Jump to content

Double Winning St Johnstone FC Thread


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, deej said:

The problem with xG is Chris Kane could be through one-on-one, somehow take it round the keeper and be facing an empty net, and I still don't think I would expect him to score

I wish it was called "chance quality" instead, tbh, expected goals gives the wrong impression I think.

Should probably add in how many actual goals they scored, and mins played, next time for more context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@RandomGuy is this league only? 

If it is and I'm reading it correctly, we 'should' have scored 43/44 goals this season compared to the 27 we have scored. It would intereting to see a table that confirms we are amongst, if not the, most wasteful. Another thought is that we're probably getting more clinical, so you'd hope the figures would reflect that we're wasting fewer chances over time. 

Why though would p90 not be a fairer way of looking at, as it's players that you're judging?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Valentino Bolognese said:

@RandomGuy is this league only? 

If it is and I'm reading it correctly, we 'should' have scored 43/44 goals this season compared to the 27 we have scored. It would intereting to see a table that confirms we are amongst, if not the, most wasteful. Another thought is that we're probably getting more clinical, so you'd hope the figures would reflect that we're wasting fewer chances over time. 

Why though would p90 not be a fairer way of looking at, as it's players that you're judging?

Yeah sorry, shouldve made it clear.

The 43.68 is both xG and xA combined, so isn't the amount we shouldve scored, you'd have to total the xG up to get that, as you can be counting chances twice using both, if that makes sense? Also doesn't include Hendry or McNamara. ModernFitba twitter had our seasonal xG up a few ago I'm sure.

Was looking more at who our most dangerous players have been this season, and wanted to include players who hadn't played as much, so felt fairer to those who have played a lot of minutes. Sometimes p90 figures punish folk like Wotherspoon who play almost every minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Yeah sorry, shouldve made it clear.

The 43.68 is both xG and xA combined, so isn't the amount we shouldve scored, you'd have to total the xG up to get that, as you can be counting chances twice using both, if that makes sense? Also doesn't include Hendry or McNamara. ModernFitba twitter had our seasonal xG up a few ago I'm sure.

Was looking more at who our most dangerous players have been this season, and wanted to include players who hadn't played as much, so felt fairer to those who have played a lot of minutes. Sometimes p90 figures punish folk like Wotherspoon who play almost every minute.

Of course, should have seen it was xA and xG. Still think it would be interesting to know xG for the team for the season vs actual goals scored, particularly in comparison to other teams. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Valentino Bolognese said:

Of course, should have seen it was xA and xG. Still think it would be interesting to know xG for the team for the season vs actual goals scored, particularly in comparison to other teams. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW here's our squad breakdown, in the league, to try and find who our most dangerous players have been.
xG used to see who's getting shots in dangerous areas, xA to see who's creating shots in dangerous areas. Used total instead of p90 as I think its a fairer way to look at it, maybe wrong. % is the amount they individually contribute to the who squads total. If a players missing from the list, it means they scored 0 in both so I erased them them ease. Penalties removed. They're not ordered in any way, simply how they came out from WyScout...
Screenshot_20210212-125133_Office.thumb.jpg.0f98c46091b8165d6382274a7e8e0c4d.jpg
...from memory a lot of chances Conway sets up are from corners/set plays. May was top when you include penalties, then plummets when you remove them.
I don't think McCann has been particularly adventurous this season, so to see him have a similar chance of goals as May is a bit of a worry.
Wotherspoon, though...

Interesting stuff. Think it reflects especially well on Conway and Tanser. Fwiw I still don’t really agree with removing penalties but I see why you’ve done so in this case since they’re rated so highly with xG!

Do you have the data for McNamara? And for that matter, Hendry too?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Zamora Fan said:


Interesting stuff. Think it reflects especially well on Conway and Tanser. Fwiw I still don’t really agree with removing penalties but I see why you’ve done so in this case since they’re rated so highly with xG!

Do you have the data for McNamara? And for that matter, Hendry too?

Just removed penalties to try and really see what May was doing, before removing penalties he comes out as our 2nd most dangerous player, which didn't feel right to me, think it looks fairer without them, but maybe unfair to remove them?

Hendry was 2.79xG and 0.15xA, I'll have to check McNamara tonight after work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ffs removing penalties? What the f**k is wrong with you boys?

You want me to drop some Mandy in to you Random, I've got a pile that am I f**k touching, the stats should look a fair bit better for you then.

Anyway I'm looking forward to young Middleton getting a run out soon, I think he could do a good job in the Melamed role, he's direct and not afraid to shoot, just what we need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, tree house tam said:

Ffs removing penalties? What the f**k is wrong with you boys?

This'll sound wanky, but I don't really know how else to word it, but I was looking at "input", rather than "output" (as in, looking at players getting lots of shots in dangerous areas/creating lots of shots in dangerous areas, rather than how many goals/assists) so I thought penalties were a bit misleading towards that.

As I say, maybe wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, apparently only 1 club so far hasn't applied for the government "loan" money. 

You'd guess it would be one of the rich clubs (Celtic/Rangers), or one who have said they're pretty much fine (Motherwell), but feel like it might well be us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Also, apparently only 1 club so far hasn't applied for the government "loan" money. 

You'd guess it would be one of the rich clubs (Celtic/Rangers), or one who have said they're pretty much fine (Motherwell), but feel like it might well be us.

It was confirmed at our AGM last night that we've applied for the money.

The same thing was mentioned though, 11 of the 12 clubs have apparently applied.

Edited by capt_oats
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, The Real Saints said:

After impressing throughout the season, he has rightfully earned himself a move to a bigger club than Dundee United. Has Lawrence Shankland achieved this yet?

Keep an eye on him for me, he’s the subject of a bet I have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, perthsaint1977 said:

Halifax scout today would have been disappointed that Tanser was out... 

This is glorious. 

Rangers/Celtic to Sunderland to Mansfield and now Halifax. 

I wonder if it'll dawn on Tanser before it's too late.

He's got Kilmarnock written all over him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...