flobaba wrote:
Football's greatest moments aren't about xG though are they? Just take Parteys goal for example. What's the xG he scores from that chance? Very low. But in the moment, as a footballer, you take the shot. And when it goes in, like that, scenes. Who cares what the xG is then? But if one gets fixated on all that you have some coaches discouraging the shot. You have Zinchenko telling Saliba not to shoot.
Stats are cool to back up or justify what we see, but I don't want them used to overly influence how a player wants or needs to express themselves. Look at the NBA for example. Because stats, the midrange game is almost extinct. And you have every Thomas, Richard and Harold practicing step back 3s. It just becomes cookie cutter. Annoying.
As Burns said, there is an interview with Odegaard where he says they practiced the Partey shot. Basically they knew that Conte would have two banks of 5 defending deep, so we would have these open spaces at the top of the box and have to shoot from there. The alternative would’ve been to pass sideways endlessly because it would’ve been hard to penetrate those ranks of players.
But you look at the data and it’s quite clear, a shot taken where Partey shot is typically 1/3 as successful as a shot taken around the 6 yard box. So if you can take the extra pass or two to get the ball closer to the 6 yard box, it’s in your best interest to do so.
There is clear data around build ups that you can use to refine your attack, but also to scout opponents attacks as you prepare defense. Nobody’s saying don’t enjoy the art of football that glues us to the screen all weekend. But where the data is sensible use it.
What isn’t sensible is a lot of the data that has been used historically. Things like assists. Raw possession data. Passes etc. A lot of the time that does not actually deliver a lot of useful information. Whereas the advanced metrics like xG, progressive passes, deep completions, field tilt, average positions, pass maps, etc., carry much more info.
