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.
A football blog dedicated to statistically analysing the Championship
Showing posts with label Rotherham United. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rotherham United. Show all posts
Thursday, 13 October 2016
Friday, 2 October 2015
Championship Week 9: New beginnings
Welcome to the 2015/16 version of The Only Statistic That Matters.
First an apology for my tardiness at putting this out but sometimes life, among other things, gets in the way.
This season I’m collecting a whole load more data which I’m still working out what to do with, what is useful and what can add value to understanding how this wonderful sport we so love works.
One of the big changes I’ve made with the data I’m tracking this year is to use 11v11 wherever possible.
I noticed last year that on occasions there seemed to be big swings in shot stats involving games with a red card (Brentford’s 41 shot mauling of Blackpool being the prime example).
In ice hockey, where many of these metrics originate, the power play/penalty kill (where one team temporarily has a player less) are separated out from full strength (5v5 in that case) play.
Yes, it will make for a smaller sample size, but I’m hoping the sample I’m left with will be more accurate as to the real skills of the Championship teams.
The good point about starting coverage at this stage in the season is that many of the metrics have started to settle down – at least they were doing so at this time last season.
We are still dealing with a small sample size in terms of shots though.
The average team will have taken (and conceded) 118 shots so far, meaning a couple of goals here or freak deflections there can still make all the difference in the table and in the numbers.
I’m also recording where the shots are being taken from, at least in broad geographic on-pitch locations.
These are the standard ones that I’m sure many of you will be familiar with already, but just for clarification we have: inside the six yard box, the central area of the 18 yard box immediately in front of the six yard box, the sides of the 18 yard box, and outside the 18 yard box.
The six yard box and area in front of it collectively being the Danger Zone.
Headers are being recorded separately from shots: inside the six yard box and outside (the vast majority of these take place in the central 18 yard box area so there seems little point in also using the sides).
Middlesbrough being in the promotion spots will not be a surprise to many. Brighton being top probably will be, but shouldn’t be. I was cautiously optimistic about the Seagulls before this season given their very good shot metrics last year.
With very good shot numbers again it seems this season they’re actually scoring and saving shots that last year they should have been.
At the other end, I had much higher (mid-table) hopes for at least two of the promoted teams.
But while it may make pretty grim viewing for the trio right now, as we’ll see shortly, only MK Dons are making a particularly bad start, with Preston and Bristol City bitten by horrible luck and variance in and in front of goal.
Again, Reading (0.714 shot share, 97.78 PDO) and
Middlesbrough (0.531 shot share, 126.38 PDO) do not fit on the chart.
They started off at around an 80% shot share but that was never going to be sustainable and are now in the region of 68-72%, depending on which flavour of metric you prefer.
The secret of this is defence.
The Royals have conceded just 67 total shots – almost half the league average.
And while doing that, they’ve also been very nicely above average at taking shots (137, 3rd best).
That is quite simply superb.
There may be other reasons for this such as the fixture schedule so far, but they have played (and outplayed) Burnley and Ipswich, while they matched Derby in shots despite being down to ten men for half the game.
In fact, Ipswich (in that memorable Friday night hammering) are the only team to reach double figures in shots taken at 11v11 and are the only team to out shoot Reading.
I suspect much of that was due to the massive score difference leading to Reading sitting back.
So certainly at the moment, Reading look like legitimate promotion contenders.
There is still a long way to go, but boy do the early stats make positive reading.
While his personality can rub people the wrong way, last season he did a fine job keeping the small budget Millers up and it was only a horrible PDO score that saw them slide towards the relegation zone.
Their shot metrics were give or take mid-table obscurity.
Unfortunately for Evans, in the summer he was forced to sell some key players without being able to replace them sufficiently and the results this year have been rather ugly.
Rotherham are bottom in overall 11v11 shot share (taking just 43.3% of all shots in their games), second bottom in unblocked shot share (again 43.3%) and third bottom in shots on target share (40.7%).
Getting burned a bit by PDO as well (93.94) meant there was nowhere to hide and so Evans left the club.
Perhaps the real killer for Rotherham has been the quality of shots taken by opponents.
The Millers have conceded 40 danger zone shots (most) including nine from within the six yard box.
The next worst teams have only conceded six close in, with the average being three and a combined 25 from the six yard box and danger zone respectively.
Whether anyone else will be able to improve performances given the talent drain at the club it will be tough to do, but I’d suggest they look at the defensive side of things first.
Well nobody else is, so I may as well give the developments at Griffin Park a bit of coverage, eh?
I had actually really hoped to give Brentford a wide-ish berth this season and just let the club get on with what they are doing and see how it goes.
I had not expected to be writing about sacking the manager in my first post this early in the season.
There's been a lot of heat and not much light in the comments that I've seen about the Brentford situation this week. Hopefully this will add some much needed light to the discussion.
Like just about everyone else in the world I have very little idea of the exact reasons why Marinus Dijkuizen was sacked on Monday.
But it seems fair to look at the numbers and see what’s been going-on on the pitch.
And the numbers do not make great viewing.
At the time of Dijkuzien’s sacking, while the all situations metrics looked just below average, these were buoyed by a positive piece of play when up a man against Bristol City.
In 11v11 it was not pretty. In the bottom eight in both overall shot share and unblocked shot share (47.4% and 45.4%), the Bees were third worst in the Championship with a shots on target share of just 39.7%.
That is a quite remarkable turnaround from last season.
When we look down into the raw shot numbers there seems to be a likely dearth of quality scoring chances.
Although there were 27 shots taken centrally in the 18 yard box (above the 22 average at the time), there was just one solitary shot form inside the six yard box. And no headers from inside the six yard box too.
While not damning, those numbers are not exactly warm and fuzzy either.
However, if we look at the shot shares when scores are level in the game, this makes a bad situation look even worse.
Pretty horrific yeah?
Taking 40% (or even worse just 30%) of shots when the score is tied is an awful position to start a game from.
Yes, the PDO score is kind of bad as well, but a team would need a mammoth PDO up around 120 to be surviving that kind of shots performance.
As a result, by the completion of week eight, Brentford had spent as much time at one goal down as they had at level scores.
I cannot say with anything other than guess work that these are the sorts of figures the management team at Brentford would be using to make the decision, but it seems a likely path.
Brentford were not in their lowly position by an awful run of bad luck. This league position was not a quirk of fate. Shots-wise at least, it was fully deserved.
And although it may make some fans or media happy to see the experiment with analytics in Griffin Park apparently fail so quickly, that Dijkuzien was let go at this early point probably says loud enough that there was a realisation that his role and input was not working out.
That is what the analytics should be doing; helping make informed decisions at the appropriate time without reacting to isolated events.
Tuesday’s home defeat by Birmingham was another shots horror show, so it will be interesting to see how Lee Carsley beds-in and if he can turn this poor start around.
First an apology for my tardiness at putting this out but sometimes life, among other things, gets in the way.
This season I’m collecting a whole load more data which I’m still working out what to do with, what is useful and what can add value to understanding how this wonderful sport we so love works.
One of the big changes I’ve made with the data I’m tracking this year is to use 11v11 wherever possible.
I noticed last year that on occasions there seemed to be big swings in shot stats involving games with a red card (Brentford’s 41 shot mauling of Blackpool being the prime example).
In ice hockey, where many of these metrics originate, the power play/penalty kill (where one team temporarily has a player less) are separated out from full strength (5v5 in that case) play.
Yes, it will make for a smaller sample size, but I’m hoping the sample I’m left with will be more accurate as to the real skills of the Championship teams.
The good point about starting coverage at this stage in the season is that many of the metrics have started to settle down – at least they were doing so at this time last season.
We are still dealing with a small sample size in terms of shots though.
The average team will have taken (and conceded) 118 shots so far, meaning a couple of goals here or freak deflections there can still make all the difference in the table and in the numbers.
I’m also recording where the shots are being taken from, at least in broad geographic on-pitch locations.
These are the standard ones that I’m sure many of you will be familiar with already, but just for clarification we have: inside the six yard box, the central area of the 18 yard box immediately in front of the six yard box, the sides of the 18 yard box, and outside the 18 yard box.
The six yard box and area in front of it collectively being the Danger Zone.
Headers are being recorded separately from shots: inside the six yard box and outside (the vast majority of these take place in the central 18 yard box area so there seems little point in also using the sides).
Season so far
So now that’s cleared up, or at least some of it, let’s have a look at where we are so far.| Pos | Team | Played | Won | Drawn | Lost | For | Against | Goal Diff | Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brighton | 9 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 13 | 7 | 6 | 21 |
| 2 | Middlesbrough | 9 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 17 | 5 | 12 | 20 |
| 3 | Reading | 9 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 7 | 7 | 15 |
| 4 | Hull | 9 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 12 | 7 | 5 | 15 |
| 5 | Birmingham | 9 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 10 | 4 | 15 |
| 6 | Cardiff | 9 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 13 | 10 | 3 | 15 |
| 7 | Burnley | 9 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 12 | 10 | 2 | 15 |
| 8 | Ipswich | 9 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 15 | 15 | 0 | 15 |
| 9 | Derby | 9 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 10 | 7 | 3 | 14 |
| 10 | Wolves | 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 11 | 1 | 12 |
| 11 | Nott'm Forest | 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 9 | 9 | 0 | 12 |
| 12 | Sheffield Weds | 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 12 | 13 | -1 | 12 |
| 13 | QPR | 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 14 | 17 | -3 | 12 |
| 14 | Fulham | 9 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 15 | 14 | 1 | 11 |
| 15 | Leeds | 9 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 9 | 11 | -2 | 11 |
| 16 | Huddersfield | 9 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 10 | 11 | -1 | 10 |
| 17 | Charlton | 9 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 9 | 12 | -3 | 9 |
| 18 | Blackburn | 9 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 8 |
| 19 | Brentford | 9 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 12 | 17 | -5 | 8 |
| 20 | Rotherham | 9 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 11 | 17 | -6 | 8 |
| 21 | Bolton | 9 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 6 | 12 | -6 | 8 |
| 22 | Preston | 9 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 10 | -4 | 7 |
| 23 | Milton Keynes Dons | 9 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 8 | 13 | -5 | 7 |
| 24 | Bristol City | 9 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 11 | 19 | -8 | 6 |
Middlesbrough being in the promotion spots will not be a surprise to many. Brighton being top probably will be, but shouldn’t be. I was cautiously optimistic about the Seagulls before this season given their very good shot metrics last year.
With very good shot numbers again it seems this season they’re actually scoring and saving shots that last year they should have been.
At the other end, I had much higher (mid-table) hopes for at least two of the promoted teams.
But while it may make pretty grim viewing for the trio right now, as we’ll see shortly, only MK Dons are making a particularly bad start, with Preston and Bristol City bitten by horrible luck and variance in and in front of goal.
For the eagle-eyed among you, Reading (0.681 shot share, 97.78 PDO) and Middlesbrough (0.530 shot share, 126.38 PDO) do not fit on the chart.
Shooting stars
The early statistical stars of the season are without doubt Reading.They started off at around an 80% shot share but that was never going to be sustainable and are now in the region of 68-72%, depending on which flavour of metric you prefer.
The secret of this is defence.
The Royals have conceded just 67 total shots – almost half the league average.
And while doing that, they’ve also been very nicely above average at taking shots (137, 3rd best).
That is quite simply superb.
There may be other reasons for this such as the fixture schedule so far, but they have played (and outplayed) Burnley and Ipswich, while they matched Derby in shots despite being down to ten men for half the game.
In fact, Ipswich (in that memorable Friday night hammering) are the only team to reach double figures in shots taken at 11v11 and are the only team to out shoot Reading.
I suspect much of that was due to the massive score difference leading to Reading sitting back.
So certainly at the moment, Reading look like legitimate promotion contenders.
There is still a long way to go, but boy do the early stats make positive reading.
Rotherham
Somewhat lost amid the row about a certain West London team was the news that Steve Evans left (by one method or another) the manager’s post at Rotherham United.While his personality can rub people the wrong way, last season he did a fine job keeping the small budget Millers up and it was only a horrible PDO score that saw them slide towards the relegation zone.
Their shot metrics were give or take mid-table obscurity.
Unfortunately for Evans, in the summer he was forced to sell some key players without being able to replace them sufficiently and the results this year have been rather ugly.
Rotherham are bottom in overall 11v11 shot share (taking just 43.3% of all shots in their games), second bottom in unblocked shot share (again 43.3%) and third bottom in shots on target share (40.7%).
Getting burned a bit by PDO as well (93.94) meant there was nowhere to hide and so Evans left the club.
Perhaps the real killer for Rotherham has been the quality of shots taken by opponents.
The Millers have conceded 40 danger zone shots (most) including nine from within the six yard box.
The next worst teams have only conceded six close in, with the average being three and a combined 25 from the six yard box and danger zone respectively.
Whether anyone else will be able to improve performances given the talent drain at the club it will be tough to do, but I’d suggest they look at the defensive side of things first.
Let’s talk about Brentford
Well nobody else is, so I may as well give the developments at Griffin Park a bit of coverage, eh?
I had actually really hoped to give Brentford a wide-ish berth this season and just let the club get on with what they are doing and see how it goes.
I had not expected to be writing about sacking the manager in my first post this early in the season.
There's been a lot of heat and not much light in the comments that I've seen about the Brentford situation this week. Hopefully this will add some much needed light to the discussion.
Like just about everyone else in the world I have very little idea of the exact reasons why Marinus Dijkuizen was sacked on Monday.
But it seems fair to look at the numbers and see what’s been going-on on the pitch.
And the numbers do not make great viewing.
At the time of Dijkuzien’s sacking, while the all situations metrics looked just below average, these were buoyed by a positive piece of play when up a man against Bristol City.
In 11v11 it was not pretty. In the bottom eight in both overall shot share and unblocked shot share (47.4% and 45.4%), the Bees were third worst in the Championship with a shots on target share of just 39.7%.
That is a quite remarkable turnaround from last season.
When we look down into the raw shot numbers there seems to be a likely dearth of quality scoring chances.
Although there were 27 shots taken centrally in the 18 yard box (above the 22 average at the time), there was just one solitary shot form inside the six yard box. And no headers from inside the six yard box too.
While not damning, those numbers are not exactly warm and fuzzy either.
However, if we look at the shot shares when scores are level in the game, this makes a bad situation look even worse.
Pretty horrific yeah?
Taking 40% (or even worse just 30%) of shots when the score is tied is an awful position to start a game from.
Yes, the PDO score is kind of bad as well, but a team would need a mammoth PDO up around 120 to be surviving that kind of shots performance.
As a result, by the completion of week eight, Brentford had spent as much time at one goal down as they had at level scores.
I cannot say with anything other than guess work that these are the sorts of figures the management team at Brentford would be using to make the decision, but it seems a likely path.
Brentford were not in their lowly position by an awful run of bad luck. This league position was not a quirk of fate. Shots-wise at least, it was fully deserved.
And although it may make some fans or media happy to see the experiment with analytics in Griffin Park apparently fail so quickly, that Dijkuzien was let go at this early point probably says loud enough that there was a realisation that his role and input was not working out.
That is what the analytics should be doing; helping make informed decisions at the appropriate time without reacting to isolated events.
Tuesday’s home defeat by Birmingham was another shots horror show, so it will be interesting to see how Lee Carsley beds-in and if he can turn this poor start around.
Saturday, 2 May 2015
Championship Week 45: Why Millwall and Wigan were relegated
So it turns out Troy Deeney and I were both wrong.
Watford were promoted with only winning four of their last five games. And with one of those games still to play they can make the final gap between themselves and the chasing pack quite substantial.
Bournemouth deserve equal praise for their thoroughly comprehensive performance over the season which was very fittingly summed up with an equally thorough and professional dismantling of Bolton to secure promotion.
The pair turned a torrid pace in the last nine games with Watford taking 22 out of a possible 27 points and Bournemouth 21.
Something Middlesbrough and Norwich just could not keep pace with.
| Position | Team | Played | Won | Drawn | Lost | Goals For | Goals Against | Goal Difference | Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Watford | 45 | 27 | 7 | 11 | 90 | 49 | 41 | 88 |
| 2 | Bournemouth | 45 | 25 | 12 | 8 | 95 | 45 | 50 | 87 |
| 3 | Middlesbrough | 45 | 25 | 9 | 11 | 68 | 37 | 31 | 84 |
| 4 | Norwich | 45 | 24 | 11 | 10 | 84 | 46 | 38 | 83 |
| 5 | Ipswich | 45 | 22 | 12 | 11 | 70 | 51 | 19 | 78 |
| 6 | Derby | 45 | 21 | 14 | 10 | 85 | 53 | 32 | 77 |
| 7 | Brentford | 45 | 22 | 9 | 14 | 75 | 59 | 16 | 75 |
| 8 | Wolves | 45 | 21 | 12 | 12 | 66 | 54 | 12 | 75 |
| 9 | Blackburn | 45 | 16 | 16 | 13 | 63 | 57 | 6 | 64 |
| 10 | Charlton | 45 | 14 | 18 | 13 | 54 | 57 | -3 | 60 |
| 11 | Birmingham | 45 | 15 | 15 | 15 | 53 | 64 | -11 | 60 |
| 12 | Nott'm Forest | 45 | 15 | 14 | 16 | 70 | 67 | 3 | 59 |
| 13 | Cardiff | 45 | 15 | 14 | 16 | 55 | 60 | -5 | 59 |
| 14 | Sheffield Weds | 45 | 14 | 17 | 14 | 42 | 48 | -6 | 59 |
| 15 | Leeds | 45 | 15 | 10 | 20 | 50 | 61 | -11 | 55 |
| 16 | Huddersfield | 45 | 13 | 15 | 17 | 58 | 75 | -17 | 54 |
| 17 | Fulham | 45 | 14 | 10 | 21 | 60 | 79 | -19 | 52 |
| 18 | Bolton | 45 | 13 | 12 | 20 | 54 | 66 | -12 | 51 |
| 19 | Reading | 45 | 12 | 11 | 22 | 45 | 69 | -24 | 47 |
| 20 | Brighton | 45 | 10 | 16 | 19 | 44 | 54 | -10 | 46 |
| 21 | Rotherham | 45 | 11 | 15 | 19 | 46 | 67 | -21 | 45 |
| 22 | Millwall | 45 | 9 | 14 | 22 | 40 | 72 | -32 | 41 |
| 23 | Wigan | 45 | 9 | 12 | 24 | 39 | 61 | -22 | 39 |
| 24 | Blackpool | 45 | 4 | 13 | 28 | 36 | 91 | -55 | 25 |
So I guess I have to admit to being slightly disappointed with the end of the Championship season.
After being such a tight battle at the top of the table for so long I had expected the promotion race to become a last day classic between the top four teams.
Now it will be Watford and Bournemouth playing their respective games with the title on the line, while for Middlesbrough and Norwich it will be the playoffs.
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | Birmingham | 600 | 709 | 0.458 | 201 | 233 | 0.463 | 26.37 | 72.54 | 98.91 |
| 9 | Blackburn | 676 | 631 | 0.517 | 212 | 215 | 0.497 | 29.72 | 73.48 | 103.2 |
| 24 | Blackpool | 522 | 739 | 0.414 | 151 | 242 | 0.384 | 23.84 | 62.4 | 86.23 |
| 18 | Bolton | 569 | 714 | 0.443 | 192 | 240 | 0.444 | 28.14 | 72.5 | 100.64 |
| 2 | Bournemouth | 741 | 519 | 0.588 | 265 | 152 | 0.636 | 35.84 | 70.39 | 106.23 |
| 7 | Brentford | 696 | 622 | 0.528 | 257 | 211 | 0.549 | 29.17 | 72.03 | 101.2 |
| 20 | Brighton | 650 | 566 | 0.534 | 183 | 174 | 0.512 | 24.05 | 68.97 | 93.02 |
| 13 | Cardiff | 568 | 619 | 0.478 | 170 | 180 | 0.486 | 32.36 | 66.68 | 99.04 |
| 10 | Charlton | 466 | 725 | 0.391 | 166 | 215 | 0.436 | 32.52 | 73.49 | 106.01 |
| 6 | Derby | 592 | 568 | 0.51 | 212 | 189 | 0.529 | 40.08 | 71.95 | 112.03 |
| 17 | Fulham | 593 | 693 | 0.461 | 189 | 238 | 0.443 | 31.74 | 66.8 | 98.55 |
| 16 | Huddersfield | 655 | 631 | 0.509 | 234 | 209 | 0.528 | 24.78 | 64.11 | 88.88 |
| 5 | Ipswich | 657 | 586 | 0.529 | 224 | 169 | 0.57 | 31.25 | 69.82 | 101.07 |
| 15 | Leeds | 514 | 696 | 0.425 | 154 | 217 | 0.415 | 32.48 | 71.9 | 104.37 |
| 3 | Middlesbrough | 650 | 519 | 0.556 | 209 | 148 | 0.585 | 32.55 | 75 | 107.55 |
| 22 | Millwall | 592 | 581 | 0.505 | 166 | 206 | 0.446 | 24.09 | 65.05 | 89.14 |
| 4 | Norwich | 721 | 423 | 0.63 | 235 | 150 | 0.61 | 35.75 | 69.33 | 105.09 |
| 12 | Nott'm Forest | 660 | 640 | 0.508 | 210 | 202 | 0.51 | 33.32 | 66.82 | 100.15 |
| 19 | Reading | 583 | 564 | 0.508 | 178 | 201 | 0.47 | 25.27 | 65.66 | 90.94 |
| 21 | Rotherham | 608 | 603 | 0.502 | 188 | 199 | 0.486 | 24.47 | 66.33 | 90.8 |
| 14 | Sheffield Weds | 597 | 550 | 0.521 | 165 | 175 | 0.485 | 25.45 | 72.57 | 98.01 |
| 1 | Watford | 650 | 629 | 0.508 | 246 | 205 | 0.545 | 36.59 | 76.1 | 112.69 |
| 23 | Wigan | 537 | 525 | 0.506 | 151 | 177 | 0.46 | 25.83 | 65.54 | 91.38 |
| 8 | Wolves | 578 | 623 | 0.481 | 187 | 198 | 0.486 | 35.31 | 72.72 | 108.03 |
Speaking of the playoffs, Brentford and Wolves have managed to keep their hopes alive and keep some life in the last day.
Ipswich’s goal difference should just about be enough to secure them a place, although it would not take too much of a swing for Brentford to usurp them. And Ipswich face the toughest test of the four against Blackburn.
At the bottom of the table Rotherham successfully avoided being dragged in to a last day relegation battle and have since, unsurprisingly, decided not to appeal the three point deduction for fielding an ineligible player.
The Millers’ win over Reading (who put in a particularly inept performance until 2-0 down) sent Millwall and Wigan to League One.
It is hard to find any concrete reason for Wigan and Millwall’s relegation other than horrible PDO.
You can make a case for Wigan who managed the fewest shots on target in the Championship – never a good thing – and fourth fewest in overall shots. But the Latics were also one of the most prudent in those regards too. (Millwall were lower mid-table in both metrics.)
But the problem with taking fewer shots is you expose yourself to greater potential variance in the sample (shot) size. That means any anomalies (weird bounces, bad referring decisions and such) get magnified more than in a larger sample.
And that could certainly be a significant factor.
The other probably more telling factor in the relegation battle has been the non-presence of Leeds and Charlton; far worse teams in just about every measure except one crucial one – PDO.
The combination of awful PDO and a massive PDO boost for two of the other prime relegation candidates left Millwall and Wigan trapped in the bottom three.
They have not been great teams this year, but probably do not deserve the fate that awaits them either.
Ultimately the lesson is: don’t be a below average shots team and leave your future up to your own luck or, even worse, others’.
Friday, 17 April 2015
Championship Week 43: No time to mess around
No messing around this weekend.
The first game of the weekend (Norwich vs Middlesbrough) is definitely the biggest and could potentially see one of even two teams as good as eliminated from the automatic promotion race.
| Position | Team | Played | Won | Drawn | Lost | Goals For | Goals Against | Goal Difference | Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bournemouth | 43 | 24 | 11 | 8 | 90 | 43 | 47 | 83 |
| 2 | Norwich | 43 | 24 | 10 | 9 | 83 | 44 | 39 | 82 |
| 3 | Watford | 43 | 25 | 7 | 11 | 87 | 49 | 38 | 82 |
| 4 | Middlesbrough | 43 | 24 | 9 | 10 | 64 | 33 | 31 | 81 |
| 5 | Derby | 43 | 21 | 12 | 10 | 78 | 46 | 32 | 75 |
| 6 | Ipswich | 43 | 21 | 11 | 11 | 67 | 49 | 18 | 74 |
| 7 | Brentford | 43 | 21 | 8 | 14 | 71 | 57 | 14 | 71 |
| 8 | Wolves | 43 | 20 | 11 | 12 | 64 | 53 | 11 | 71 |
| 9 | Blackburn | 42 | 15 | 14 | 13 | 56 | 52 | 4 | 59 |
| 10 | Nott'm Forest | 43 | 15 | 13 | 15 | 66 | 62 | 4 | 58 |
| 11 | Sheffield Weds | 43 | 14 | 16 | 13 | 39 | 44 | -5 | 58 |
| 12 | Charlton | 43 | 13 | 18 | 12 | 52 | 55 | -3 | 57 |
| 13 | Cardiff | 43 | 14 | 13 | 16 | 52 | 58 | -6 | 55 |
| 14 | Birmingham | 42 | 13 | 15 | 14 | 51 | 63 | -12 | 54 |
| 15 | Leeds | 43 | 14 | 10 | 19 | 47 | 58 | -11 | 52 |
| 16 | Huddersfield | 43 | 13 | 13 | 17 | 52 | 69 | -17 | 52 |
| 17 | Bolton | 43 | 13 | 11 | 19 | 52 | 61 | -9 | 50 |
| 18 | Reading | 42 | 12 | 11 | 19 | 44 | 64 | -20 | 47 |
| 19 | Brighton | 43 | 10 | 16 | 17 | 43 | 50 | -7 | 46 |
| 20 | Fulham | 43 | 12 | 10 | 21 | 55 | 76 | -21 | 46 |
| 21 | Rotherham | 43 | 10 | 14 | 19 | 43 | 65 | -22 | 44 |
| 22 | Millwall | 42 | 9 | 12 | 21 | 37 | 67 | -30 | 39 |
| 23 | Wigan | 43 | 8 | 12 | 23 | 37 | 59 | -22 | 36 |
| 24 | Blackpool | 43 | 4 | 13 | 26 | 34 | 87 | -53 | 25 |
Of course a lot depends on the results on Saturday for Bournemouth and Watford, but these four teams didn’t get in to this position by losing games. So it’s probably fairly safe to assume that at least one of Bournemouth or Watford will win all their remaining games – as I discussed a little while ago.
| Position | Team | Played | 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 | 42 | 565 | 663 | 0.46 | 188 | 215 | 0.466 | 27.14 | 70.71 | 97.84 |
| 9 | Blackburn | 42 | 635 | 573 | 0.526 | 196 | 195 | 0.501 | 28.57 | 73.33 | 101.89 |
| 24 | Blackpool | 43 | 492 | 720 | 0.406 | 142 | 234 | 0.378 | 23.95 | 62.81 | 86.76 |
| 17 | Bolton | 43 | 549 | 673 | 0.449 | 186 | 222 | 0.456 | 27.95 | 72.52 | 100.47 |
| 1 | Bournemouth | 43 | 701 | 502 | 0.583 | 251 | 145 | 0.634 | 35.86 | 70.33 | 106.19 |
| 7 | Brentford | 43 | 665 | 590 | 0.53 | 242 | 202 | 0.545 | 29.33 | 71.78 | 101.11 |
| 19 | Brighton | 43 | 621 | 546 | 0.532 | 173 | 165 | 0.512 | 24.86 | 69.7 | 94.56 |
| 13 | Cardiff | 43 | 544 | 597 | 0.477 | 163 | 171 | 0.488 | 31.91 | 66.07 | 97.98 |
| 12 | Charlton | 43 | 449 | 690 | 0.394 | 157 | 203 | 0.436 | 33.12 | 72.91 | 106.04 |
| 5 | Derby | 43 | 570 | 538 | 0.515 | 202 | 176 | 0.535 | 38.6 | 73.86 | 112.46 |
| 20 | Fulham | 43 | 573 | 659 | 0.465 | 179 | 229 | 0.439 | 30.72 | 66.82 | 97.54 |
| 16 | Huddersfield | 43 | 622 | 608 | 0.506 | 223 | 199 | 0.528 | 23.31 | 65.33 | 88.64 |
| 6 | Ipswich | 43 | 635 | 565 | 0.529 | 219 | 163 | 0.573 | 30.59 | 69.94 | 100.53 |
| 15 | Leeds | 43 | 485 | 676 | 0.418 | 142 | 210 | 0.403 | 33.09 | 72.38 | 105.48 |
| 4 | Middlesbrough | 43 | 624 | 485 | 0.563 | 200 | 138 | 0.592 | 32 | 76.09 | 108.09 |
| 22 | Millwall | 42 | 549 | 542 | 0.503 | 150 | 193 | 0.437 | 24.67 | 65.27 | 89.94 |
| 2 | Norwich | 43 | 695 | 391 | 0.64 | 231 | 143 | 0.618 | 35.93 | 69.22 | 105.15 |
| 10 | Nott'm Forest | 43 | 630 | 613 | 0.507 | 196 | 194 | 0.502 | 33.68 | 68.05 | 101.73 |
| 18 | Reading | 42 | 537 | 528 | 0.504 | 163 | 185 | 0.468 | 26.99 | 65.4 | 92.39 |
| 21 | Rotherham | 43 | 573 | 590 | 0.493 | 181 | 194 | 0.483 | 23.75 | 66.49 | 90.24 |
| 11 | Sheffield Weds | 43 | 576 | 520 | 0.526 | 157 | 166 | 0.486 | 24.83 | 73.48 | 98.31 |
| 3 | Watford | 43 | 620 | 611 | 0.504 | 235 | 199 | 0.541 | 37.02 | 75.38 | 112.4 |
| 23 | Wigan | 43 | 518 | 506 | 0.506 | 145 | 168 | 0.463 | 25.51 | 64.89 | 90.4 |
| 8 | Wolves | 43 | 563 | 605 | 0.482 | 183 | 195 | 0.484 | 34.99 | 72.82 | 107.81 |
Of the top four, unsurprisingly both Norwich and Middlesbrough are playing their (statistically) toughest remaining fixture this weekend, but so too are Bournemouth who host Sheffield Wednesday.
Watford have a (statistically speaking) easy one against
Birmingham, but do have too tough ones to finish – the aforementioned Sheffield
Wednesday and Brighton.
The situation is certainly more desperate for Middlesbrough who in reality probably need a win against to stand any chance of going up automatically.
Norwich could possibly recover from a draw as they would still be one point ahead of Middlesbrough and at worst two behind Watford and three behind Bournemouth.
Both Watford and Middlesbrough play Brighton and despite their lowly position, the Seagulls are a match for anyone – as they proved by outshooting Bournemouth last Friday night.
Sadly they struggled to really convert any of their chances and Bournemouth took home a 2-0 win.
But I suspect it’s a case of winner takes-all at Carrow Road.
I do not think either team can really afford to play for a draw.
That should make for a fantastic game.
Then there’s Wolves v Ipswich on Saturday lunchtime.
If Ipswich win that would all but eliminate Wolves from the playoff race and just about secure Ipswich’s spot.
Although Ipswich face a tough last two games against Nottingham Forest and Blackburn. Given the shot shares you would have to bet on Ipswich getting the better of Wolves, at least on the shot chart.
It’s also gratifying to see both Middlesbrough and Ipswich correcting the slight dip in shot share and shots on target share that they suffered a couple of games ago.
This at least indicates some form of recovery from Middlesbrough during a period which included a difficult game against Wolves.
But now they face the toughest test in the division.
Yes, I’m giving Norwich a very slight edge over Bournemouth – imagine how the Canaries' season would have gone without a monumental PDO collapse for 10 or so games.
Certainly they'd still have a very capable manager at the helm.
At the other end, Wigan’s defeat to Millwall has all but relegated them – only the slight hope of Rotherham being deducted points is keeping them alive.
Millwall are in slightly better shape having a game in hand, and would be more so if the Millers are docked points.
But even then the London club would still face making up a two point deficit from games against Cardiff, Blackburn, Derby and Wolves. Just about all of whom have superior shot statistics to the Lions.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)













