Creativity & Chance Conversion

[swipe right]

All this bandwidth being wasted because little Jay has to prove a point. Shame shame.

[jayramfootball]

All this bandwidth being wasted because little Jay has to prove a point. Shame shame.

Poor swipey doesn't like reality.
awww.


The funny thing is that there is no point to prove.
The numbers speak for themselves and are neither supportive of the argument that we cant create or that we can.
It's a mixed bag - just not all negative as you'd like it to be, petal.

[theHotHead]

The goal probably counted as 3 chances

We had the volume. The final xG score is an accumulation of all the shots tallied up to give us the 2.69 score. All the 0.1, 0.14, 0.04 shot at up if you dominate with shots. We did dominate but just need to create better chances.

This is what it sounds like to me, lots of crap shots, doesn't mean you created a lot but does mean the quality of the "chance" wasn't that good either.

[jayramfootball]

The goal probably counted as 3 chances

We had the volume. The final xG score is an accumulation of all the shots tallied up to give us the 2.69 score. All the 0.1, 0.14, 0.04 shot at up if you dominate with shots. We did dominate but just need to create better chances.

This is what it sounds like to me, lots of crap shots, doesn't mean you created a lot but does mean the quality of the "chance" wasn't that good either.

Here's what it means:

'We create a lot of chances, but those chances on average are not great chances. However, we create so many we'd have reasonably expected to score 4-5 goals so far this season, but because our finishing is the worst in the league, we've only scored 1.'

Whilst the average chance is not great - we have also had a lot of decent chances actually.

[theHotHead]

The goal probably counted as 3 chances

We had the volume. The final xG score is an accumulation of all the shots tallied up to give us the 2.69 score. All the 0.1, 0.14, 0.04 shot at up if you dominate with shots. We did dominate but just need to create better chances.

Almost correct.
Yes, this season the quality of our chances created ranks 19th in the league, the volume of chances ranks 6th.
Even though the quality is ranked low, we have created a lot and over the season would have been expected to score 4-5 goals but have scored 1.
That is the worst ratio in the league of expected goals to actual goals - i.e. our shooting is shit as well as the quality (on average) of the chances we are creating.

But Jay you are confirming all we are doing is creating a lot of shit chances, how can we expect to score goals if wre are creating shit chances. I get the probability, 1 in 10, but I also need to point out that you could also reasonably expect that you will never score from a shit chance - so scoring just 1 goal is a very plausible result and not in any way a criticism of the finishing.

[jayramfootball]

The goal probably counted as 3 chances

We had the volume. The final xG score is an accumulation of all the shots tallied up to give us the 2.69 score. All the 0.1, 0.14, 0.04 shot at up if you dominate with shots. We did dominate but just need to create better chances.

Almost correct.
Yes, this season the quality of our chances created ranks 19th in the league, the volume of chances ranks 6th.
Even though the quality is ranked low, we have created a lot and over the season would have been expected to score 4-5 goals but have scored 1.
That is the worst ratio in the league of expected goals to actual goals - i.e. our shooting is shit as well as the quality (on average) of the chances we are creating.

But Jay you are confirming all we are doing is creating a lot of shit chances, how can we expect to score goals if wre are creating shit chances. I get the probability, 1 in 10, but I also need to point out that you could also reasonably expect that you will never score from a shit chance - so scoring just 1 goal is a very plausible result and not in any way a criticism of the finishing.

Well a 0.1 chance is not shit.
For example, remember that shot Pepe had from a good move against Brentford, near the end.. good save from the keeper? That was a 0.09. You have 10 of those you expect to score 1 goal.

Here are all our chances and who had them:



Don't get me wrong - we are 19th in the league at the average quality of chance created - but even with it would be reasonable to expect a return of 4 or 5 goals this season based on the chances we have had.

[swipe right]

Enough already Jay. This is getting embarrassing. Take your lumps like a big boy. No need to open up useless threads.

[Salibatelli]

Why would be expect to score 4-5 goals in our 4 games this season, when the team dynamics aren’t working and the style isn’t right generally they struggle to score goals.

Our play is too slow on the whole and the chances aren’t good enough and when they do come there’s a lot of pressure as we don’t create enough good chances, that’s has to be added to the mix.

I just don’t think this goals prediction matrix can possibly work, there’s just too many factors which just cannot be represented.

How do they take into consideration whether a keeper is having a good game or a bad one, how about the height and reach of the keeper or quality of the keeper.

What about the strengths and weaknesses of a player, not every player is great at heading, not every player is good with both feet, not every player has the same composure when goals have dried up and the pressure is on.

If our chances were tapins and we missed those, fair enough you could say we should have score some of those (though players miss those as well), but not when they’re running and have someone breathing down their neck and a keeper too beat etc

[theHotHead]

Ozim, very good post, very good

There are so many things that go toward determining whether a particular shot would be a success or not, goalkeeper positioning, familiarity the player has taking that sort of shot, there are endless reasons that contribute to it that you can't say statistically 1 out of 10 times that goal would be scored so we can multiply out the number of 1 out of 10 chances and come up with a number that the team should have scored.

Far better and more accurate to say, that was an obvious and clear chance to score that the player - any player - should've scored and multiply that out.

[swipe right]

Just a way for some to deflect from Arteta’s abysmal performance. Blame the strikers for not scoring.

[Marsbar100]

Am i hearing this right we are 19th in terms of quality of chances created, thats awful

[jayramfootball]

Am i hearing this right we are 19th in terms of quality of chances created, thats awful

On average yes, unfortunately.

19th in terms of the average quality of chances we create
20th and last in terms of our finishing.

[jayramfootball]

Ozim, very good post, very good

There are so many things that go toward determining whether a particular shot would be a success or not, goalkeeper positioning, familiarity the player has taking that sort of shot, there are endless reasons that contribute to it that you can't say statistically 1 out of 10 times that goal would be scored so we can multiply out the number of 1 out of 10 chances and come up with a number that the team should have scored.

Far better and more accurate to say, that was an obvious and clear chance to score that the player - any player - should've scored and multiply that out.

That is clear cut chances and taking those alone would not account for the half-chances that go in a percentage of the time. Thus you would miss the ineffectiveness of the team taking lots of long shots or shots from tight angles and missing them all with awful attempts at goal.
Quite clearly the ability to finish is a combination of clear cut chances and half chances. In fact, what sets players apart is the talent of the players to score the harder chances.

You have to take both or you can not get any measure of expected goals from the attempts taken.

An example of measuring only clear cut chances:
- Player A has 15 chances, 5 clear cut and 10 half chances - scores 7 goals (4 of the clear cut and 3 of the half-chances, with the 7 other half chances narrowly missing)
- Player B has 15 chances, 5 clear cut and 10 half chances - scores 4 goals( 4 of the clear cut and hoofed every half-chance into row z)

Measuring just clear cut chances you would rate Player A and B the same, which of course would be nonsense.

Lets look at this seasons data again:


HH, you are suggesting we only take the 3 clear cut chances here to determine how well we are finishing chances - ignoring the other 56 chances of varying quality. For example, ESRs chance against City you would say was not a chance, Auba's chance against Chelsea and his chance against Norwich near the end from the left... not chances that we should measure? Don't be silly. This is a fact and data-based thread free of bias. The data is what it is and has been presented as such.

Right now, the data says - regardless of the protests - that we should have scored 4-5 goals this season based on the chances we have had.

There is a rather simplistic narrative that has emerged that we can't create chances - that is simply not true. We create a lot of chances, but we do not create enough clear cut chances. The data actually measures both in fine detail.

[ag6789]

Things will improve dramatically in next few weeks I'm sure because the current situation is guaranteed relegation.
But can't we do away w/these hiccups beginning of the season almost every time for nearly 10 yrs? Probably started w/ Cesc, Nasri and Song leaving in '11?

[ag6789]

Lies, damn lies and statistics.
They could be totally misleading, like possession stats. If you have 70% possession passing backwards and sideways and the opponent lies in wait ( w/only 30% control) but pounces on some of your passing mistakes and scores two, whereas you come up w/ nothing.
Or , you take 20 rubbish shots at the goal and waste all of them whereas the opponent takes three w/ precision and scores two.
An outsider who hasn't seen the game sees the stats and thinks, hmmm, our team made 20 attempts; we must be the unluckiest dog in town.