On Neil Warnock and Cardiff's 'anti-football' success

It's been a pretty busy year for me so I've not had the time to dedicate to this blog, but with the big game coming up on Sunday the @DerbyCountyBlog asked me for something on Cardiff this season.

I got rather carried away and so here's my thoughts on Cardiff's season so far. You can read the abridged version, along with the Derby perspective on The Derby County Blog.

***********

There’s lots to say about this season for Cardiff, but if you watched the game at Brentford on Tuesday night then you probably know all you need to know about how Cardiff play.

That’s not meant as a flippant way to disregard Cardiff’s performances, it’s just that game probably replicates the vast amount of games the Bluebirds have played this season.

The strategy under Neil Warnock is not necessarily pretty, but it is mightily effective.

It is reliant on stout, energetic, pressing defending and quick, direct attacks, often from long balls forward or powerful runs from the wings.

And then there are the set pieces, boy are there set pieces.

When Warnock took over early last season that was the first most noticeable change he made.

But it is not by luck Cardiff find themselves in the top two – despite what some would believe.

Anti-football?

Statistically they deserve to be there and I’ll break this down a bit why Cardiff are genuine.

Sure, the passing measures are pretty awful with the Bluebirds looking more like a relegation battler than a promotion candidate here.

Cardiff average 45.7% possession (fourth worst) and just 60% of passes are completed, the absolute lowest ratio in the division.

Unsurprisingly they’ve played the fewest short passes in the Championship 212, less than half the total of the top possession teams.

But Warnock does not care about possession – he cares about activity at each end of the pitch.

And in this regard whether you look at goals scored and conceded (fourth and top) or by expected goals – the numbers are clear, Cardiff are legit.

But how?

Cardiff are second in shots for per game (14.1), shots on target per game (5), and top in attempts generated from set pieces (5.3).

Meanwhile they are fourth best in shots conceded per game (11.2), and in the top group for shots on target conceded.

So, they concede few shots and take plenty. And then add-in the locations of those to give a sign of Cardiff’s dominance.

The Bluebirds take 10% of their attempts on goal in the six-yard box (joint highest with Wolves) and 55% within the rest of the 18-yard box, third best.

At the other end, just 6% of shots conceded are taken by opponents in the six-yard box (5^th best), with the remaining locations at mid-table rates.

Finally, we get to set pieces, where Cardiff really stand out.

Cardiff have scored 18 goals from set pieces (joint top with Wolves) and conceded just 7 (joint top with a couple of other teams).

Depth to the strategy

Don’t be fooled into thinking Warnock is just a hit and hope long ball merchant.

Sure, the strategy has an element of that, but it is designed to clear balls from Cardiff’s defensive third quickly and put pressure on opposing defenders with strong, quick wingers or forwards chasing down.

Most of these don’t work admittedly, but the tactic does not allow defenders to switch off or make a mistake at any time in the game.

Think you’re in good shape with the ball on the edge of Cardiff’s area?

Bang!

Seconds later you’ve got a winger and forward bearing down on you with a ball bouncing around in no-man’s land.

Do you stick or twist? Get that wrong and another second later it’s in your net.

Likewise at set pieces there is subtle complexity designed, with flick-ons and targeted headers across goal all painstakingly setup on the training ground – this isn’t just hit it into the box and hope stuff.

Think the shortest player on the pitch isn’t a threat? Wait until he’s heading the flick-on back across goal from the far post after cutting in from the side of the box.

Play with the ball

This team can also play with the ball too, they just choose to do it in the final third.

Junior Hoilett has been one of the biggest threats in the Championship this season while the currently injured Joe Ralls is, in my mind, as good as any central midfielder in the division.

This pair can press and disrupt the opposition or work openings through tight defences and hit quickly on the counter.

And with Kenneth Zohore back and seemingly up to last season’s pace there is a real goal threat.

Custom-built player

But I’ll end this preview with probably Cardiff’s most important player this season – captain and central defender Sean Morrison.

As impressive as Sol Bamba, Bruno Manga and the rest of the defence have been, Morrison is that cut above.

He takes control of situations, is rarely out of position and wins countless headers and tackles and clearances, not to mention chipping in with the odd goal or two.

If Neil Warnock could forge his own custom-built player I suspect it would look a lot like the Cardiff captain.

And so, although the Bluebirds were due a dip in form, it’s probably not a coincidence Cardiff’s poor run around Christmas and New Year happened during his absence.

Has Neil Warnock improved Cardiff?

When Paul Trollope was sacked as Cardiff manager the team was languishing in 23rd place heading for a relegation fight.

Eight weeks later with Neil Warnock in charge, the club is still languishing in 22nd place now very much in a relegation fight with almost half the season gone.

So was it worth it? Has Warnock improved results and performances?

First off, Trollope’s team had amassed just eight points in those 11 games – a rate of 0.73 points per game. Extend that over a full season and it becomes around 33 points – nailed on relegation and quite possibly bottom in some years.

Warnock has flipped those numbers, 11 points in eight games, good for 1.375 points per game. Again if we extrapolate that over a whole season we get 63 points – comfortably top half of the table and potentially just a win or two from being in the playoffs.

Most importantly however, if we extend Warnock’s 1.375 ppg over the whole of the season from him joining we get 48 points.
That in itself should be enough to keep Cardiff out of the relegation zone (just), but added to Trollope’s eight points the Bluebirds should be on course for a steady bottom half finish.

Now this haul has come over a small sample of just eight games – a lucky win here or there can wildly skew the ppg totals – so can we be sure Warnock has improved performances to justify these results?

I'm exiled at the moment, so just watching the couple of televised matches under Warnock it’s been a far better looking Cardiff team than with Trollope, but does that translate into actual solid data? (Remember, appearances can be deceiving.)

Well, yes it does.

Attacking efficiency

Let’s consider the attacking side first.
Warnock has made Cardiff’s attack quite a bit more efficient. Despite cutting down the number of shots Cardiff take per game by roughly 1.5 when at 11v11, the number of those that are not blocked by defenders and that then make it on target has remained almost unchanged.

(click the image for a bigger version)

Looking at locations (under all game states), Warnock has cut down almost two shots per game from outside the box and instead added an extra shot from inside. The biggest increase has been headed attempts from inside the six-yard-box. (Somewhat reassuringly, this is true to form for Warnock and meets what he did at Rotherham last season, as I mentioned in my preview piece upon his hiring.)

While headers are far less effective for goal scoring than shots, if you are going to make them a focus of your attack then you want to do so from as close range as possible. Whether this has been initiated by the types of opportunities created, better crossing, or position of attacking players, it is a welcome improvement that has already yielded two goals from this area.


Overall, although there are improvements, as I wrote previously, this is still a below average Championship attack which relies too heavily on headed attempts and still needs further work to open defences and create chances regularly.

Defensive stability

Given the attacking shortcomings this means the defence has to be above average just to keep its head above water. Warnock has improved on what was a roughly league average unit to make it a well above average group under his charge.

Warnock’s removed a full 2.5 attempts from inside the box during his reign and given up just 1.5 more from outside – a more than fair exchange by anyone’s reckoning.
He’s improved an already strong aerial defence, but most encouragingly Cardiff have cut out almost a full shot per game from both the central and side areas of the 18-yard-box.

Cardiff now concede just 2.25 (foot) shots per game from the danger zone of six-yard-box and central 18-yard-box, well below the league average of 2.95 per game.
Incidentally, the Bluebirds also take 2.25 shots from the danger zone area each game, so a deficit of almost one shot per game in this area under Trollope has been equalised.

In all, Cardiff’s defence has changed from allowing more shots from better locations than the league average under Trollope, to allowing fewer shots from far more distant locations under Warnock.
(I was hesitant about Warnock’s defensive potential in my earlier piece, but I am very pleased to say he has far outperformed my prediction.)

Overall performance

Looking at the overall shot shares under the two managers, we can see Warnock has made noticeable improvements in terms of all shots, unblocked shots, shots on target and goals for.
The team is at least league average in these markers now and better still when the scores are level.

Shooting % (the rate at which shots on target are scored) is typically around 30% within the Championship – although this can be subject to significant short term volatility.

Trollope, perhaps being a victim of poor shooting locations, had a rate of just 22%, while Warnock has had shots being scored at an above average 40%, again perhaps influenced by the improved (though still not great) locations. I would not expect this to continue long term, though the short term correction is much appreciated.

Likewise, goalkeeper save% (the rate at which goalkeepers save shots on target) can be volatile and also dependent on shot location.

Again Warnock’s improved defence may well tell part of the story in this improvement.
However, it is well worth noticing that both Trollope and Warnock’s save% are well below the 70% league average, and it is hard not to wonder if selling TWO first team goalkeepers in the summer without recruiting a suitable replacement may be significantly hindering Cardiff’s progress.

Encouraging signs

Perhaps most encouragingly for Cardiff fans, this improvement in shot shares is seen throughout all score states.
This means the team is able to hold its own or even control the balance of shots when the game is there for the winning, not just when several goals down and the opposition are sitting back. And when ahead it means Cardiff are as likely (or more so) to score a second than concede an equaliser.

Also encouragingly, Warnock has faced a reasonably stiff set of fixtures during his time, including five of the top six teams in terms of 11v11 shots on target share – one of the better statistical predictors of team quality and future success.

The signs for Cardiff are more positive under Warnock and with the whole bottom half of the table (Rotherham excluded) so tight, a couple of wins could easily see the Bluebirds as high as 15th.

Of course football has its shock results (such as Blackburn winning at Newcastle last week) and being dragged into a relegation battle can have unanticipated effects on players and management, but I am now far more confident that Cardiff will be sitting away from the relegation zone in May than I was under Trollope.

Can Neil Warnock turnaround Cardiff City?

It's been quite a while since my last post, here's hoping I can make it more regular for the rest of the season.

The Severnside derby kicks off the return of the Championship.
Like most local derbies it draws a decent amount of attention and this one has the added Wales vs England element too.
However this one is likely to attract a bit more scrutiny given the events at Cardiff during the international break.

Paul Trollope lasted 11 games in charge and in some respects its surprising he lasted that long.
I'm not usually one for sacking a manager early but in Trollope's case I'm not convinced it was going to work out.
He'd already switched from his initial 5-3-2 formation and tactics, and credit to him for that, but according to the data things were getting worse, not better.

It’s a shame it ended this way as statistically speaking, the season appeared to have started fairly well.
For the first six weeks Cardiff had a decent overall shots on target share above 50% at 11v11 and at level score situations.
However, the Bluebirds' all shot share (Corsi/TSR) only once made it above 50% either under all conditions or at level score situations.

But (poor) shot quality matters.

And when we look deeper into the data we can see why the results did not reflect this limited early season promise.
Trollope's attack, whether by design or simply through not having any other options, had been focused on headed and long range attempts at goal.
While a varied attack can prove profitable (see Brighton), Cardiff have exchanged a sizeable amount of shots from prime positions into headed attempts.
This is not a good exchange to make.

By week 11, Cardiff had taken the third fewest footed attempts at goal in the danger zone (six-yard box and centre of the 18-yard box) in the division - only Rotherham and Ipswich have taken fewer.
Despite being middle of the pack defensively, Cardiff have the joint fifth worst danger zone shot difference - again Ipswich and Rotherham are two of the teams below them.

Looking at the headed attempts at goal, the situation is give-or-take a near perfect mirror image.
Cardiff have the directed the third most headers at goal (behind only Barnsley and Aston Villa), and have conceded the third fewest.

While it may delight commentators to regularly swing the ball into the box, such a one-sided attack does not usually prove effective as headers are much less likely to be scored than attempts from the feet.
Sadly, Cardiff have the second lowest % of their shot attempts being taken from the centre of the 18-yard box (Ipswich lowest).

In fact, Cardiff have been making almost two thirds (63%) of their attempts on goal as headers outside the six-yard box or shots from outside the 18-yard box.
It is entirely possible that taking so many attempts from poor locations is playing a part in the awful shooting % figure.
By contrast, Cardiff have forced just 56% of attempts at goal from these poorer locations.



So instead we have Neil Warnock joining the show.

Personality-wise, Warnock has had something of a love-hate relationship with Cardiff fans. He’s generally been complimentary about the club and its fans, but during his travels around the league he’s managed to rub a lot of Bluebirds up the wrong way.
Still, this isn’t a popularity contest – this is, of course, a results driven business and following guiding Rotherham to safety last year and his wealth of previous experience, Warnock would seem to be an obvious choice.

But how much of last year’s great escape was down to Warnock’s influence and is he likely to have a similar effect on Cardiff?
Well, having gone through the data I’m not convinced Warnock had that big an effect on Rotherham’s survival.
He took over from Neil Redfearn after 30 games with Rotherham battling Bolton, MK Dons and Charlton to avoid relegation.

Credit where it's due?

In the end the Millers completed the task relatively easily (nine points above safety), but I suspect that may be as much down to the awfulness of the other three teams as to Warnock’s magic.
As you can see in the chart below, at level score Rotherham’s all shot share (Corsi/TSR) and unblocked shots share (Fenwick) remained pretty unchanged from Warnock’s start to the end of the season.
There was a slight uptick in shots on target share (green line) but this still never broke the 45% mark – hardly earth shattering but useful at the bottom of the table.

The biggest changes, however, came in the rate Rotherham scored their goals and kept them out.
The Millers’ combined shooting % and save % (PDO) was its lowest of the season (just) when Warnock took over – 17 points below league average.
By the end of the season Rotherham’s PDO had made up 15 points of this difference – with the save % being the main benefactor by more than 10 points.
And it’s so much easier to win games sneaking the odd goal when you’re not shipping them constantly.
Combined with a smaller but important increase of five points in shooting % and Rotherham were just a shade under league average in these key metrics by the end of the season.




So could Warnock have instilled a tactical change to improve these measures?

Well, in all his changes gave Rotherham one extra shot from the centre of the 18-yard box per 7.5 games… so two more shots from this area during his spell in charge than Redfearn would have expected.
But there were ten extra headers inside the six-yard box compared to Redfearn and shots taken from outside the 18-yard box were cut down significantly.
So it is possible this could have accounted for the increase in shooting %.

How about defensively?

Well, aside from a very small drop in the number of headers allowed inside the six-yard box, this does not make great reading.
Warnock’s team conceded more shots per game from the centre of the 18-yard box (+0.5), the sides of the box (+0.24) and outside (+0.9) than Redfearn’s side averaged.
The increase in shots outside the box would be far less of a concern if it meant shots inside the box were being pushed out, but this did not happen.
Of course, the situations may have been different – perhaps Warnock’s defensive system meant opposition players were closed down more frequently when taking shots resulting in poor quality chances.

However, there’s little evidence in my data to suggest anything other than a more normal save % and shooting % driven recovery.
Indeed, at level score under Warnock 35% of shots on target taken were hitting the back of the net and more than 86% of shots on target conceded were saved – both way above league averages of 30%-70%.

For Cardiff fans, it seems that it might be a case of more of the same as regards the aerial based attack, although there may be a focus to not shoot from distance so much.
Also, it is probably fair to say that Cardiff's squad is more talented than Rotherham's (especially given the free agent signings made in the last week) so one would hope Warnock can get more out of this talent.
But perhaps its most notable that in this young season Cardiff have the second lowest shooting % and save %, to give a PDO of just 78.44 – lowest in the entire division by some way.
It’s safe to say the team is due something of a rebound, how much we will have to wait and see.

Chmapionship Week 36: 10 games to go

I really can't wait for the last ten games of this Championship season - it's shaping up to be an absolute stormer.

Big news this week (aside from Cardiff unveiling another slightly less disastrous badge) was Ian Holloway's (inevitable) sacking at Millwall.

Position	Team	Played	Won	Drawn	Lost	Goals For	Goals Against	Goal Difference	Points
1	Bournemouth	36	19	9	8	74	39	35	66
2	Derby	36	19	9	8	68	39	29	66
3	Watford	36	20	6	10	72	44	28	66
4	Middlesbrough	36	19	9	8	54	26	28	66
5	Norwich	36	19	8	9	70	39	31	65
6	Brentford	36	19	5	12	58	46	12	62
7	Ipswich	36	17	10	9	56	39	17	61
8	Wolves	36	16	10	10	50	44	6	58
9	Nott'm Forest	36	14	11	11	59	51	8	53
10	Blackburn	36	13	12	11	46	45	1	51
11	Sheffield Weds	36	12	13	11	32	34	-2	49
12	Charlton	36	11	15	10	41	45	-4	48
13	Leeds	36	13	8	15	39	46	-7	47
14	Birmingham	36	11	13	12	42	52	-10	46
15	Cardiff	36	11	11	14	43	48	-5	44
16	Reading	36	12	8	16	39	54	-15	44
17	Huddersfield	36	11	9	16	45	62	-17	42
18	Bolton	36	11	8	17	43	55	-12	41
19	Brighton	36	9	13	14	41	45	-4	40
20	Rotherham	36	9	13	14	37	53	-16	40
21	Fulham	36	11	6	19	47	64	-17	39
22	Wigan	36	7	10	19	32	48	-16	31
23	Millwall	36	7	10	19	31	60	-29	31
24	Blackpool	36	4	10	22	29	70	-41	22

I wrote last week how Millwall (and Holloway) could consider themselves a little unlucky to be in the relegation zone, particularly when there are far better candidates sitting outside - yes I mean you Charlton and Leeds.

But even so, Millwall have not been a good team this year, getting just a 42.8% share of shots on target per game. They've done ok in the overall shot share at 50%, but failing to get them on target is a real millstone.

Position	Team	Shots for total	Shots against total	Corsi/TSR	shots on target for total	shots on target against total	Shots on target share	Shooting % For	Save %	PDO
14	Birmingham	488	568	0.462	156	183	0.46	26.91	71.59	98.5
10	Blackburn	554	498	0.527	171	172	0.499	26.9	73.83	100.73
24	Blackpool	398	611	0.395	125	195	0.391	23.19	64.09	87.28
18	Bolton	458	553	0.453	156	187	0.455	27.57	70.59	98.16
1	Bournemouth	591	436	0.576	214	131	0.62	34.57	70.23	104.8
6	Brentford	525	511	0.507	194	176	0.524	29.91	73.85	103.76
19	Brighton	535	466	0.535	157	138	0.532	26.11	67.38	93.49
15	Cardiff	451	500	0.474	137	147	0.482	31.38	67.35	98.73
12	Charlton	376	564	0.4	129	171	0.43	31.8	73.69	105.49
2	Derby	484	454	0.516	169	148	0.533	40.25	73.65	113.89
21	Fulham	470	563	0.455	146	189	0.436	32.18	66.14	98.32
17	Huddersfield	522	516	0.503	183	175	0.511	24.59	64.56	89.15
7	Ipswich	536	487	0.524	189	139	0.576	29.63	71.94	101.57
13	Leeds	424	555	0.433	123	170	0.42	31.7	72.95	104.65
4	Middlesbrough	545	397	0.579	177	114	0.608	30.5	77.2	107.7
23	Millwall	470	477	0.496	127	170	0.428	24.4	64.71	89.11
5	Norwich	583	349	0.626	199	122	0.62	35.19	68.02	103.21
9	Nott'm Forest	532	483	0.524	162	156	0.509	36.42	67.32	103.73
16	Reading	467	461	0.503	148	162	0.477	26.36	66.68	93.03
20	Rotherham	489	499	0.495	158	161	0.495	23.42	67.07	90.5
11	Sheffield Weds	481	442	0.521	129	135	0.489	24.81	74.82	99.62
3	Watford	526	515	0.505	197	168	0.54	36.55	73.82	110.37
22	Wigan	439	424	0.509	118	141	0.456	27.13	65.96	93.09
8	Wolves	475	490	0.492	150	164	0.478	33.34	73.17	106.51

So Holloway has left the Den and I saw some Blackpool fans on twitter even (half-jokingly I suspect) wondering if he could be persuaded to come back to Bloomfield Road.
Sadly, I don't think even Ian Holloway's magic can save the Seasiders from the Oyston treatment.

FA Cup Third Round: Predicting the Upsets

The FA Cup third round is often cited as one of the best weekends (as it has now become) of football in the season.

With the biggest teams in the country entering the knockout competition for the first time, it means the first possibility of any real big upsets.

I’m going to try my best to highlight some of those games that, statistically speaking at least, look like they have a decent chance at producing upsets.


The first third round game this weekend is (my beloved) Championship side Cardiff City hosting League One Colchester United.

On the face of it this would seem a fairly unlikely one for an upset – Cardiff are comfortably set in mid-table (for the moment), while Colchester are struggling to avoid relegation.


There is of course the vast mess that Cardiff finds itself in off the field.
But comparing shot stats there is every chance that tonight could be an embarrassment on and off the field for the Bluebirds.
Obviously there is a division separating the two teams but Colchester’s 23rd spot in League One is very heavily the result of poor PDO. Only Yeovil out of the top four leagues in England has a worse PDO score.


Both Cardiff and Colchester are averaging similar shots for per game: 12.71 and 12.35 respectively.
But here is where the statistics start to diverge. The visitors appear a stronger defensive side, with a much lower overall shots against average of just 11.78 per 90 minutes, compared to Cardiff giving up 15.13 shots per game.


So as a result Colchester has far a better Corsi/TSR score than Cardiff: 0.457 vs 0.512. It is a similar story with the shots on target share, although here the difference is slightly less: 0.47 vs 0.505
In raw numbers, Cardiff manages almost one shot on target less per game (3.96) than Colchester (4.71) although the Bluebirds do concede slightly fewer shots on target per game (4.46 vs 4.63).


The only statistic in which Cardiff has a significant advantage over Colchester is in PDO (the combined shooting % and save %, which also serves as a simplified measure for footballing “luck”).

Here its shooting % which is really killing Colchester as the visitors score from just 23.89% of all shots on target, compared to Cardiff’s success rate of 33.68.
The save % (percentage of shots on target saved) is closer, but again Cardiff has the edge: 67.3 vs 63.96.

Overall the PDO scores are 100.98 for Cardiff and just 87.85 for Colchester - second lowest in the football league.

Position	Team	Played	Shots for per game	Shots vs per game	Shots for total	Shots against total	Corsi/TSR	Shots on target for per game	Shots on target vs per game	shots on target for total	shots on target against total	Shots on target share	Shooting % For	Save %	PDO
12 (Championship)	Cardiff	24	12.71	15.13	305	363	0.457	3.96	4.46	95	107	0.47	33.68	67.3	100.98
23 (League One)	Colchester	23	12.35	11.78	284	271	0.512	4.71	4.63	113	111	0.505	23.89	63.96	87.85

So sure, a division is big gap to overcome, but given the turmoil at Cardiff City FC and the poor shot stats comparison, an FA Cup upset is a real possibility at the Cardiff City Stadium tonight – and it may be witnessed by barely a couple of thousand brave souls.

Ticket sales this week were looking poor at best (as indicated by @ViewFromTheNin) and with antipathy growing towards Vincent Tan and seeping in to additional criticism of Russell Slade, it could be a very cold quiet night in the Welsh capital.

Championship Week 11: The quarter mile post

So having played 11 games and reached its second international break the Championship season is now basically a quarter of the way through.
So it seems an appropriate time to start looking at some of the league-wide trends and some new graphs for me.

First up, as always, is the real life table after those 11 matches.

Position	Team	Played	Won	Drawn	Lost	Goals For	Goals Against	Goal Difference	Points
1	Norwich	11	6	3	2	21	10	11	21
2	Nott'm Forest	11	5	6	0	19	9	10	21
3	Watford	11	6	3	2	20	12	8	21
4	Derby	11	5	5	1	19	10	9	20
5	Middlesbrough	11	6	2	3	16	8	8	20
6	Ipswich	11	5	4	2	16	10	6	19
7	Charlton	11	4	7	0	14	10	4	19
8	Wolves	11	5	4	2	14	11	3	19
9	Sheffield Weds	11	4	5	2	11	8	3	17
10	Brentford	11	5	2	4	15	16	-1	17
11	Bournemouth	11	4	3	4	16	14	2	15
12	Blackburn	11	4	3	4	16	18	-2	15
13	Reading	11	4	3	4	15	17	-2	15
14	Leeds	11	4	3	4	11	13	-2	15
15	Cardiff	11	3	4	4	13	14	-1	13
16	Millwall	11	3	3	5	10	13	-3	12
17	Rotherham	11	3	3	5	9	13	-4	12
18	Huddersfield	11	3	3	5	12	20	-8	12
19	Brighton	11	2	5	4	10	12	-2	11
20	Birmingham	11	2	5	4	12	18	-6	11
21	Wigan	11	2	4	5	12	14	-2	10
22	Fulham	11	2	1	8	12	22	-10	7
23	Blackpool	11	1	3	7	6	14	-8	6
24	Bolton	11	1	2	8	8	21	-13	5

Norwich are sitting nicely top of the tree and their underlying stats back up that position very nicely indeed.
At the bottom we have Bolton and Blackpool, both with some horrible numbers but also, as we’ve been seeing, affected by awful luck (PDO) as well.
Fulham’s recent run of form has is genuinely deserved and were it not for having the second worst PDO score in the league the west London side would be very comfortably in mid-table.

I think it’d be quite nice to see what forces are driving the bus in terms of teams overall performance so far. Being a quarter of the way in to a seas you would hope that we are starting to see some performance (as opposed to luck) –based trends developing. But its still only 11 games in – by scientific principles still quite a small sample size.
So first thing I’m going to do is compare league points accumulated so far against shot share (Corsi/TSR).

What we’re looking for is an R2 value close to 1 (a complete positive correlation) or -1 ( a completely negative correlation). Anything around 0 means, well, its worth about 0.



As you can see, there’s barely any link at all between how teams are controlling play in general and how many points they have accumulated. An R2 value of basically 0.1 is pretty weak to say the least.

So let’s try doing the same only using shots on target share instead.




This looks a bit more encouraging, although it really isn’t strong enough to say that this measure has a massive baring on the results teams are seeing so far.

In that case, let’s have a look at PDO vs points won.





Well helllloooooo!
Compared to the other two that is pretty damn high.
Again it’s not a perfect match, but what it serves to show us is that at the moment points won and hence league position are still being dominated by luck factors.
Hopefully, as we follow the season through, this score will reduce and the shot share and sots on target share will increase. (Hopefully!)

So if we do see a regression back to the mean (of 100) of PDO scores, how can we expect the season to play out if teams keep performing as they are?
Well, being as it has a slightly stronger link to points at the moment, lets look at shots on target share vs PDO to see where our teams are.





The top two (Norwich and Forest) are green coloured dots, the four play-off teams are yellow, the three in the relegation zone are red, and the rest are blue.

There are a couple of very noticeable points that are due some regression one way or another.
First is the very top one – Forest.
With a very average share of the shots on target and a sky high PDO, Forest seem due for a fall down the league when the luck runs out.
Already we’re seeing some disquiet among Forest fans as the club has hit a dry spell in front of goal. It could get much worse for the early leaders.

In an opposite position is Brighton.
Having a great share of the shots on target but rotten luck, it’s just a question of how long Sami Hyypia can remain in charge at the Amex to benefit from the regression.
Once that kicks in, assuming these good underlying numbers are not purely due to score effects (or some horrible tactical inefficiency at one end or the other), the Seagulls could well race up the table.
And if they’re not too far off by then, even make a challenge for the playoffs or promotion.

In the left side of the graph we have the teams that are struggling.
As I mentioned earlier, despite the recent upturn in results Fulham are still being hit by brutal luck. Once that begins to reverse the west London side should be fine.

Looking on the good luck side of the x-axis, the two teams most in danger of joining Bolton and Blackpool are Leeds and Wigan.
Remarkably similar underlying numbers but Leeds managed to scrape a few more points together.
A sharp turnaround is needed in performance or this pair is going to find themselves sucked into a relegation battle shortly.

And teetering on the precipice is Birmingham.
Getting just 40% of the shots on target with a dead even PDO score (the only team in the league to do so), it’s safe to say that the Blues are right where they deserve to be.
It’s a relegation fight that could go right down to the wire again for them.


Too hot

There are a few fascinating games (statistically speaking) this weekend in the Championship.
Number one for me is down at the Amex where Brighton and Middlesbrough face-off.
Two teams that love controlling possession and a few weeks ago were both suffering the pain of harsh PDO.
Middlesbrough has since recovered, when will Brighton?
That should be a good one.


Too cold




Then comes the match at St Andrews and two teams with the opposite problem – neither one can control a game if its life depended on it.
This could be interesting for other reasons. Along with the obvious impact at the bottom of the table, it’s Neil Lennon’s first game in charge for Bolton.
Will Wanderers be lifted by this? Will Lennon’s tactics bring an improved performance?
And will Birmingham get sucked in to the relegation mire?
Of course a win for Birmingham brings them some much needed breathing space and would be a real blow to Bolton.
And surely someone has to get a shot on target!


Just right

Finally from my highlight trio is Cardiff vs Forest.
Looking at the table this seems a real mis-match, but going by shots on target share, this could be a very close game.
Both teams are basically at 50% of the shots on target share each game.
Forest have by far the stronger overall shot share (Corsi/TSR) numbers, but there’s very little difference when it comes to getting shots on goal.
And this of course will be Russell Slade’s first game in charge at the CCS – taking over after a particularly listless performance at Blackpool.
Does Forest’s PDO regression start in south Wales?



Dear Bill,

As an aside (or maybe rant is better), I’ve not done any graphs and charts work on Excel in a long time… like more than a decade ago when doing my degree, so this post has involved a lot of re-familiarising myself with that.
Or in fact, re-learning. Because Microsoft seems to have taken what was a relatively simple process in those earlier versions of Excel, and twisted it to become ridiculously complicated instead.
This to me feels like the sort of thing you have to intend to do, to make it that awkward. But still, I guess you learn something new everyday!