|
Post by tachyon on Jun 13, 2022 9:35:47 GMT
Aside from Fulham, Stoke created the most xG from corners in 2021/22. We also ranked 5th in creating xG from non corner, set pieces. 45% of Flint's Championship xG comes from corners and another 20% from non corner set pieces. If you are looking for a plug and play way to boost scoring as a spin-off from another acquisition, this is probably as good as it gets. Is set-piece xG creation just down to the quality of deliveries from Vrancic and Baker, or something more subtle? I notice Cardiff were right up there on that metric too But assuming we go to a back 4 and change things up, he'd have to be on the pitch for us to get that advantage - and if he does, it means Wilmot (who we paid £1.5m for) and Jagielka (probably) aren't. Creating from corners has multiple drivers. It's become a cottage industry within the game. (Stoke take data from a company who provide bespoke & general set piece/corner creation modules, so who knows). Design has come a long way from Pulis' "pin the keeper, block off defenders, isolate or free your best header" strategy. But as with a lot of things TP was well ahead of the curve back in the day. Having big players is one advantage you either have or you don't and Flint wins upwards of 70% of his aerial duels. After that it's intricate blocking runs, near far post overloads, delivery (out vs inswingers) etc Re avaiabiliy (when and if he signs), he played mostly in a 3 or 5 last season, iirc, but he has played more often as a right sided 4 in the Championship. As for Jags, I wouldn't pencil in a 40 year old as being anywhere near the top of the depth chart, but that's just me :-)
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Jun 13, 2022 8:51:56 GMT
Aside from Fulham, Stoke created the most xG from corners in 2021/22. We also ranked 5th in creating xG from non corner, set pieces.
45% of Flint's Championship xG comes from corners and another 20% from non corner set pieces.
If you are looking for a plug and play way to boost scoring as a spin-off from another acquisition, this is probably as good as it gets.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Jun 11, 2022 11:16:25 GMT
Speed can be an issue depending on the system though, surely? And depending on the make-up of your defence? Sure, but you set up to mitigate any perceived weakness, either by having alternative speed in the backline, more numbers, work on likely starting positions or press the passing source. That's why there's next to no correlation between high intensity speed values and defensive performance. But the bottom line is no-one here knows AF's high intensity splits are anyway and opinion on fansites is subjective at best or in some cases (not yours) wilfuly argumentative. I trust Stoke have a fair idea, though.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Jun 11, 2022 10:15:03 GMT
Why so negative? Centre havles are in their prime in their 30s. Maybe even 40s for Jags. Hes got a great goal scoring record. He's a massive presence. He's undoubtedly better than Chester and Harwood-Bellis. tachyon rates him as top 5 centre halves in the Championship. Turn that frown upside down. I think that infogol ranking will largely be based on getting points for every clearance, header, block etc - although I'd be interested in Tachyon explaining how the metric is arrived at, which may give more cause for optimism. And because they did a lot of defending, and were set up deep to defend, he had a lot of work to do and did lots of defensive actions. The goals will help too maybe? Suppose it depends on what we ask him to do. But big lack of pace, and not being good on the ball don't immediately mark him out as an obvious fit for the way we've been attempting to play over the last 2 seasons. Warning. A bit long. Flint's attacking contribution. On average, a centre back brings around 0.04 xG per 90 to a game. Flint's Championship career figures way outstrips this. Career-wise it is 0.13 xG per 90 and 0.15 xG per 90 in 2021/22 only. The defensive/progressive "on the ball" actions are valued as a gain or loss of probability that a goal will be scored from the position of the field where the ball is won/lost/progressed. He stopped a lot of dangerous situations from continuing. But Cardiff allowed 68 goals in 202122!!True, they were the equal 6th worst team for conceding goals. But allowing goals has a chain of events. The defense (mainly) allows attempts on goal, the opposing attack gets the attempt on target (or not), with varying degrees of save difficulty and the keeper saves those goal bound attempts (or not). Cardiff (and Flint) did really quite well at restricting the location based goal attempts of the opposition. They allowed chances worth just 56.2 xG in their 46 games (Flint played 3518 minutes of those games). That was the 9th BEST in the Championship. It when wrong for Cardiff when the opposition hit the corners slightly better than expected, but their keepers were also dreadful. OK I know Smithies won the players player of the year, but he was an extremely poor shot stopper. He allowed around 6 more goals than expected. Maybe he organised the social events. Phillips was even worse, allowing 5 more goals from 27 fewer shots on target. Terrible shot stopping absolves Flint & his colleagues from apparently poor defensive play. Where's he fit in at Stoke.He's played around 60% of his Championship games as right of a back four, with a fairly normal line height. Last season he played mostly as the center of a back three or five and Cardiff kept a line that was a couple of yards deeper than his historical average positioning. He has played a much higher line in the past and he has also played predominately as a right sided (even wide) defender in a four in his final BC season. His main skillset is aerial dominance in both penalty areas, but his passing (as I've said) isn't that good. He shuns short passing, passing in his own half and is below average for completion once difficulty of pass is factored in. He goes long more than average (may be due to instructions), but he's also not particularly accurate with those passes either. So people will have to second guess where and how MON will use him. Just because a player doesn't appear to be good at on aspect of play in one team, it doesn't mean he never will be in a different set up. Rubbish already being peddled on this site. He's slow. Does speed (or lack of it) correlate to poor performance? Answer "No". "Reports seem to make Flint out as a mistake machine" Third hand hersay, wait until it actually happens, it hasn't yet in 258 Championship matches.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Jun 10, 2022 9:12:11 GMT
He's got an hilarious shot map, nearly every Championship goal he's scored has been in or immediately around the six yard box. Orange blob is where his goals were scored from. 0.13 xG/90, which is decent for a defender. 0.12 xG per attempt, which are also reasonable high quality chances. 77% of his chances come from set pieces or corners and 72% are headers. Defensively, he's a very good "blocks, clearances (in the air obviously) and interceptions" type of defender. Passing isn't a strength. Tends to go long and get rid, not the best knocking it around in his own half, but doesn't try to. The "got a mistake in him" narrative that the usuals have jumped all over, is typical fan hyperbole. He's made a mistake that's led directly to a goal once every 52 full games & he's given away a penalty once every 70 full games. Plays centre right of a back 4. He's 33 in a month, but defenders have an ageing curve than peaks later than other positions. We ranked him in the top five for Championship central defenders in 202122.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Jun 8, 2022 14:15:57 GMT
U21 representation is no guarantee of international progression. Two thirds of all players who are capped at U21 level never make a full England appearance. 70% of U21 capped keepers fail to represent England at senior level. Just under 60% of U21 capped keepers become Championship level regulars and only 30% become PL regulars. Does the number of caps won at U21 level affect the above? It feels that a player earning 10+ caps at that level should have a better chance of a successful career than someone winning 1 or 2 caps. (A 10+ caps player will have been around the squad for a couple of years, whereas a 1 or 2 cap player might just have been the "next cab off the rank" when the first choice players are not available, for whatever reason.) Is that something that the stats show or is there no difference? Yes, more caps does imply a greater likelihood of going onto full honours. Of the 50 players with the least caps, (allowing for a gap for them to come out of the age range), around 15% got at least one full cap. That compares with 40% of those 50 with the most caps going onto full honours. (Still 60% didn't).
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Jun 8, 2022 12:49:46 GMT
U21 representation is no guarantee of international progression.
Two thirds of all players who are capped at U21 level never make a full England appearance.
70% of U21 capped keepers fail to represent England at senior level.
Just under 60% of U21 capped keepers become Championship level regulars and only 30% become PL regulars.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Jun 7, 2022 19:14:57 GMT
No one has taken much notice of assist stats for about a decade.
It's outcome over process. Very bad practice.
Instead use expected assists per 90 at the very least, based on the quality of the opportunity created.
xG added by progressing the ball is another alternative because it shows which players are important in getting the ball into dangerous positions.
Tymon's tops Stoke's open play xA per 90, creates our highest quality chances, creates five open play chances every four games, creates three chances from crosses every four games and tops our ball progression per 90.
He's created open play chance quality that is equivalent to around seven assists this season and his crosses hit the sweet spot in the box more often than any other player.
He's been the major contributor to our open play creativity by a country mile.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 29, 2022 10:06:16 GMT
They teamed up with a stats company called SISports a while ago and implemented xG into the game, however it is calculated slightly differently than the real life xG as Jacobson wasn't happy with how the real life stats people calculate it. I wouldn't be surprised if that crosses over into real life and they change the way xG is used. FM borrowed the xG concept from football analytics. They tweaked it to enhance the game's playability. The direction of travel is analytics to FM. It won't ever be the other way around :-)
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 27, 2022 12:07:36 GMT
From 2014 to relegation, both Begovic and Butland were well above average shot stoppers.
Lee Grant wasn't quite up to their standard, but he was still better than the Premier League average and was exceptional in the first 40 or so shots on target he faced for Stoke.
Given our recent alternatives to Butland were Given (very poor, but past it) and Haugaard (just terrible, 11 goals allowed from just 5.4 xG2 for Stoke), it's demonstrably true that Lee Grant kept Stoke in the Premier League in 2016-17.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 26, 2022 14:33:47 GMT
Apart from the 3568 minutes of Championship football in 19/20 alone at Barnsley, the 1.4 chances created for team mates per full game, the 0.22 xG per full game and the 2.1 attempts on goal per full game. If you set that kind of benchmark, you get opportunities. And if from 0 games you have 0 xG this is seen as a personal fault apparently. Like it couldn't possibly be the club's coaching policy that is wrong... Brown vs Porter is a false equivalence.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 25, 2022 18:20:04 GMT
Not many saw much purpose to Jacob when he arrived Apart from the 3568 minutes of Championship football in 19/20 alone at Barnsley, the 1.4 chances created for team mates per full game, the 0.22 xG per full game and the 2.1 attempts on goal per full game. If you set that kind of benchmark, you get opportunities.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 21, 2022 6:50:36 GMT
And that just proves data is bollocks Please elaborate.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 21, 2022 6:46:21 GMT
I think this is from before a lot of the data might have been available, but what happened with Delap's long throws, both offensively and defensively? Offensively, we seemed to go from an all-out melee of bodies and runs (see Ryan's goal vs Middlesbrough with Mama holding off three defenders) to all of our attacking players standing completely motionless while they waited for the ball. Presumably there was a logic to this? I'm also guessing that the perceived crappiness of this approach was as much down to teams finding a more effective way to defend against them as a unit? I'm also also guessing that even when we stopped scoring as many from them, we stuck by them because they were more likely to produce further set plays than normal throws. Stoke created 50+ attempts on goal and scored 8 goals from Delap's throws in the first PL season. Those numbers gradually declined as the opposition saw more of the tactic (flat throws, speed, unusual trajectory). Even Arsenal managed to find a way to defend it. The longthrow influence made it to a wider audience & highlighted the importance of set pieces, overall as a "cheap" source of goals. The Brentford lads took it to Denmark & won the title with a lot of help from long throws at MFC and set play construction/defensive recognition/route running etc remains a key goals ingredient for their customers. There's still some set play goals aren't real goals snobbery in favour of open play chance creation, but they count the same.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 20, 2022 15:25:28 GMT
I was watching a game a couple of weeks ago where the near post defender dropped back and cleared the ball off the line and this thread got me wondering whether it was one of those occasions when I remembered the 1 time it worked but forgot the 9 where it didn't. (I guess a bit like we all remember Ben Wilmot smashing one into the top corner from 35 yards but tend to forget that most 35 yarders tend to take out some poor bloke sitting in Row 20). Lol, data analysts = anecdote slayer
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 20, 2022 8:36:08 GMT
That expands on what I heard 10+ years ago when a manager (probably TP) was asked in one of those long end or pre season interviews to explain the reasoning behind bringing everyone back for corners. Presume all the last 10 years have done is to provide plenty more data to support. I would suggest that you keep a copy of your reply handy ready to paste in the thread for the next time that the usual suspect comes on and says he doesn't know why teams bring everyone back for corners. He has been saying the same thing for the last 5+ years, despite being basically told what you have said, so I assume he will be back sometime next season. The one question I would ask would be whether the introduction of VAR in the Premier League has provided any workable stats to show whether there is any benefit for the defender marking space at the near post dropping back onto the line if the ball is hit deep to/beyond the far post as against holding the line, or pushing out? (Is catching an attacker offside more likely than the defender clearing any knock back or looped header?) That's a great point. The offside line from 2nd balls (if you count the corner as the 1st) is what killed off "men on posts". You not only play everyone onside, you also expand the area to be defended instead of compressing it. The other reason "mops" got dumped was they were a last line of defence that invariable didn't come into play & as a defense you outnumbered yourself by letting 20% of your outfield defensive resources prop up a post. You want active, not passive defenders in a corner situation. Guard the front post space, maybe, but then get the heck out. Problem with VAR is we don't know how many correct/incorrect decision would have been reversed (some teams will have applied VAR to historical footage to see which side of the line the credit/debit currently lies). But I think you still assume offsides and clearing the six yard box for your keeper still trumps any benefit from having defensive bodies in or around the goal line. Data gains you knowledge, with that knowledge you can sensibly reconstruct what might be happening on the pitch, once you better understand what is taking place on the pitch, then you can try to enhance or prevent it. Rinse/repeat from the past, with little or no foundation is no longer an option (unless you want a co-commentator gig on Jaurassic TV). Standing on a post got you a good view of your team conceding, nothing more & the same's true for leaving men up top.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 19, 2022 8:04:31 GMT
Data analysis, virtually overnight, killed off perceived old school football "wisdom", such as leaving players up and having men on posts. These two "strategies" were, at best, nonsense and at worst positively suicidal.
"Men on posts" concede an eyewatering 35% more goals than not having men on posts. And it was only when data pointed this out that the reasons (which "football men" had missed for years) became blindingly obvious.
I'm sure I don't have to point out the two major design flaws that made this tactic such a dreadful idea in the first place ;-).
It's not 1990 anymore.
Next, leaving men upfield also tips defensive corner strategy towards the foolhardy.
You defend corners by denying space. You defend space by occupying it. You occupy it by having bodies. Further, if you're going to have a hybrid zonal/man marking strategy you need bodies.
Common denominator here is having as many players in and immediately around your penalty area, not isolated 40 yards away.
There are much better ways to retain clearances and perhaps counter attack based around supported players picking up cleared balls closer to your own goal.
Attacking teams have gotten ever so smart at creating from corners by emulating the master of misdirection/dark arts etc (Pulis) and it's only in the last three or four seasons that the quality and quantity of chances created from corner kicks has finally started to fall.
But that has needed an acknowledgement that sticking players on the halfway line is from a bygone age of data ignorance.
Historically, around 3% of goals come from corner situations for the attacking side, just 0.7% from counters by the corner allowing team after defending one.
Good luck trying to squeeze more out of that 0.7% at the expense of an already dangerous 3%. Rather than eating into the much larger 3% by becoming more secure defensvely thru wrangling the attackers into submission. (again as per Pulis).
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 17, 2022 9:13:58 GMT
Pulis CornersForgot to add, Pulis was a corner guru at Stoke and at his subsequent clubs.The 16/17 WBA team scored from 10% of their corners. WHICH IS JUST ASTONISHING!
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 17, 2022 8:12:36 GMT
Short corners are more efficient than long ones. Creating more goal attempts, expected and actual goals.
But it's a biased sample consisting of teams with the skill set and pre preparation to create from short corners. So you have to bring it from the practice pitch & have players to implement any routines.
There's still a fair bit of juice to be extracted from corners, the productivity differential between the best and worst is significant. Overall scoring rates from set plays, in general, exceeds that from open play.
We've been very good, both offensively and defensively from corners this season.
For long corners the Maguire/O'Callaghan routine remains the best option. Anything that diverts the flight of the ball improves your chances of scoring and in swinging > out swinging.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 13, 2022 11:27:31 GMT
Here's the shot stopping crib sheets we use to write about a keeper's shot stopping qualities. It's 20 shot rolling averages for goals allowed compared to the difficulty of the shots/headers faced. It's then heavily smoothed to get a trendline. Above the line, a keeper is on a run where he has saved more than expected, below the line an he's allowed more goals than expected. Distance from the zero line shows how extreme his performance has been. Length of the plot corresponds how many on target attempts each keeper has faced (these are all for Stoke, not their previous/future clubs). Last time we had a prolonged bout of over performance was Sept 2018 to March 2019. (Jack Butland). It's been treading water or slightly drowning since then.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 9, 2022 7:08:35 GMT
Doing the end of season stock taking, so here are the performance ratings of the Championship midfielders. View AttachmentNominal positions at their most fluid here. I haven't sorted out those who've barely played any minutes. Much prefer the BWR color scheme. It really frustrates me to see red and green in any graphic nowadays. What do the scores relate to, ORs on the likelihood of them being in a winning side? It’s hard for me to draw anything from that without any idea about the model. Does it take into account the relative position of the midfielder (8, 10 etc). Each player gets credit/debit for every action they've been involved in during the season and how it impacts on the change in the likelihood that the team scores/concedes a goal compared to where the ball was and who had it immediately prior to the event. So you've got net positive or negative scores in a variety of categories which you can take a more granular look at a player's strengths or weaknesses. (Aerial duel, forward passes, ball recoveries etc) These are amalgamated into a single score for convenience of presentation. The actual scores are standard scores for each position (so midfielders are calculated against other midfielders and so on, they are also subdivided into defensive/attacking/central mids etc). The final score incorporates the standard deviation of the scores for each position, so a score of zero is an average score for that position and it makes comparisons between different positions and seasons easier. Mitrovic is therefore 3.71 standard deviations better than par. Sorry about the colour blind unfriendly scheme. My bad.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 8, 2022 17:54:37 GMT
Doing the end of season stock taking, so here are the performance ratings of the Championship midfielders. Attachment DeletedNominal positions at their most fluid here. I haven't sorted out those who've barely played any minutes.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 8, 2022 14:00:24 GMT
How strange that our attacking and defensive record from corners is one of the best in the league. Last two seasons, we've taken roughly as many as we've faced, yet, respectively in 20/21 and 21/22 we've created a net 24% and 30% more scoring opportunities from corners compared to our concession numbers. We've created a net positive 60% & 65% more xG from corner situations and the quality of the chances we've created is 30% higher than those we've allowed. Training ground work paying off big time, fan wisdom, not so much. created but not scored The former matters much more than the latter in the long run.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 8, 2022 10:34:10 GMT
How strange that our attacking and defensive record from corners is one of the best in the league.
Last two seasons, we've taken roughly as many as we've faced, yet, respectively in 20/21 and 21/22 we've created a net 24% and 30% more scoring opportunities from corners compared to our concession numbers.
We've created a net positive 60% & 65% more xG from corner situations and the quality of the chances we've created is 30% higher than those we've allowed.
Training ground work paying off big time, fan wisdom, not so much.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 8, 2022 9:04:23 GMT
As we're clearly in the market for some full back/wingbacks, here's our 2021/22 Championship ratings for those positions. Again, some have played very few mins, some play in a variety of positions. View Attachment* denotes right sided. How can you differentiate between how good a player is in a position versus the benefit of the team they play in? Sheff Utd have a lot of full backs that appear decent and that may be the case, or it may be the team deliberately looks to use them more. Another Barnsley player, Callum Brittain could be achievable. It's a good point. Firstly you assume better players play for better teams in a relatively free market. This is a first sweep based on what a player has been asked to do and it's just this season. You need to build up a profile. So you then look into role within the team, team system, how he's performed against his peers within the team, etc. Stand out, bad or good seasons are the most interesting. Wonder why Sawyers hasn't particularly impressed at Stoke, especially in a deeper role, when his career high was in 2018/19 playing a deep lying role at Brentford. It's because at Brentford 2018/19 he hovered up all the stray balls in the middle of the park. That's not been the case at Stoke, probably because as a side we haven't generated those opportunities for him. All those loose balls Sawyers picked up fuelled his passes, but they've declined as well. It's become an ugly, vicious circle, not really of his making, but it's not because he can't be used playing deeper. There's two main ways to evaluate player performance, top down, where you look at the team's overall performance in a game and then see who played & distribute credit and a bottom up method whereby you value every individual on field action. (That's the one I've used for the Infogol player ratings). Then you look at efficiency figures, rather than raw numbers. Winning three tackles a game is opportunity and team quality based, but winning 60% of tackles when the overall average for your position is only 56% is more talent based. It's a huge topic, that quickly needs a specialist, position and role based approach and a data based input is essential.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 8, 2022 6:58:30 GMT
As we're clearly in the market for some full back/wingbacks, here's our 2021/22 Championship ratings for those positions. Again, some have played very few mins, some play in a variety of positions. Attachment Deleted* denotes right sided.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 8, 2022 6:53:30 GMT
Surprised to see the number of ex premier league strikers in the red zone. Age does for strikers quicker than any other position. Those that do keep going into their 30's so their useful production quickly tail off.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 7, 2022 9:27:10 GMT
With my analysts hat on. Clarke-Harris is 27 and 300 days, which is at the top end of peak & near to the start of a striker's ageing phase. Before this season he hadn't played at Championship level since 2016/17, when he barely played for a relegated team. Biggest red flag is his penalty scoring record. It has contributed 2, 4, 7, 5 since 2018/19, He's only scored 6 non penalty goals in 32.5 full games this season or 0.18 per 90. Here's our ratings for Championship strikers from this season. Caveat, some have played very few minutes and Opta's definition of a striker can be fluid. View Attachment Based off this, what’s your opinion on Maja? Here's what I wrote on the Maja thread. Maja's shot profile in a variety of leagues (PL Ligue1 Champ)
Attachment Deleted
Overall 0.29 non penalty xG per full game (a NP expected goal every 3.5 games).
0.16 xG per goal attempt (so, high quality chances, likes the six yard box).
Average of 1.8 attempts per game.
Not done so well at Stoke (service probably an issue).
Here he's got on the end of an expected goal every five full games, at roughly the same quality of chances, but fewer attempts per full game (just 1.2).
Stylistically, he's poor in the air. Doesn't get involved in many aerial duels and only wins a quarter of the ones he does. (average success rate for his position is just over 40%)
Passing wise, he gets more involved in passes in his own half than the average for forwards and is above average for completion, not a liability in his own half. Likes a backwards pass (14% more frequently than average for his position) So brings in midfield runners from deep and does it at above average efficiency.
A smaller percentage of his passes are forward ones compared to his position and that's a career trait.
Doesn't carry the ball much, but is more difficult to shift off it than average when he does.
Not yet in his prime, still a young talent at 23 & 100 or so days.
Last line sums him up. He's been underwhelming at Stoke, but he a better bet than the Posh guy.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 7, 2022 9:11:15 GMT
With my analysts hat on. Clarke-Harris is 27 and 300 days, which is at the top end of peak & near to the start of a striker's ageing phase. Before this season he hadn't played at Championship level since 2016/17, when he barely played for a relegated team. Biggest red flag is his penalty scoring record. It has contributed 2, 4, 7, 5 since 2018/19, He's only scored 6 non penalty goals in 32.5 full games this season or 0.18 per 90. Here's our ratings for Championship strikers from this season. Caveat, some have played very few minutes and Opta's definition of a striker can be fluid. View Attachment Jury out then? And given Posh would be asking for at least £5m he doesn't scream go get him His age profile isn't good, he's had a few peak years to make the jump to the Championship (and he hasn't). His non penalty xG per 90 is at Steven Fletcher levels (around 0.28). He's only scored at the rate of 0.18 non pen goals per 90 (if you look at this season's shot map he's left some good quality chances on the table, the big blue circles), so there is the potential to get an undervalued asset. Attachment DeletedBut the five penalty goals muddies the negotiating stance. He can be marketed as an 11 goal striker. Haven't looked at the rest of his game, but he comes out at just a below average striker on our combined rating, which includes all the other footballing stuff a player does outside of goal scoring. I'd say avoid, esp as the price is likely to be inflated, rather than in the value for money range.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on May 7, 2022 8:40:00 GMT
Unless someone got the game time he has season and had the chances to score goals. It's true another player would have taken Brown's game time, but it is not a given that they would have had the same number & quality of chances to score. That comes from the talent of the striker to find space and anticipate where the ball and defenders will go. It is by far the most important quality for a striker and Brown has been excellent in that regard this season. His ability to get onto goal scoring chances has been 30% better than the combined rate of all our other scoring threats and his conversion rate has been 40% better than our other potential scorers. He's been head and shoulders our best player in 2021/22. He's shown great football awareness and he's been "clinical", which is so revered by the fans.
|
|