Modern Fitba - Advanced Premiership Stats

Big Buff

Well-Known Member
Anyone else subscribed to the Modern Fitba advanced statistics Patreon?

Looking through the data this morning and it makes for very interesting reading, particularly with regards to the xG table. It indicates Celtic are due for a major regression soon.
 
There is no way they can continue their shots to goal average, they are due to come down with a bump soon. Hopefully Killie this weekend.
 
There is no way they can continue their shots to goal average, they are due to come down with a bump soon. Hopefully Killie this weekend.
Kilmarnock are absolutely dire this season but hopefully their win v Hibs has given them some confidence.
 
Anyone else subscribed to the Modern Fitba advanced statistics Patreon?

Looking through the data this morning and it makes for very interesting reading, particularly with regards to the xG table. It indicates Celtic are due for a major regression soon.

There was some info posted on here last week from the SPFL stats section which indicated they are getting 2 goals from every 3 shots on target. That is remarkable and totally unsustainable in the longer term. The best teams in the World do not achieve that.

Anything better than 1 goal per 3 shots on target is generally regarded as ‘decent’. Last season we ended up with something like a goal every 2.7 shots on target or thereabouts. This season we are a good bit behind that so far in the league.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GF7
There was some info posted on here last week from the SPFL stats section which indicated they are getting 2 goals from every 3 shots on target. That is remarkable and totally unsustainable in the longer term. The best teams in the World do not achieve that.

Anything better than 1 goal per 3 shots on target is generally regarded as ‘decent’. Last season we ended up with something like a goal every 2.7 shots on target or thereabouts. This season we are a good bit behind that so far in the league.
Our xG so far this season is pretty consistent with our goals scored. We’re top of the xG table for the whole league
 
Kilmarnock are absolutely dire this season but hopefully their win v Hibs has given them some confidence.
They have been poor but seems to have stopped the rot a bit. 4 clean sheets on the bounce I think now - soon to be 5 ;)
 
Our xG so far this season is pretty consistent with our goals scored. We’re top of the xG table for the whole league

No idea about that mate as I’m only going by SPFL stats:

Rangers 95 shots at goal, 48 on target and only 12 goals.
Dhims are 73 shots at goal, 27 on target and 18 goals.

We need to improve our conversion rate. Your original point stands though - they cannot sustain that level.
 
Anyone else subscribed to the Modern Fitba advanced statistics Patreon?

Looking through the data this morning and it makes for very interesting reading, particularly with regards to the xG table. It indicates Celtic are due for a major regression soon.
I've been posting about this in the threads on here about our goalscoring. Haven't seen the most recent stats but a couple of weeks ago our XG was pretty much the same as our goals scored. Interestingly Celtic's XG was slightly lower than ours despite scoring much more. I've said that things will even out as time goes on but folk love to panic on here. They've gone through a bit of a purple patch where they were banging in goals from outside the box against St Johnstone etc but that won't last.
 
No idea about that mate as I’m only going by SPFL stats:

Rangers 95 shots at goal, 48 on target and only 12 goals.
Dhims are 73 shots at goal, 27 on target and 18 goals.

We need to improve our conversion rate. Your original point stands though - they cannot sustain that level.
Compare our conversion rate to our XG, it's far too simplistic and also pretty meaningless to compare our conversion rate to another teams. Or I should say, it can lead to us making the wrong assumptions and reaching wrong conclusions.
 
I've been posting about this in the threads on here about our goalscoring. Haven't seen the most recent stats but a couple of weeks ago our XG was pretty much the same as our goals scored. Interestingly Celtic's XG was slightly lower than ours despite scoring much more. I've said that things will even out as time goes on but folk love to panic on here. They've gone through a bit of a purple patch where they were banging in goals from outside the box against St Johnstone etc but that won't last.
That’s pretty much how it sits right now.

Also interesting: Niko Katic has the second highest xG from set pieces, but hasn’t scored one yet...
 
Just domestic mate
Surprised at that a bit, the Hibs game was an onslaught and even though we scored 6, I think we had some thing ridiculous like 30+ efforts. Maybe balanced out by us not creating much at Rugby Park or against them.

Europe has been eye watering - 21 goals :))
 
Compare our conversion rate to our XG, it's far too simplistic and also pretty meaningless to compare our conversion rate to another teams. Or I should say, it can lead to us making the wrong assumptions and reaching wrong conclusions.

I don't have access to xG figures so I can't compare.

What I do see, from the SPFL stats, is that we have more attempts on goal than anyone else, we have more shots on target than anyone else - yet only 1 in 4 of those shots on target results in a goal. Over the course of last season in the league I think we managed an average of a goal for every 2.7 shots on target. So, even just comparing us with our own returns from last season we have much room for improvement.

Of course, at this stage, the sample size is tiny enough to render it all a bit meaningless anyway.:)
 
I don't have access to xG figures so I can't compare.

What I do see, from the SPFL stats, is that we have more attempts on goal than anyone else, we have more shots on target than anyone else - yet only 1 in 4 of those shots on target results in a goal. Over the course of last season in the league I think we managed an average of a goal for every 2.7 shots on target. So, even just comparing us with our own returns from last season we have much room for improvement.

Of course, at this stage, the sample size is tiny enough to render it all a bit meaningless anyway.:)
Aye but the issue is shots on target is a very blunt stat, especially compared to XG. XG is based on the type of shot, where it comes from, whether it was a header or not and gives a more realistic idea of just how many goals we 'should've' scored. You can look at the number of shots we've taken and say we haven't been clinical enough in front of goal but you could also say that it's not a question of being clinical but we've been making bad decisions in terms of where the shots are coming from or poor quality chances.

I've posted on other threads about this because people are getting worked up about it but if we were to keep scoring at the rate we are then we'll end up with more goals than we did last season (and we were top scorers then). I also posted this on another thread as it seems to be these games in particular that people were getting worked up about:

"
As I've said previously the sample size is far too small for folk to be getting worked up about our shots/ goals ratio. Anyway, here's another way of looking at it:

The games people seem to be losing it over in particular are the Killie, Livingstone and St Mirren. They are 3 of the most defensive minded teams we'll play and against packed defences we may get quite a few shots away but many of those will be blocked or from poor positions. So how do we compare to last season against them in corresponding fixtures?

St Mirren away from home
Last season we had 20 shots on goal (4 on target) and won 2 nil
This season we had 15 shots on goal (7 on target) and won 1 nil

Livingston at home
Last season we had 18 shots on goal (6 on target) and won 3 nil
This season we had 23 shots on goal (10 on target) and won 3 - 1

Kilmarnock away
Last season game one we had 15 shots on goal (7 on target) and lost 2 - 1
Last season game two we had 7 shots on goal (3 on target) and lost 2 - 1
This season we had 14 shots on goal (10 on target) and won 2-1


So over the corresponding fixtures last season we averaged 15 shots on goal per game and scored 1.75 per game.
This season we've averaged 17 shots on goal per game and scored 2 goals per game.

Conclusion
We've had slightly more shots and goals per game in the corresponding fixtures. Also note that in the 4 fixtures last season we took 6 points and in 3 fixtures this season we've already taken 9. Points make prizes. Finally, before the claims of 'but we should still be scoring more' remember that were highest scorers in the league last season and we've already banged in a few goals this season against teams who play a more open game against us. "
 
I posted the below after the Rangers Vs Celtic game, not sure what the updated figures are from the game last week but it shows the difference atm. They seem to be able to carve teams open a lot easier than we do, obviously, this could come down to how teams are defending against them compared to us but it is something we have to get better at.

"1 in 10 of rangers sustained possessions in the final 3rd ended up in a shot compared to 1 in 2 for Celtic. Shoes the difference in how clinical they were compared to us in terms of creating a shooting chance."

I guess it ties in with the conversion rate per shot.
 
I find statistically analysis moderately interesting.

However to my naked, untrained eye we miss too many chances and are not clinical enough.

I'd say that's fairly obvious.

Surely that contradicts the xG analysis?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GF7
I find statistically analysis moderately interesting.

However to my naked, untrained eye we miss too many chances and are not clinical enough.

I'd say that's fairly obvious.

Surely that contradicts the xG analysis?
In terms of analysis xG is a stat that is really good for providing an unbiased look at how many goals a team should score. In smaller samples teams could be a good bit above or below it but over the peice they should be scoring around what the xG stat shows.
 
I was looking through some of their individual player graphics yesterday and was surprised to see Defoe leading the league in combined xG and xA per 90 minutes with Morelos in 3rd.

Tavernier 3rd in the league for solely xA behind Niall McGinn and Chris Burke of all people.
 
I was looking through some of their individual player graphics yesterday and was surprised to see Defoe leading the league in combined xG and xA per 90 minutes with Morelos in 3rd.

Tavernier 3rd in the league for solely xA behind Niall McGinn and Chris Burke of all people.
The way Defoe likes to play, on the shoulder of the centrehalfs mean that a good number of his chances will come in the area where you're more likely to have an xG, i.e. cental area of the box with the feet rather than the head. Arfield has a great understanding with him in that area of the park.
 
Back
Top