Jim Smith 2,291 Posted November 7, 2017 I think Farke is a good coach so our issues will be evident to him anyway but if they weren''t then the stats couldn''t make it much clearer.A goal every 14.9 shots, 3rd worst in the league despite having the third most shots on goal in the league.As we have seen this season the first goal is absolutely key with this team. We absolutely have to get more clinical. Had Jerome scored against Bolton, Stiepermann against Derby and Hull and Murphy against Burton (and was it Birmingham?) then i''m pretty confident that we would have won at least 3 of those games because this Norwich side looks very (and unusually) confident and assured once we get in front.Also its interesting that in every game we''ve won we''ve had less possession than the opposition and in every game we''ve lost we''ve dominated possession. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SwindonCanary 455 Posted November 7, 2017 A goal every 14.9 shots, 3rd worst in the league despite having the third most shots on goal in the league.This, I believe, is due to our slow approach, too many players get back to block shots Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,456 Posted November 7, 2017 This is where the Expected Goals stat comes in use- allows us to see the quality of chances created rather than just the number. We apparently have an expected goals tally of 18 this season yet have only scored 15 which suggested we''re not finishing as well as we could. However I''d also wager that even if we''d scored 18 goals that wouldn''t change our position that much and we need to be creating far better chances. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,503 Posted November 7, 2017 [quote user="king canary"]This is where the Expected Goals stat comes in use- allows us to see the quality of chances created rather than just the number. We apparently have an expected goals tally of 18 this season yet have only scored 15 which suggested we''re not finishing as well as we could. However I''d also wager that even if we''d scored 18 goals that wouldn''t change our position that much and we need to be creating far better chances.[/quote]Disagree. First goal been so important to us and I think had we scored some of our chances at home we''d have won them. Potentially 7 points better off where there''d be 0 complaints. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,456 Posted November 7, 2017 True. But equally the could have been scored when 4-0 down to Millwall and 3-1 down to Sunderland. Difficult to say either way I guess. I guess my larger point is if we''d have scored 18 goals this season we would still be in a position where only Birmingham, Bolton and Millwall would have scored less. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 998 Posted November 7, 2017 I am with Hoggy, what the stats do not show is that we need to score first, if we do not then the best we can hope for is a draw...... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jim Smith 2,291 Posted November 7, 2017 I''d say the 4 best chances we''ve missed this season have all been with the score at 0-0 against Brum, Burton, Derby and Bolton (although i gather Murphy had a chance second half on Saturday which i''ve not seen). If "expected goals" relates to changes you would expect to see converted then I think those goals would have made a huge difference given our record after going 1 up in games this season (i.e. winning them all). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted November 7, 2017 The three games where the difference between the xG and the number of goals scored was Burton, Bristol and Millwall. Get an extra goal in each of those games and Norwich have 6 extra points.According to @NorwichFCStats Norwich are 5 goals behind their xG so far this season. So if you look at 5 games with the biggest difference you also get Hull and Wolves. So for 5 extra goals, you could get 8 extra points. Over simplistic of course analysis of course, but it is safe to say bad finishing is the root of Norwich''s problems. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lake district canary 4,520 Posted November 7, 2017 [quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"] Over simplistic of course analysis of course, but it is safe to say bad finishing is the root of Norwich''s problems.[/quote]Not over simplistic in the slightest - and it doesn''t need pages full of stats to work that out! [:O] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,456 Posted November 7, 2017 @Bethnal- that was where I was looking too, must have looked at some old stats to get my 18 v 15.I''d still be concerned though that if we''re only creating enough chance to have scored 20 goals so far that this is still an issue. Would be interested to see an xG table to see how this number reflects against others. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Badger 2,389 Posted November 7, 2017 What is an expected goal? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,456 Posted November 7, 2017 It''s a stat that aims to measure the quality of chances. Basically they look at how often a particular type of chance is scored and gives it a value. So if a chance is converted 6 out of 10 times on average it will be given a rating of 0.6 etc etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Making Plans 929 Posted November 7, 2017 [quote user="Jim Smith"]I think Farke is a good coach so our issues will be evident to him anyway[/quote]Really?I think you over estimate his ability to see what''s going on.This is the man who said after Saturday''s game , and I quote, "we couldn''t see this coming".Strange that several posters in the Bolton match thread, who by all accounts know nothing about football, could see it coming after 20 or so minutes and were just waiting for Bolton to score. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted November 7, 2017 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41822455Expected goal is the metric used to measure the likelyhood a shot would be scored based on comparing it to other shots taken from the same location, in similar circumstances (header, shot from a cross, through ball, free kick, corner, rebound etc). This is expressed as a decimal. A shot which is scored 50% of the time is .5. The database of comparable shots used by someone like opta contains millions of shots - so while every circumstance cannot be taken into account, it is a robust data source. It is used as a way to see how good shots a team is taking is, as saying on target/off target isn’t that useful - strikers don’t aim at the centre of the goal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Making Plans 929 Posted November 7, 2017 [quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]strikers don’t aim at the centre of the goal.[/quote]Well Jerome doesn''t Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,352 Posted November 7, 2017 [quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]The three games where the difference between the xG and the number of goals scored was Burton, Bristol and Millwall. Get an extra goal in each of those games and Norwich have 6 extra points.According to @NorwichFCStats Norwich are 5 goals behind their xG so far this season. So if you look at 5 games with the biggest difference you also get Hull and Wolves. So for 5 extra goals, you could get 8 extra points. Over simplistic of course analysis of course, but it is safe to say bad finishing is the root of Norwich''s problems.[/quote]Great stuff as always Beth.Are these stats available from last season? I remember us scoring a lot of goals. 55 home goals I think it was. But only 30 away from home. I don''t think anyone in the league scored more than those 85. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted November 8, 2017 Thanks Nutty.I don''t have exact figures for last season, but was told Norwich over performed vastly for number of goals scored compared to their ''expected goals''. Which from watching the season makes sense - lots of long range goals from Jacob, Pritchard and Nelson, which generally score low in expected goal terms. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Badger 2,389 Posted November 8, 2017 Thank you KC and BYG for the explanation of expected goals. Is the data publicly available on an ongoing basis? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557 Posted November 8, 2017 There is no one ''source'' for expected goals, as different analysts use different models. Opta are producing the data which used by the BBC, and they probably have the biggest collection of source data, but it is very expensive to access.The www.experimental361.com blog produces free to use xG data (and is what the @norwichfcstats account use). How much data this is based on and what model they use isn''t clear. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,456 Posted November 8, 2017 @BadgerI''ve struggled to find it so I rely on what others post- I assume you have to have access to opta or similar.I''ll say I was a little skeptical about it as a stat as some people try and build to much into it but since it''s been explained to me how it works and what you can use it for I think its excellent. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites