Norwich have Kim Hellberg on their radar

[Smurph]

I hope his 'attacking philosophy' is "stick the ball in their onion bag"

Philosophy ffs. It's hardly Socratic, not even when Socrates was playing.

'

Seems to be working well for him at the moment

 

[Longlostjack]

I hope his 'attacking philosophy' is "stick the ball in their onion bag"

Philosophy ffs. It's hardly Socratic, not even when Socrates was playing.

'

Bit of a Kant was Socrates but he knew how to stick the ball in the onion bag.

 

[Andrew - North Hill]

Because it's a load of bollocks.

I sort of agree. In fact I mostly agree, you either score or concede, or you don't. That's all that ultimately matters.

But I do find it interesting that Cardiff were highlighted as overachieving on xG last season, did nothing, and ended up in a serious relegation battle.

Similarly, there was a minority of people at the time during Monk's 8th place season who were adamant that we had got lucky and he'd completely fucked us up. At the time they looked like moaners, but they turned out to be right. The drop off the following year was dramatic. That's because he didn't change and the luck ran out.

There's definitely something in it as a metric. I don't think it should be the be all and end all though.

 

[Smurph]

I sort of agree. In fact I mostly agree, you either score or concede, or you don't. That's all that ultimately matters.

But I do find it interesting that Cardiff were highlighted as overachieving on xG last season, did nothing, and ended up in a serious relegation battle.

Similarly, there was a minority of people at the time during Monk's 8th place season who were adamant that we had got lucky and he'd completely fucked us up. At the time they looked like moaners, but they turned out to be right. The drop off the following year was dramatic. That's because he didn't change and the luck ran out.

There's definitely something in it as a metric. I don't think it should be the be all and end all though.

I'm a dinosaur when it comes to this type of thing, probably best ignored

Only metric that counts for us supporters are the goals for and against during a game.

 

[Andrew - North Hill]

I'm a dinosaur when it comes to this type of thing, probably best ignored

Only metric that counts for us supporters are the goals for and against during a game.

Think of overachieving on xG as a high cholesterol reading .... it doesn't guarantee you'll have a heart attack, in fact you probably won't..... but it doesn't help your chances

 

[Smurph]

Think of overachieving on xG as a high cholesterol reading .... it doesn't guarantee you'll have a heart attack, in fact you probably won't..... but it doesn't help your chances

Brilliant

 

[bytholwyn]

The massive improvement under Sheehan has been defensive, more than halving the rate we're conceding goals to just over half a goal per game. If we were to decide on who to appoint purely on the defensive side of things then it would be a no brainer to appoint Sheehan.

As for the attacking side of things there have been modest improvements there as well. One element of Sheehan's philosophy is to control the play in the opposition half. Against Blackburn and QPR we had less than 50 per cent possession overall but completed more passes in the opposition half than they did in ours. So the emphasis is on controlling territory rather than possession. There's a lot to be said for that, especially in our case, seeing we have the ideal set of tigerish midfielders to win that territorial battle. Other than that there doesn't seem to be a consistent way of building attacks, but again that's not a bad thing. Williams in particular was obsessed with attacking down the flanks, despite the fact we had Eom on one flank, finding his feet, and the consistently inconsistent Ronald on the other. So, the variety in our play under Sheehan is something I welcome. The second goal against QPR in particular was a lovely team goal.

However it does help to have a core philosophy, and ideally an innovative one. Even Joe Kinnear had a clear philosophy. Hellberg has a reputation for being innovative, Sheehan doesn't strike me as having that quality, but I may be doing him a disservice. He basically doesn't have the games under his belt for him to have established a Sheehan Way. That's no reason to rule him out, and it may be that in discussions with Montague he's outlined his long term thinking, which hopefully aligns with the direction the club wants to go in.

 

[Neath_Jack]

I'm a dinosaur when it comes to this type of thing, probably best ignored

Only metric that counts for us supporters are the goals for and against during a game.

Same as me. What’s the old saying, football is a simple game, complicated by…

Now I don’t mind some stats, like crosses made, tackles made, goals obviously. But this expected nonsense can get fucked. And I’ve never met anyone who starts talking about xG, only ever see it mentioned online. It’s definitely one for the nerds.

 

[Darran]

Same as me. What’s the old saying, football is a simple game, complicated by…

Now I don’t mind some stats, like crosses made, tackles made, goals obviously. But this expected nonsense can get fucked. And I’ve never met anyone who starts talking about xG, only ever see it mentioned online. It’s definitely one for the nerds.

Great post.

 

[Skippyjack]

Same as me. What’s the old saying, football is a simple game, complicated by…

Now I don’t mind some stats, like crosses made, tackles made, goals obviously. But this expected nonsense can get fucked. And I’ve never met anyone who starts talking about xG, only ever see it mentioned online. It’s definitely one for the nerds.

Who determines and decides whether a certified xG chance has occurred?.. load of baloney.. a forward could have a 5 yard tap in and another one could have a 10 yard tap in, yet they're both judged by some made up %age that the player should and could score by some random bloke in the crowd who determines this bollocks

 

[Darran]

Who determines and decides whether a certified xG chance has occurred?.. load of baloney.. a forward could have a 5 yard tap in and another one could have a 10 yard tap in, yet they're both judged by some made up %age that the player should and could score by some random bloke in the crowd who determines this bollocks

It’s bollox. I always think of shots on target.
Player hits a thunderbolt and the ball is going in until the keeper makes a world class save.
Five minutes later player stubs his toe taking a shot and the ball trickles up to the keeper which he stops with his little finger.
Both go into the shots on target category.
It’s utter nonsense.

 

[jack_lord]

One thing Sheehan hasn't had to contend with is bad luck with injuries and suspensions. He's been able to draw on the same back 4 in all games. The only injury of note has been Peart-Harris, and his absence has allowed a resurgent Eom to come back in. Williams can certainly bemoan his luck in the Sheffield United game where the ref should have sent Rhys Norrington- Davies off just before half time and awarded us a penalty. Darling's subsequent red card certainly didn't help in subsequent games. That's the downside of appointing a manager with only 18 games under his belt. How does Sheehan deal with a bad run? Or a second spate of injuries? Or a series of bad refereeing decisions?

Whilst correct, and Williams did have bad luck, but Sheehan has given Swansea 5 wins in a row for the first time since 2007 when we beat Leeds to make it 6 in a row. He has picked the team to do the job on the day which Williams did not. He had the same tools just didn't use them.
If things get difficult it will be interesting to see how Sheehan deals with it but I get the feeling he won't throw the players under the bus like Williams and Martin did. If his results are part of the interview process then he is the leading candidate but who knows how things will change with a new gaffer.

 

[Skippyjack]

It’s bollox. I always think of shots on target.
Player hits a thunderbolt and the ball is going in until the keeper makes a world class save.
Five minutes later player stubs his toe taking a shot and the ball trickles up to the keeper which he stops with his little finger.
Both go into the shots on target category.
It’s utter nonsense.

They've probably drafted in an analytics whizz in, who sits there and is the only one on earth who can determine the correct conclusion of a chance.. if you've ever watched a game live with fans, about 25 people in the crowd have an array of different opinions on how it should've been a penalty or striker should've buried it, then you go home, watch the highlights and a completely different conclusion will come to mind

 

[Darran]

They've probably drafted in an analytics whizz in, who sits there and is the only one on earth who can determine the correct conclusion of a chance.. if you've ever watched a game live with fans, about 25 people in the crowd have an array of different opinions on how it should've been a penalty or striker should've buried it, then you go home, watch the highlights and a completely different conclusion will come to mind

Well said Skip you’ve always made a lot of sense on here.

 

[JackSomething]

The dinosaurs are out tonight. It only takes a quick Google search to show you how xG stats are created and while I don't think they are as important as some do, they are a better yardstick of chances created than shots on target (as Daz ironically pointed out above).

As ever with statistics, xG is only as useful if the people analysing them know what they're doing. Brentford and Brighton are rightly praised for their stellar recruitment and you're deluding yourself if you think they don't extensively use analytics/statistics to make those signings.