Xhaka - worst buy in recent history?: Page 21 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Xhaka - worst buy in recent history?

speedy

Im not sure it makes sense, you'd want to play another 3 or 4 high risk passes in the move, each with the oppertunity to lose possesion and launch a counter. And have more players higher up to have the same statistical chnace of a goal.

Silva shot which is less accrate is still a turn over.

Nobodys suggesting xhaka should shoot everytime, we just noting that when we havent got much on his pot shots are as effective as most AM in the league.

GooneriC

His role restricts his shooting efforts. If he was further forward i would encourage him to take more shots on goal , the power and swerve in his shots are a nightmare to deal with once on target. Wenger didnt like his midfielders to shoot from range , its one side of our game that was severely lacking for almost a decade. Wonder if Emery has the same restrictions .

Claudius

speedy wrote:
Im not sure it makes sense, you'd want to play another 3 or 4 high risk passes in the move, each with the oppertunity to lose possesion and launch a counter. And have more players higher up to have the same statistical chnace of a goal.

Silva shot which is less accrate is still a turn over.

Nobodys suggesting xhaka should shoot everytime, we just noting that when we havent got much on his pot shots are as effective as most AM in the league.

It makes sense because if you look at the expected goals formula, it basically looks at all the recorded goals ever scored and says if you shoot from a specific place in a specific way, you are typically this likely to score, all things being equal. If you have an open shot close to goal, you are more likely to score than if you have an open shot far from goal. So given that there are 90 minutes in a game and teams only have 12 to 15 chances per game, take the extra 10 seconds and work a better shot if that means you can take yourself from a 10% to a 20 or 30% shot opportunity.

speedy

I see what you're saying now. But we have the specific outcome for xhaka and his counter parts. So the general data for players were not discussing is less specific.

If someones in a good position he tends to pass it but if nothings on and his scoring stats are good theres no reason for him not to have a pop.

Claudius

The point is that the xG suggests that the intrinsic qualities of the shot (location, type of shot, coverage) are more important than the shooter. So get your team to create shots that have good intrinsic qualities.

This is why City scores so much. It doesn't really matter who is shooting. They just create shots with really good intrinsic qualities, so any of their 4 or 5 forwards can stick it in the net. Aguero isn't scoring those 90-100 league goals on his own. All that zigging and zagging moves defenders out of position until a good shot materialises in the box.

Clrnc

Claudius wrote:
This is why City scores so much. It doesn't really matter who is shooting. They just create shots with really good intrinsic qualities, so any of their 4 or 5 forwards can stick it in the net. Aguero isn't scoring those 90-100 league goals on his own. All that zigging and zagging moves defenders out of position until a good shot materialises in the box.

Yeah and I'm bored to hell watching them. They are obviously one of the best or probably the best the league has ever seen (esp if they win the league again), but their attacking play is so well rehearsed it makes them robotic. Pretty much almost every move end up with someone tapping in an open goal.

Claudius

Clrnc wrote:
Claudius wrote:
This is why City scores so much. It doesn't really matter who is shooting. They just create shots with really good intrinsic qualities, so any of their 4 or 5 forwards can stick it in the net. Aguero isn't scoring those 90-100 league goals on his own. All that zigging and zagging moves defenders out of position until a good shot materialises in the box.

Yeah and I'm bored to hell watching them. They are obviously one of the best or probably the best the league has ever seen (esp if they win the league again), but their attacking play is so well rehearsed it makes them robotic. Pretty much almost every move end up with someone tapping in an open goal.

If you study operations, that's a great thing. Well-rehearsed, repetitive and consistent. It's what you want to make sure a system is working well. That's what we need, and that's what Emery is giving us more of

Big Willie

I'd rather be bored stiff watching us score 100 tap ins on the way to a title than huffing and puffing our way to laboured efforts that end up seeing us end up fighting for top 4 clrnc.

Clrnc

Big Willie wrote:
I'd rather be bored stiff watching us score 100 tap ins on the way to a title than huffing and puffing our way to laboured efforts that end up seeing us end up fighting for top 4 clrnc.

Yeah me too but I have this feeling history highlights won't remember them too well showing those tap-ins rather than our beautiful goals from the invincible team for example when we are comparing champions.

speedy

Claudius wrote:
The point is that the xG suggests that the intrinsic qualities of the shot (location, type of shot, coverage) are more important than the shooter. So get your team to create shots that have good intrinsic qualities.

This is why City scores so much. It doesn't really matter who is shooting. They just create shots with really good intrinsic qualities, so any of their 4 or 5 forwards can stick it in the net. Aguero isn't scoring those 90-100 league goals on his own. All that zigging and zagging moves defenders out of position until a good shot materialises in the box.

I get what you're saying but the logic crumbles when xhaka is in a good position to shoot and nobody else is offering a decent option.

Obviously we needed to create chances close to goal aswell. Speed of counter attack directly relates to chanve of scoring aswell. Ramsey's dickhead passes in thr centre of the park behind the player cost a second and probably drop the chances of scoring by at least 30%.

Big Willie

Clrnc wrote:
Big Willie wrote:
I'd rather be bored stiff watching us score 100 tap ins on the way to a title than huffing and puffing our way to laboured efforts that end up seeing us end up fighting for top 4 clrnc.

Yeah me too but I have this feeling history highlights won't remember them too well showing those tap-ins rather than our beautiful goals from the invincible team for example when we are comparing champions.

Our invincibles scored a butload of tap ins from cutbacks. That was probably one of our main sources of goals.

QuincyAbeyie

Those tap-ins are the results of outplaying your opponent so thoroughly you don't even need to shoot. City are playing great football, and other than Arsenal and Messi they're the only thing I bother watching for pure entertainment.

Mirth

The passing moves that fashioned those cut backs were probably some of the most complicated, quickest and intricate bits of football I've ever seen. And you know it.

And I'd say the same for City as well tbh.

MuswellHillGooner

speedy wrote:
Heres this seasons stats to see how he stacks up.

Xhaka this season
Shots 24
Shots on target 10
Shooting accuracy % 42%
Goals 4

Ramsey (obviously way more attacking)
Shots 25
Shots on target 11
Shooting accuracy % 44%
Goals 3

Pogba
Shots 87
Shots on target 46
Shooting accuracy % 53%
Goals 11

Silva
Shots 46
Shots on target 19
Shooting accuracy % 41%
Goals 6

Wijnaldum
Shots 28
Shots on target 9
Shooting accuracy % 32%
Goals 3

So this compariosn is completely unfair, because Xhaka is our deep midfielder and I'm compairing him to the best attacking midfielders in the league. The other thing to note is he is usually not scoring from brilliant combination play he's making a chance out of nothing from way out, so thats worth a lot more.

You undermined all your work right there.

Also please update your stats
https://www.fctables.com/players/granit_xhaka-244124/

Finally how many of those shots in the random stats you brought up are long range shots and how many of those goals are long range shots that your random stats do not make clear?

goon

Mirth wrote:
The passing moves that fashioned those cut backs were probably some of the most complicated, quickest and intricate bits of football I've ever seen. And you know it.

And I'd say the same for City as well tbh.

Our two best goals by a mile this season (Ramsey v Fulham and Auba v Leicester) ended with cut backs.

speedy

Muswell Hill Gooner wrote:
speedy wrote:
Heres this seasons stats to see how he stacks up.

Xhaka this season
Shots 24
Shots on target 10
Shooting accuracy % 42%
Goals 4

Ramsey (obviously way more attacking)
Shots 25
Shots on target 11
Shooting accuracy % 44%
Goals 3

Pogba
Shots 87
Shots on target 46
Shooting accuracy % 53%
Goals 11

Silva
Shots 46
Shots on target 19
Shooting accuracy % 41%
Goals 6

Wijnaldum
Shots 28
Shots on target 9
Shooting accuracy % 32%
Goals 3

So this compariosn is completely unfair, because Xhaka is our deep midfielder and I'm compairing him to the best attacking midfielders in the league. The other thing to note is he is usually not scoring from brilliant combination play he's making a chance out of nothing from way out, so thats worth a lot more.

You undermined all your work right there.

Also please update your stats
https://www.fctables.com/players/granit_xhaka-244124/

Finally how many of those shots in the random stats you brought up are long range shots and how many of those goals are long range shots that your random stats do not make clear?

No I didn't undermine my work. The stats are unfair on xhaka and he still stacks up with the best. It strengthens my point.

My "random stats" ar the official prem stats of their site.

And finally all xhakas are pretty much long range so the other players who shoot from closer should in theory be miles better and they're not. Which again highlights that xhakas long shots are not ineffective. Which was the original point.

MuswellHillGooner

He matches Matt Ritchie.
That's his level.

MuswellHillGooner

Minus the stat about errors leading to conceding a goal that he leads!
edit: here you go
http://dailycannon.com/2019/01/granit-xhaka-errors/

flobaba

Mirth wrote:
The passing moves that fashioned those cut backs were probably some of the most complicated, quickest and intricate bits of football I've ever seen. And you know it.

And I'd say the same for City as well tbh.

Yes, and both City and the Invincibles have/had some of the most talented, skillful technically sound players the premier league has ever seen. Admittedly Pep lays his thumb imprint heavier on his teams, while Wenger I think allowed his teams to generate similar quality chances by intuition.

With our current team it’s actually a wonder (or credit to the manager) that we are able to create as many quality chances as we have with the type of players we have used in midfield for the majority of the season.

Ray

Muswell Hill Gooner wrote:
Minus the stat about errors leading to conceding a goal that he leads!
edit: here you go
http://dailycannon.com/2019/01/granit-xhaka-errors/

That’s since the start of last season this season he has 2, which simply put is not something he leads on.

« Previous Page Next Page »