MUTU wrote:zozon wrote:MUTU wrote:zozon, it's time for your pills again
Can you please explain to me how Coman's "chance" is rated 0.08 xG and Gnabry's post is rated at 0.07?
Just explain please. Or please never use the Understat "stats" again. Its easy to try to "calm" me down when you dont have the answer. Just diluting the conversation.
Easy, it's because you exaggerate all the chances.
You probably thought Mueller should have scored 3 goals from his chance.Our goal was to create the most precise method for shot quality evaluation.
For this case, we trained neural network prediction algorithms with the large dataset (>100,000 shots, over 10 parameters for each).
On this site, you will find our detailed xG statistics for the top European leagues.
But yes, go with your gut feeling by all means, after all you probably did watch over 100,000 shots.
zozon wrote:You just need a pair of eyes to see which chance had a better probability to go in - and yet, Understat rates Coman's blocked shot 1m from him a better chance than Gnabry's post.
Hardrade wrote:My comparison of main characteristics (serious)
Müller pros: Vision, Positioning, Finishing, Mentality
Müller cons: Technique
Coutinho pros: Vision, Passing, Long Shots, Technique
Coutinho cons: Consistency
Of course, we had a very few games with both of them in this club, and these are not the only skills / weaknesses they have, only the most obvious ones
MUTU wrote:Hardrade wrote:My comparison of main characteristics (serious)
Müller pros: Vision, Positioning, Finishing, Mentality
Müller cons: Technique
Coutinho pros: Vision, Passing, Long Shots, Technique
Coutinho cons: Consistency
Of course, we had a very few games with both of them in this club, and these are not the only skills / weaknesses they have, only the most obvious ones
Fair enough. I'd add off-the-ball movement for Mueller unless that's what you mean by positioning.
MUTU wrote:zozon wrote:You just need a pair of eyes to see which chance had a better probability to go in - and yet, Understat rates Coman's blocked shot 1m from him a better chance than Gnabry's post.
Are you talking about this chance? It was difficult, but so was Gnabry's chance. I think you are misunderstanding what xG stands for. It has nothing to do with how close the player was to scoring, but rather the probability of a random player scoring from the point where the real player took the shot. Imagine your satellite/stream feed stops just as the player is about to shoot... and you're left wondering whether he scored or not... that's xG. And quit complaining about a difference of 0.01. That's a 1% chance of scoring more than the other; it's as negligible as they get.
Exactly. People who dispute the use of statistics such as xG and Goalimpact are people who just plainly do not understand statistics or have no clue what they're looking at.MUTU wrote:zozon wrote:You just need a pair of eyes to see which chance had a better probability to go in - and yet, Understat rates Coman's blocked shot 1m from him a better chance than Gnabry's post.
Are you talking about this chance? It was difficult, but so was Gnabry's chance. I think you are misunderstanding what xG stands for. It has nothing to do with how close the player was to scoring, but rather the probability of a random player scoring from the point where the real player took the shot. Imagine your satellite/stream feed stops just as the player is about to shoot... and you're left wondering whether he scored or not... that's xG. And quit complaining about a difference of 0.01. That's a 1% chance of scoring more than the other; it's as negligible as they get.
PunkCapitalist wrote:Exactly. People who dispute the use of statistics such as xG and Goalimpact are people who just plainly do not understand statistics or have no clue what they're looking at.MUTU wrote:zozon wrote:You just need a pair of eyes to see which chance had a better probability to go in - and yet, Understat rates Coman's blocked shot 1m from him a better chance than Gnabry's post.
Are you talking about this chance? It was difficult, but so was Gnabry's chance. I think you are misunderstanding what xG stands for. It has nothing to do with how close the player was to scoring, but rather the probability of a random player scoring from the point where the real player took the shot. Imagine your satellite/stream feed stops just as the player is about to shoot... and you're left wondering whether he scored or not... that's xG. And quit complaining about a difference of 0.01. That's a 1% chance of scoring more than the other; it's as negligible as they get.
Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk
MUTU wrote:IsiahRashad wrote:There are players with less minutes than him, but they remain up in the standings.
It's not only the goals and assits, there are other stats, also important for the game of football, and yall know that very well.
It's not about the total minutes but about the number of minutes per appearance.
Yes there's other stats, like winning possession and aerial duels. In the latter, as per your screenshot, Mueller wins 5x more aerial duels than Coutinho, and they're not even /90 stats.
Paphlagonian wrote:I need a "neither of them" choice.
Return to General Bayern Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests