Stats, xG, etc.

[paul_e]

It's very easy to ignore if you don't like it. I'd imagine scouts and managers use it to some degree, along with numerous other stats and then the more traditional method of actually watching players once they have identified targets more specifically.

This is it. It's clearly a stat which has some uses, but almost never tells the whole story and certainly never in isolation. Like any metric, in fact.

... and the people who made it, along with the people thy made it for, are all aware of all of those limitations.

[German James]

It's very easy to ignore if you don't like it. I'd imagine scouts and managers use it to some degree, along with numerous other stats and then the more traditional method of actually watching players once they have identified targets more specifically.

This is it. It's clearly a stat which has some uses, but almost never tells the whole story and certainly never in isolation. Like any metric, in fact.

... and the people who made it, along with the people thy made it for, are all aware of all of those limitations.

Fair enough. Why is it suddenly "a thing"?

[Monty]

It's very easy to ignore if you don't like it. I'd imagine scouts and managers use it to some degree, along with numerous other stats and then the more traditional method of actually watching players once they have identified targets more specifically.

This is it. It's clearly a stat which has some uses, but almost never tells the whole story and certainly never in isolation. Like any metric, in fact.

... and the people who made it, along with the people thy made it for, are all aware of all of those limitations.

Fair enough. Why is it suddenly "a thing"?

Podcast twats, mostly.

[paul_e]

Yep, it became part of the opta stat pack and people who didn't really understand it started acting like it was the greatest stat ever and basing their entire output on it.

[German James]

Got it! Thanks. I expect it will blow over.

[lovejoy]

I also think some xG measures accumulate shorting the same phase of attack thereby inflating the xG regardless of the fact that you couldn’t score twice in the same move.

[Chris Harte]

I also think some xG measures accumulate shorting the same phase of attack thereby inflating the xG regardless of the fact that you couldn’t score twice in the same move.

I think there was an example of that recently involving Newcastle (possibly against us) where two players tried and failed separately to get on the end of a cross. They each scored something like 0.4 xG. Like you say, it's daft.