The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
He’s scored 5.7% of his shots
An open goal 25 yards out is easier than 8yrds out with 16 players in 6yrd the box
No because I’m using facts not assumptions that Kane takes more difficult shots based on shoddy criteria like “did he head it”sammyspurs
The stat you're using against Kane is this:
But your criticism of me using xG was this:
Can you not see that your own criticism applies to the stat that you're using??
Actually, there are some circumstances where headers are more difficult than a normal shot. For example, it's quite rare to see a long range header scored. At short range there isn't a big difference between a header and a normal shot.No because I’m using facts not assumptions that Kane takes more difficult shots based on shoddy criteria like “did he head it”
Some headers are tap insActually, there are some circumstances where headers are more difficult than a normal shot. For example, it's quite rare to see a long range header scored. At short range there isn't a big difference between a header and a normal shot.
xG% is obviously not perfect, but it's clearly better than % of shots scored, as there's more context.
Kane is the second best finisher out of top 20 goalscorers in Europe in the past 5 years.
It is a measure of a players' finishing ability.It’s bullshit definitions of “difficulty” and takes zero account t of a players actual ability.
Was it as difficult for Kane as it would have been for Charlie Adam?
No. As I said, this measure isn't perfect, and no stat is, as it can't take everything into account.Does it take into account mentality? Strong wind, wet pitch, quality of goalkeeper, was the player given a dead leg two minutes earlier....?
You keep saying it’s not perfect then using itIt is a measure of a players' finishing ability.
Kane will have a higher percentage of xG scored than Charlie Adam.
No. As I said, this measure isn't perfect, and no stat is, as it can't take everything into account.
However none of these things are considered in your stat of '% of shots that are goals' which you keep citing.
If you have two measures, and one of them considers more factors than others, it is a more precise measure.
What don't you get?You keep saying it’s not perfect then using it
My measurements are perfect. They are facts.
Kane has taken 109 shots, and 91 did not go in.
The End
What don’t you get more like?What don't you get?
On the same basis the xG stats aren't perfect, yours aren't either.
The difference is your stat has no context whatsoever, so it's virtually meaningless. xG has some context, so is far more useful.
Read my post above again: #42
Correct. The question is whether this is conclusive evidence he's a poor finisher.Kane has 109 shots and 19 goals.
That’s a fact.
I agree, I'm not dismissing it. Missing a free kick will contribute to a lower goals/xG %.Blasting it at the wall because he’s not good enough to hit the target with them does not exonerate him, or should not be dismissed.
The fact he has most goals and most assists in PL, in a team who barely dominate any game is a a clear indicator he's a good decision maker.It’s not “awwww poor Kane, it’s difficult”, it’s just shit play.
You’d bother if genuinely deep down you didn’t agree with me.seriously why even bother
Just ignore
The things you criticise him for, missing free kicks and missing long range shots are all counted towards this goals/xG percentage.
And despite that, he's still number 2 in Europe in terms of finishing.
That’s why the biggest argument today has been “if you ignore Kane’s free kicks, his stats are better”
And we’ve come full circleThe fact he has most goals and most assists in PL, in a team who barely dominate any game is a a clear indicator he's a good decision maker.
I'm not saying he's clinical just because he's scored more, the stat is comparing his goals vs expected goals.More shots equals more goals, that doesn’t make him clinical.
Son trounces him in that graphI'm not saying he's clinical just because he's scored more, the stat is comparing his goals vs expected goals.
Yeah Son is a better finisher.Son trounces him in that graph
You stand by the conclusion that Son is a better finisher?
Right so we should play Son as our main striker and he’d be world class?Yeah Son is a better finisher.
However Kane is better overall. Better passing, higher football IQ, and also better defensively.
At our best this season, Kane showed his versatility by switching from CF to CAM at times; with Son making advanced runs.Right so we should play Son as our main striker and he’d be world class?
You’d be happy to not use Kane as our striker and feel Son would score more goals than him up top?At our best this season, Kane showed his versatility by switching from CF to CAM at times; with Son making advanced runs.
I would change the nature of their partnership.
I wouldn't change the nature of their partnership.