I think Wissa would fit in well. He is a super finisher and has great movement that would suit our game. But, given his age, I would not want to pay too much and I think Brentford are unlikely to let him go.
Isakly what we need (AKA Isak Hunt)
- Thread starter Hansern
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
So one goal from open play in last 20 shots. Some were shit shots and several were very good saves. And, that is sometimes the problem with xG. Although, one could argue that 20 shots is not a big enough dataset to account for goalkeepers saving shots that maybe they should not.
Shame they want 50 mill for him
Alternatively, he tears a groin in pre-season and Newcastle fans have to suffer a toothless front line for 3 months whilst Ekitike hits the ground running in style…
He will have a back injury & miss the fixture - he doesn't want to jeopardise the proposed swap deal with Ektititktktk next summer
I was going to ask exactly this, then saw you had, and then realised @MomoWASright hadn't responded.
@MomoWASright, I think you may be misunderstanding the metric.
The metric should be he scores 19/20. To say he should only be scoring 16 of those is kind of arbitrary. He’s just fucking good at them based on real data. In a hypothetical game, it’s drab, zero chances for either side, Milner gets a pen. What is the xG? 0.8 - 0.00 or 0.95 - 0.00? Looking at the real data, it’s 0.95.
xG utilises, I think, 5 metrics. Where on the pitch the ball is, distance, angle (could really be rolled into the first), shot or header and defensive set up. Like I said in the post, there are way too many variables. Like with the pen, is the chances of scoring a pen 80% in the 84th minute whether 7-0 up or at 0-0 in the 38th game of the season to win you the league? Is it away? Which supporters are you shooting towards? What are the weather and pitch conditions? It applies the same scoring when all things are not equal.
xG tries to over simplify what is a technical thing.
So, you're suggesting that it actually needs to take in more metrics to be more accurate? Maybe it does, but at least it's not as simple as all chances are equal. There's probably trade offs with adding in things that are more subjective.
But, it absolutely needs to be taken into consideration with other things, it shouldnt be used in isolation, it's just a better metric than chance conversion as it attempts to put in the difficulty.
This I agree with. It shouldn’t be the be all and end all. Over the years it has been given too much prominence. Saying how did city lose 2-1 when they won xG 4.85 to 0.55 when if you were to look at the actual game you’d get better answers through other metrics.
Yeah, but you could be pretty sure that they were pretty shit in front of goal, it wasn't a lack of creating good chances, it was not putting them away. Maybe something else too.
All that stuff should be washed out if you have a big enough dataset.
I don't really understand your stance on the Milner thing. An average pen taker would score 80% based on the stats. Milner being way better than average has no bearing on that, surely?
If every shot in each zone of the pitch was roughly equal then yes, but there are too many variables including a shit load of luck.
Presenting a Milner penalty as 80% is wrong because we have a better source of data to help make a more complete reflection on what happened.
I'm 100% in that boat. Really really hope I'm a terrible judge of potential.
Yes I think that was obvious from his 'Last 60 Shots' YT video that put the shits up many of us! Something the coaching team can work on though.
Oh I see what you're getting at - ie that it'd be wrong to say we had 0.8xG when really it was 0.95 in our particular case, etc?
I think that sort of shortcoming is just inherent in the metric isn't it? It's not saying these chances will convert to x goals for this team, but as an average across all teams. It's not really there to make an actual prediction - it's not meant to be intelligent in that way. It's basically just a chance creation measurement. And then how tightly chances created will correlate with goals will vary by team based on different factors which xG isn't designed to assess.
Except in the case when Arsenal xG is better than PSG - then it clearly and, indisputably, demonstrates that Arsenal are the best team in Europe, but conversely, second only to Chelsea in the world.
Just for the record: Darwin Núñez has scored 40 goals in 143 appearances for Liverpool, starting in 49 of those matches.
Isak 62 goals in 109 for Newcastle, starting 80 times.
1%
So you're saying we should keep Darwin? Confused.
On xG, it is bollocks. How do you compare Ekitike xG in Germany, where the goalkeeping is a bit shit, to Darwins xG, whete he's up against some of the best goalkeepers in the world? (or THE best, in the case of Martinez lol)
I was a big Darwin supporter. I loved his energy, never say die attitude, aggression (yes OT on occasions but the bitching on here sometimes saying our team needs more aggression then moaning when we get it) and I always thought he'd come good - unfortunately I was wrong as he just didn't learn, he doesn't have it between the ears. I'm guessing IQ testing is not one of our scouting parameters.
He scored some amazing goals - but, some of those misses ugh *head in hands*. He was unlucky with the woodwork though - if even half of them had gone in ... !l
That said minutes matter and whilst I'm not comparing Nunez to Isak (as if!) if you're not on the pitch then you can't score (hence why I always prefer 'mins per goal' and not 'goals per game').
The hope with Ekitike is that he can replicate his BL form and progress from better coaching and being around players. It's as much a gamble as Nunez was, but hopefully not with the same outcome. Still, I'm nervous.
No confusion. I just wanted to find out how they compare. I'd like Isak to play for us.
Stats as we know can be misleading though, take for example goals when starting: 54 in 80 for Isak, 30 in 49 for Nunez. Makes Darwin look better than the general view.
Agree, intelligence probably the most important thing in elite football and poor Darwin just doesn't seem to have it. Most players learn and improve but he still can't get his head round an effective press. I'm wondering how much is down to the language barrier but that in itself speaks volumes.
i check out the stats out of curiosity.
i only found about 58 goals all competitions for isak.
but let's just accept 62.
about 15 of them are penalties.
that makes 47 non penalty goals for isak.
nunez only have 1 penalty for us.
nunez has 39 non penalty goals. starting about half isak games.
that doesn't make nunez impressive.
rather it makes isak doesn't look that impressive.
especially for £150m
