Thread

XG 2.14?! (NCFC) - Kangol Canary, Nov 27, 08:24:26
- xG, why it doesn't work. (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 13:40:24
  - It's a case study in GIGO isn't it? (n/m) (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Nov 27, 16:29:34
    - What garbage goes in though? (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 18:44:46
      - Is it? (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Nov 27, 18:56:10
        
        Nope. The raw data is the outcome of shots from the same part of the pitch (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 19:08:34
        
        I think we just have differing views on the quality of that data then (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Nov 27, 19:38:02
        
        Fair enough. (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 19:46:44
        
        You are a credit to xG 🎩 (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 20:16:34
        
        I presume it's one part of a suite of stuff (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Nov 27, 19:59:51
    - The thing is there is actual proof... (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 16:56:48
      - That’s how you compare players and teams though, isn’t it? (NCFC) - APB, Nov 27, 18:31:00
  - Might as well have titled it (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 14:12:16
    - I literally explained in detail why its wrong and this is your comeback.... (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 15:54:13
      - lol others have tried explaining to you (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 19:17:11
        
        Who explained it to me.... (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 20:57:24
- All the nerds getting off on xg... what does it actually do? Let me (NCFC) - Pixelman, Nov 27, 10:20:27
  - clubs use it so there’s that (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 10:30:26
    - xG is bollocks because (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Nov 27, 10:41:17
      - Presumably the stats back up the xG allocation? (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 11:06:58
        
        Simon, simple question, why do better teams and players outperform xG (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 16:00:36
        
        Because xG is about the average outcome of any given scenario (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 16:24:29
        
        But you are giving a better player a value which is incorrect (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 21:04:40
        
        VMT (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 19:18:13
        
        Glad you agree with something that is Bollocks... (n/m) (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 21:05:13
        
        To be more precise (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Nov 27, 11:52:06
        
        How do they use it? (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 11:54:34
        
        Thye mainly use it to justify losses....... (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 16:02:14
        
        Not seen that (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 19:18:42
      - You’re an xG sceptic then (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 10:45:50
        
        If I don't believe in Santa or the tooth fairy.... (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 13:21:31
        
        You’re a septic (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 13:23:02
    - But what does it do? I can see it might be helpful to clubs when (NCFC) - Pixelman, Nov 27, 10:35:59
      - When the club looks at the next game.... (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 21:08:45
      - The league table is a far more useful stat. (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 12:54:50
      - Like all stats it shouldn't be looked at in isolation. Combined with other metric over (NCFC) - The Gaffer, Nov 27, 11:00:46
        
        That's fascinating. For the clubs. But for the fan on the street it is (NCFC) - Pixelman, Nov 27, 12:33:07
        
        So why bother with any of them? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 13:01:57
        
        Indeed. Why bother. It adds nothing to my enjoyment or othewise knowing we had (NCFC) - Pixelman, Nov 27, 13:35:34
        
        Those are actual number we can count... (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 13:06:41
        
        Boro are a good example (NCFC) - jamesward, Nov 27, 11:48:17
        
        I'm struggling to make myself clear here. That is great for clubs but (NCFC) - Pixelman, Nov 27, 12:36:19
        
        What’s the point in discussing potential line ups and tactics? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 13:07:06
        
        See, now your just configrating. My point is specifically about xg. (n/m) (NCFC) - Pixelman, Nov 27, 13:38:29
        
        Mikey likes to muddy the waters while losing an argument (n/m) (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 16:04:05
        
        Blimey 15 goals in their last 3 games (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 11:58:46
      - Just a metric for those interested in the finer details (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 10:42:20
        
        Cricket has a few. But they are based on actuals... batting average, bowling average etc.. (NCFC) - Pixelman, Nov 27, 12:39:51
        
        These are based on a large sample of incidents (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 13:10:47
        
        Exactly, that's what Mikey doesn't get (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 12:57:28
        
        But a reliable metric needs consistent factors (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Nov 27, 11:57:31
        
        Absolutely, but with enough data you end up with an average (n/m) (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 12:28:17
        
        Not sure how infinite possibilities can create an average! (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Nov 27, 12:53:48
        
        Regularly ranting about xG (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 13:12:15
        
        I assume this is just your subjective view? (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Nov 27, 13:28:30
        
        Well I’m not going to look for each occurrence (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 14:16:19
        
        EDIT - twice as difficult as Sainz's 3rd. (n/m) (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Nov 27, 12:55:54
        
        Unforced errors can be pretty subjective (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 12:18:46
        
        That's why it's just a guide (NCFC) - jamesward, Nov 27, 12:06:33
        
        But people treat it as an arbiter (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Nov 27, 12:12:46
        
        Eh? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 12:23:06
      - It is an indicator of the quality of chances created (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 10:41:02
        
        Nobody is addressing the fact it's subjective... (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 12:51:26
        
        I don't think that's true (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 15:10:58
        
        Again, answer the question..... (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 16:12:31
        
        lol amazing it’s like part of your brain doesn’t work (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 19:21:57
        
        It does make sense for you to be assigned the same value... (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 16:32:32
        
        👍 (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 19:23:27
        
        Again, answer the question..... (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 16:12:00
        
        Why would it be useful to ME? (n/m) (NCFC) - Pixelman, Nov 27, 12:43:03
        
        It isn’t useful to you (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 13:08:46
        
        I think its also misleading, which is worse. (n/m) (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 16:16:05
        
        I think its also misleading, which is worse. (n/m) (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 16:14:19
- 3.23 apparently (NCFC) - Cardiff Canary, Nov 27, 08:40:05
  - Downgraded to 3.15 (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 08:46:55
    - Makes more sense than 2! (NCFC) - Kangol Canary, Nov 27, 09:12:09
      - Go to stats on the fotmob link (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 10:01:16
    - Basically it’s a load of shite then? (n/m) (NCFC) - Adster, Nov 27, 09:09:31
      - No (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 09:14:55
        
        We scored 6 and missed a load of sitters, HTH (n/m) (NCFC) - Adster, Nov 27, 09:16:04
        
        You’re very harsh on our players (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 09:25:43
        
        Yep (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 09:34:02
        
        Surely Crnac’s header was very high (NCFC) - jamesward, Nov 27, 09:45:26
        
        0.49 (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 10:03:08
        
        Hmm (n/m) (NCFC) - jamesward, Nov 27, 10:56:34
        
        That was 0.51 (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 09:45:21
        
        The main thing xG shows me is that fans massively overestimate the likelihood of scoring (n/m) (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Nov 27, 11:19:01
        
        xG massively underestimates good teams (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 13:04:18
        
        Painful (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 14:13:08
        
        Again, no answer to why I am wrong....thats painful to watch... (n/m) (NCFC) - usacanary, Nov 27, 16:05:31
        
        Yep and get easily wound up by what others (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 13:03:01
        
        says others are "easily wound up" Lolzers (n/m) (NCFC) - Henclrikus, Nov 27, 13:29:40
        
        I do (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Nov 27, 14:13:26

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.