Tactics TFC's Tactical Autopsy Thread

[Klaus]

Forwards killing us


View: https://x.com/dataanalyticepl/status/1838980650394673222?s=46&t=IomICbZIqZC4FsH907qgfw

Click to shrink...

So we're underperforming our xG by 1.39xG

Against Brentford we notched 3.89xG and scored 3 goals.

So 0.89 of that 1.39 underperformance was from one game when it didn't matter to the result.

The remaining games we are underperforming our xG by a grand total of 0.4xG. So not even half a goal.

If we'd matched our xG exactly we'd have practically the same level of points we do right now. I hardly think that's evidence our forwards are killing us.

 

[Klaus]

View: https://x.com/dataanalyticepl/status/1838928779520971080?s=46&t=IomICbZIqZC4FsH907qgfw

Click to shrink...

Great Twitter account this.

Regarding the high xG chances, based on the eye test it feels pretty clear: many of our chances conceded are coming from counter attacks, set pieces, or "artificial transition" moments where they beat our press and put a player in behind (Newcastle's second).

What's interesting to me is how Liverpool's are so low despite playing an ostensibly similar style.

The big difference I've seen from Slot-ball at Liverpool to Ange-ball is the willingness to bait the opposition press; they want to lure the opponent out by keeping their back four relatively deep (Robertson usually always in a flat back three, sometimes Trent deep sometimes slightly inverted) and with a double pivot of Mac Allister and Gravenberch.

The "passing around the penalty box" tactic on the face of it would seem more risky but ultimately the chances it gives up don't appear to be relatively high xG, because if they do lose the ball there are plenty of players back to defend the counter attack. Slot has spoken about it in post match interviews, the concept of defenders being close together being useful in case they lose the ball.

City conversely are more like us; they push the opponent back and leave large spaces in behind, like for the Ipswich goal against them on the counter. Part of the reason I suspect they have better defensive stats is because they keep an extra man back in defence.

 

[Starks]

So we're underperforming our xG by 1.39xG

Against Brentford we notched 3.89xG and scored 3 goals.

So 0.89 of that 1.39 underperformance was from one game when it didn't matter to the result.

The remaining games we are underperforming our xG by a grand total of 0.4xG. So not even half a goal.

If we'd matched our xG exactly we'd have practically the same level of points we do right now. I hardly think that's evidence our forwards are killing us.

Click to shrink...

Surely what bus-conductor is getting at is that better forwards quite obviously create better chances..

 

[Richard Arlison]

Great Twitter account this.

Regarding the high xG chances, based on the eye test it feels pretty clear: many of our chances conceded are coming from counter attacks, set pieces, or "artificial transition" moments where they beat our press and put a player in behind (Newcastle's second).

What's interesting to me is how Liverpool's are so low despite playing an ostensibly similar style.

The big difference I've seen from Slot-ball at Liverpool to Ange-ball is the willingness to bait the opposition press; they want to lure the opponent out by keeping their back four relatively deep (Robertson usually always in a flat back three, sometimes Trent deep sometimes slightly inverted) and with a double pivot of Mac Allister and Gravenberch.

The "passing around the penalty box" tactic on the face of it would seem more risky but ultimately the chances it gives up don't appear to be relatively high xG, because if they do lose the ball there are plenty of players back to defend the counter attack. Slot has spoken about it in post match interviews, the concept of defenders being close together being useful in case they lose the ball.

City conversely are more like us; they push the opponent back and leave large spaces in behind, like for the Ipswich goal against them on the counter. Part of the reason I suspect they have better defensive stats is because they keep an extra man back in defence.

Click to shrink...

Artificial transition I think was the Newcastle 2nd and Vardy goals. Brentford was a kick off routine and then I can only think of the Mbuemo chance that was maybe them breaking our press.

Traditional counter attacks I really don't think we've given up much at all in the 5 games so far. Unless I'm missing one.

Tbh i don't think there is a pattern to the chances we are giving up. Not yet at least.

 

[Richard Arlison]

View: https://x.com/jon_mackenzie/status/1839280756939424078?s=46&t=DK3x3JffKkqwqcsQdIeO_A

 

[SpursRomania]

Forwards killing us


View: https://x.com/dataanalyticepl/status/1838980650394673222?s=46&t=IomICbZIqZC4FsH907qgfw

Click to shrink...

We scored 9 goals, this graph is not having the right data. We’re pretty much on par with our xG.

Check the xG table in the article below.

Manchester United: Erik ten Hag's side are Premier League's biggest underachievers

Man Utd sit 11th in Premier League table; Erik ten Hags side rank among top five across key attacking metrics but struggled to convert expected goals into goals; watch Man Utd vs Tottenham live on Sky Sports Premier League from 4pm on Sunday; kick-off 4.30pm

www.skysports.com

 

[Lancelot Link]

Part of the reason I suspect they have better defensive stats is because they keep an extra man back in defence.

Click to shrink...

Or having Rodri sitting in front of their back four

 

[Klaus]

Or having Rodri sitting in front of their back four

Click to shrink...

You mean the guy who's played about 30 minutes of football this season?

 

[Lancelot Link]

You mean the guy who's played about 30 minutes of football this season?

Click to shrink...

Ah apologies thought you talking about City in general not just this season. Although teams tend to be more understandably cautious against City

 

[bus-conductor]

We scored 9 goals, this graph is not having the right data. We’re pretty much on par with our xG.

Check the xG table in the article below.

Manchester United: Erik ten Hag's side are Premier League's biggest underachievers

Man Utd sit 11th in Premier League table; Erik ten Hags side rank among top five across key attacking metrics but struggled to convert expected goals into goals; watch Man Utd vs Tottenham live on Sky Sports Premier League from 4pm on Sunday; kick-off 4.30pm

www.skysports.com

Click to shrink...

My biggest grumble is that we don't turn an abundance of possession, position, press and tilt and very good situations into more quality chances. I'm Ok with Solanke, he's no superstar but he's ok at his job, works hard, fits our system well, it's the lack of craft and ability to consistently turn situations into chances by people like Johnson, Son, Kulusevski, Werner, Sarr.

Our xg is nothing special, before Saturday's game we were 13th, after a 4xg game we are up to 5th, still underscoring our XG by 1.36.

 

[SeeSpotRun]

5

My biggest grumble is that we don't turn an abundance of possession, position, press and tilt and very good situations into more quality chances. I'm Ok with Solanke, he's no superstar but he's ok at his job, works hard, fits our system well, it's the lack of craft and ability to consistently turn situations into chances by people like Johnson, Son, Kulusevski, Werner, Sarr.

Our xg is nothing special, before Saturday's game we were 13th, after a 4xg game we are up to 5th, still underscoring our XG by 1.36.

Click to shrink...

Agree on that although would probably not lump Kulu in with the others. Although if we take Leicester as the start point then it's improving. If and when we see a fit and in form Odobert, Maddison, Solanke and Kulusevski on the pitch together I think we'll see a significant lift.

 

[nasm_f]

5

Agree on that although would probably not lump Kulu in with the others. Although if we take Leicester as the start point then it's improving. If and when we see a fit and in form Odobert, Maddison, Solanke and Kulusevski on the pitch together I think we'll see a significant lift.

Click to shrink...

Out of interest, what would your midfield and forwards be in that case?

 

[bus-conductor]

5

Agree on that although would probably not lump Kulu in with the others. Although if we take Leicester as the start point then it's improving. If and when we see a fit and in form Odobert, Maddison, Solanke and Kulusevski on the pitch together I think we'll see a significant lift.

Click to shrink...

Kulusevski's XA90 is 0.13. That's pretty abysmal for someone who's not adding goals, or doing deeper midfieldy stuff either. Last season he was also the least productive of our forward group.

He's also been given more freedom, and less responsibility than all our other players. Maddison, for example, is having to see far more ball, fulfil a much more complex tactical remit, but is also providing much more creatively both in groundwork and final work - his XA90 is 0.49.

Johnson even worse. XA90 0.08.

Son's XA90 (0.38) is OK, but nothing remarkable, especially considering the type of player he is (or supposed to be).

 

[Klaus]

Ah apologies thought you talking about City in general not just this season. Although teams tend to be more understandably cautious against City

Click to shrink...

Sorry yes I was specifically referring to the "defending" graph from this season. Hence discussing Liverpool under Slot.

 

[SeeSpotRun]

Kulusevski's XA90 is 0.13. That's pretty abysmal for someone who's not adding goals, or doing deeper midfieldy stuff either. Last season he was also the least productive of our forward group.

He's also been given more freedom, and less responsibility than all our other players. Maddison, for example, is having to see far more ball, fulfil a much more complex tactical remit, but is also providing much more creatively both in groundwork and final work - his XA90 is 0.49.

Johnson even worse. XA90 0.08.

Son's XA90 (0.38) is OK, but nothing remarkable, especially considering the type of player he is (or supposed to be).

Click to shrink...

Fair comments.

I crunched the numbers from the fbref shots tables, which list xG of each shot and also who provided primary and secondary assists. This comes up with a slightly higher xA90's for primary assists (not sure why) but importantly allows secondary assists to be added in, which is often the more important "unlocking" pass. Kulusevski doesn't look too bad on this basis:

Player​	Minutes​	xG of SCA1 shot contributions​	xG of SCA2 shot contributions​	xA1_90​	xA2_90​	Sum​
Maddison​	403​	2.72​	0.79​	0.61​	0.18​	0.78​
Son Heung-min​	449​	1.97​	0.83​	0.39​	0.17​	0.56​
Kulusevski​	348​	0.83​	1.11​	0.21​	0.29​	0.50​
Bentancur​	215​	0.47​	0.34​	0.20​	0.14​	0.34​
Bissouma​	181​	0.16​	0.37​	0.08​	0.18​	0.26​
Pedro Porro​	446​	0.5​	0.53​	0.10​	0.11​	0.21​
Romero​	450​	0.24​	0.76​	0.05​	0.15​	0.20​
Sarr​	190​	0.16​	0.18​	0.08​	0.09​	0.16​
Johnson​	348​	0.38​	0.22​	0.10​	0.06​	0.16​
Solanke​	267​	0.2​	0.23​	0.07​	0.08​	0.14​
Udogie​	432​	0.29​	0.25​	0.06​	0.05​	0.11​
van de Ven​	360​	0.25​	0.09​	0.06​	0.02​	0.09​
Odobert​	162​	0.07​	0.02​	0.04​	0.01​	0.05​

A couple of disappointments there, Johnson and Odobert particularly although Odobert still settling in and then injured.

 

[Klaus]

Kulusevski's XA90 is 0.13. That's pretty abysmal for someone who's not adding goals, or doing deeper midfieldy stuff either. Last season he was also the least productive of our forward group.

Click to shrink...

Mate you can't mention his xA for this season, and then claim he was the "least productive" of our forward group last season when if you combine goals (8) + xA (8) his output was second only to Son.

2023/24
Kulu G+xA = 16
Maddison G+xA = 11
Brennan G+xA = 12

Source

Please can we not bring your Kulusevski agenda to this thread too.

 

[bus-conductor]

Fair comments.

I crunched the numbers from the fbref shots tables, which list xG of each shot and also who provided primary and secondary assists. This comes up with a slightly higher xA90's for primary assists (not sure why) but importantly allows secondary assists to be added in, which is often the more important "unlocking" pass. Kulusevski doesn't look too bad on this basis:

Player​	Minutes​	xG of SCA1 shot contributions​	xG of SCA2 shot contributions​	xA1_90​	xA2_90​	Sum​
Maddison​	403​	2.72​	0.79​	0.61​	0.18​	0.78​
Son Heung-min​	449​	1.97​	0.83​	0.39​	0.17​	0.56​
Kulusevski​	348​	0.83​	1.11​	0.21​	0.29​	0.50​
Bentancur​	215​	0.47​	0.34​	0.20​	0.14​	0.34​
Bissouma​	181​	0.16​	0.37​	0.08​	0.18​	0.26​
Pedro Porro​	446​	0.5​	0.53​	0.10​	0.11​	0.21​
Romero​	450​	0.24​	0.76​	0.05​	0.15​	0.20​
Sarr​	190​	0.16​	0.18​	0.08​	0.09​	0.16​
Johnson​	348​	0.38​	0.22​	0.10​	0.06​	0.16​
Solanke​	267​	0.2​	0.23​	0.07​	0.08​	0.14​
Udogie​	432​	0.29​	0.25​	0.06​	0.05​	0.11​
van de Ven​	360​	0.25​	0.09​	0.06​	0.02​	0.09​
Odobert​	162​	0.07​	0.02​	0.04​	0.01​	0.05​

A couple of disappointments there, Johnson and Odobert particularly although Odobert still settling in and then injured.

Click to shrink...

Hmm..Still not exactly spunktastic. I'm not totally sure how FBref/Opta derive that secondary assist value. And going back to my point about our forwards as a group, if you look at (FBRef) squad totals, it bears out my point about the paucity of ours. Our squad total (which for all clubs largely is attributed to their forwards/creatives) GCA90 is 2.20. This is lower than everyone in the top 12's bar Forest and Utd.

Johnson below Sarr FFS.

 

[bus-conductor]

Mate you can't mention his xA for this season, and then claim he was the "least productive" of our forward group last season when if you combine goals (8) + xA (8) his output was second only to Son.

2023/24
Kulu G+xA = 16
Maddison G+xA = 11
Brennan G+xA = 12

Source

Please can we not bring your Kulusevski agenda to this thread too.

Click to shrink...

You need to first adjust those stats to reflect the per minute on pitch - Kulusevski played 700 minutes more than Maddison for a start. You then have to factor that Kulusevski spent most of last season as a forward, hell, two of those goals were playing as a CF against the shittest team the PL has ever seen, Maddison, however played entirely as a midfielder. And my initial post was talking about more about creativity of quality chances, not scoring, I even specified that and also I didn't initially single out Kulusevski, just included him as one of the group.

Maybe leave your Kulusevski fanboy agenda in his thread?

 

[Klaus]

Maybe leave your Kulusevski fanboy agenda in his thread?

Click to shrink...

I don't have a Kulusevski "fanboy" agenda; if you'd bothered to read what I'd written I've actually been fairly critical of him, especially in the #8 role.

But of course, to you, everyone looks like a fanboy. Your agenda against Kulusevski is so ludicrous it's become a meme all over this site. Actually painful watching you try and retrofit every stat to try and suit that agenda, as above. Wouldn't bother me if you just kept your obsession to his thread only now you're infecting this one with it too.

 

[Richard Arlison]

My biggest grumble is that we don't turn an abundance of possession, position, press and tilt and very good situations into more quality chances. I'm Ok with Solanke, he's no superstar but he's ok at his job, works hard, fits our system well, it's the lack of craft and ability to consistently turn situations into chances by people like Johnson, Son, Kulusevski, Werner, Sarr.

Our xg is nothing special, before Saturday's game we were 13th, after a 4xg game we are up to 5th, still underscoring our XG by 1.36.

Click to shrink...

IMO what you are saying here is the same as what it has looked like to me.

Our press and use of the ball has created what Ange (I think) refers to as chances but tbh it's easier to call them "situations".

Every single game this season has seen us create easily enough great situations to be averaging close to 3 xG across the 7 games in all competitions. We haven't done that because our forwards and 8's in general had been taking a good while to find some rhythm with each other and essentially to use your phrase, they have been bumbling chances.

Where I can't agree with you is that it's terminal. The speed and tempo we play at is above the norm for any footballer IMO. That's also why it's difficult for other teams to play us and why a team like Qarabag will miss chances and fuck things up because they will see that speed and tempo very few times this season. What we have seen vs Brentford and last night is that our attacking players seem to be settling into and adjusting to the season starting again. Sure Son is still slightly overhitting through balls but the ball to Solanke tonight was overhit by less than the one to Johnson the game before and against Newcastle those situations weren't even yielding chances. Now Son is creating chances multiple times per game and Maddison looks like he might be about to start really playing well.