The 25/26 Stat Topic - “Statistically Terrible, Visually Even Worse”

[Guest]

To repeat something I said in another thread, the quality of "chances" we "create" is abysmal - joint-bottom with Swansea for xG per shot and only QPR and Watford have a higher average shot distance. Interestingly (?) we are top and third for passes into the final third and into the opposition area respectively, but if I were to guess, these passes are almost always played a) after the opposition has had ample time to get bodies behind the ball and b) to players who are consequently double/triple marked and get no support in terms of overlapping or underlapping runs.

 

Some player-specific stuff that I don't think has been mentioned: Fatawu is miles clear on successful take-ons and also leads on progressive carries, progressive passes received and passes into the penalty area. James is top for us and 8th in the division for key passes despite playing less than 500 minutes. Wout Faes has an aerial duel win rate of 35.7%.

[Sly]

3 minutes ago, Guest said:

To repeat something I said in another thread, the quality of "chances" we "create" is abysmal - joint-bottom with Swansea for xG per shot and only QPR and Watford have a higher average shot distance. Interestingly (?) we are top and third for passes into the final third and into the opposition area respectively, but if I were to guess, these passes are almost always played a) after the opposition has had ample time to get bodies behind the ball and b) to players who are consequently double/triple marked and get no support in terms of overlapping or underlapping runs.

 

Some player-specific stuff that I don't think has been mentioned: Fatawu is miles clear on successful take-ons and also leads on progressive carries, progressive passes received and passes into the penalty area. James is top for us and 8th in the division for key passes despite playing less than 500 minutes. Wout Faes has an aerial duel win rate of 35.7%.

Another thing to add on Fatawu is how great his defensive work is. He really does put in a shift.

Ricardo looks very good as well. 

 

Faes looks horrible. Thomas steady. 
 

Vestergaard and looks ok. 

[Stadt]

33 minutes ago, Sly said:

If you look at the underlying for our entire midfield, they sit in the lowest percentiles in the defensive stats. 

It's also the approach. We were shredded away at Preston when we tried to press higher because we were too disjointed and the back line was too slow.

 

Instead of changing the team selection and maintaining the approach, we kept playing a very similar XI and engaged deeper. A less 'talented' but more mobile, transition-y team could work better but Cifuenets doesn't deviate much from his initial approach at all.

 

Daka

 

Mavididi

Ramsey

Fatawu

 

Choudhury

James

 

Aluko

Nelson

Okoli

Ricardo

 

JS

 

 

[AKCJ]

If we look at the goals we've scored, it's no wonder our results have dropped.

 

The only goals we've scored from open play that don't go into the "screamer" category or were handed to us by a defensive error are the Monga goal against PNE, the Ricardo goals against Birmingham and Oxford, the James goal against Wrexham and the Ramsey goal against Portsmouth.

 

5 goals in 12 games in sustainable methods (not a screamer or handed to us on a plate by a defensive mistake).

 

Chance creation is non-existent. When we were last in the Championship Fatawu, KDH and Mavididi created a combined 63 big chances in our 46 games. That translates to about 1.4 big chances per game. 

 

This season, the only players to have registered more than 1 big chance created in the league for us are El Khannouss (3 big chances in 2 games), Ayew (3 in 11), Fatawu (2 in 9) and Choudhury (2 in 8).

[Stadt]

1 hour ago, Guest said:

To repeat something I said in another thread, the quality of "chances" we "create" is abysmal - joint-bottom with Swansea for xG per shot and only QPR and Watford have a higher average shot distance. Interestingly (?) we are top and third for passes into the final third and into the opposition area respectively, but if I were to guess, these passes are almost always played a) after the opposition has had ample time to get bodies behind the ball and b) to players who are consequently double/triple marked and get no support in terms of overlapping or underlapping runs.

 

Some player-specific stuff that I don't think has been mentioned: Fatawu is miles clear on successful take-ons and also leads on progressive carries, progressive passes received and passes into the penalty area. James is top for us and 8th in the division for key passes despite playing less than 500 minutes. Wout Faes has an aerial duel win rate of 35.7%.

Lots of crap throw ins and corners too. We're second for corners 

[Dan]

10 hours ago, Stadt said:

Stolarcyzk is joint top for most post shot xG prevented too. We should be about 15th and it’s a couple of Fatawu screamers propping us up atm

Quite strange how consistently we seem to do this. The whole thing feels cursed. It feels very 2021/22 - where we were utter shit but bailed out by Schmeichel, Maddison, Tielemans, Barnes on a pretty frequrnt basis. Then we replaced Schmeichel with a League Two level goalkeeper and the rest is history.

 

It's like a silent killer that often creeps up on us. Be rubbish but do just enough to make it look like you aren't rubbish, then it hits you before anyone at the club realises it.

 

The early wins might bail us out this season but think I'll have good money on us to drop next year. Nobody at the club will have the foresight to see this as they've already proven.

[SafewayFox]

Come January/February, will any of these stats improve with so many of our “starting 11” leaving in the summer? 
 

Not that we’ll miss any of our underperforming strikers but all three are leaving in the summer.

 

Winks/Soumare are our 1st and 3rd choice CM’s and leaving.

 

Our mis-management at senior level wouldn’t be accepted in any other industry.

.

 

 

Edited 30 October 2025 by SafewayFox

[funkyrobot]

11 hours ago, Stadt said:

Probably not but we don't compare favourably to Midddlesborough, Cov, Bristol City and Millwall who don't have parachute payments or weren't as good as Enzo's team either. Do we have the 10th best squad or 18th best on xGD? Absolutely not.

We haven’t actually been able to use any parachute payments to buy players though due to PSR. I think when you look at the squad decreasing in quality since the summer Enzo joined, now you factor in the complete lack of a striker (a fundamentally key role) or capable left back (all of the teams you’ve listed are better in these positions) and an imbalanced squad in general and then consider long term form and momentum, it’s not a stretch to see we are below the clubs you’ve listed and we are probably closer to 10th in quality than we are 1st . 

[funkyrobot]

6 hours ago, Stadt said:

It's also the approach. We were shredded away at Preston when we tried to press higher because we were too disjointed and the back line was too slow.

 

Instead of changing the team selection and maintaining the approach, we kept playing a very similar XI and engaged deeper. A less 'talented' but more mobile, transition-y team could work better but Cifuenets doesn't deviate much from his initial approach at all.

 

Daka

 

Mavididi

Ramsey

Fatawu

 

Choudhury

James

 

Aluko

Nelson

Okoli

Ricardo

 

JS

 

 

Hamza as 1st choice centre mid and Daka up front. Wow. 

[broughtonblue]

Can someone explain to a 50 year old what xg actually is, and a definition 

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, broughtonblue said:

Can someone explain to a 50 year old what xg actually is, and a definition 

xG tries to measure how likely a shot is to result in a goal, based on a load of different factors like where it was taken from, what sort of pass preceded it, where the defenders/keeper were and so on. If you've got a tap-in on the line under no pressure whatsoever, that shot's got a very high xG, whereas if you're shooting from miles out or the angle is basically impossible, that shot will have a very low xG. We will all have looked at chances and thought "he should really score that", "he could shoot a hundred times from there and it'd only go in once" - xG is just putting a number on it.

 

I think a lot of people instinctively take against it because they see the name and conclude that it's somehow trying to predict how many goals are going to be scored ahead of time - if it were called something like "chance quality" then people would probably be more accepting.

[Dan]

11 hours ago, Sly said:

If you look at the underlying for our entire midfield, they sit in the lowest percentiles in the defensive stats. 

 

10 hours ago, SuperMike said:

.......and aint too great in the creativity stakes!

It's why I'm not particularly fussed about Winks to be honest. He's alright, clearly quite good at the specific thing he does which is ball recycling, but I don't really think it's all that effective. Not a dissimilar player to Papy Mendy - not actually strong defensively and never really going to be a goal threat or creative either.

 

Soumare is a poorer version of this. Skipp is an abomination and completely lost his way as a footballer.

 

Winks has only truly flourished when in the following circumstances: ultra possession manager, comfortably the best squad in the division. Hopeless in the Premier League and average this season. Overrated.

Edited 30 October 2025 by Dan

[Dan]

9 hours ago, Guest said:

To repeat something I said in another thread, the quality of "chances" we "create" is abysmal - joint-bottom with Swansea for xG per shot and only QPR and Watford have a higher average shot distance. Interestingly (?) we are top and third for passes into the final third and into the opposition area respectively, but if I were to guess, these passes are almost always played a) after the opposition has had ample time to get bodies behind the ball and b) to players who are consequently double/triple marked and get no support in terms of overlapping or underlapping runs.

 

Some player-specific stuff that I don't think has been mentioned: Fatawu is miles clear on successful take-ons and also leads on progressive carries, progressive passes received and passes into the penalty area. James is top for us and 8th in the division for key passes despite playing less than 500 minutes. Wout Faes has an aerial duel win rate of 35.7%.

Wout Faes is not a defender. What started as a slightly light hearted thing has become something I'm astounded no coach realises. The bloke is not a centre half and quite clearly a midfielder who for some reason plays in defence.

 

His defensive stats are frankly concerning even for a midfielder!

[funkyrobot]

17 hours ago, Sly said:

Another thing to add on Fatawu is how great his defensive work is. He really does put in a shift.

Ricardo looks very good as well. 

 

Faes looks horrible. Thomas steady. 
 

Vestergaard and looks ok. 

When you say Thomas steady I assume you mean Silko Thomas? Luke has been anything but steady. He’s currently our worse player. 

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Dan said:

Wout Faes is not a defender. What started as a slightly light hearted thing has become something I'm astounded no coach realises. The bloke is not a centre half and quite clearly a midfielder who for some reason plays in defence.

 

His defensive stats are frankly concerning even for a midfielder!

I'm increasingly of this mind too. You think about the essentials you want in a centre back, then you think about which of them he's actually good at, there's basically no overlap. I don't usually like the shouts to move players around the pitch (Barnes to striker, Ndidi to centre back etc.) but anything that gets him further away from our box is worth serious consideration.

[Stadt]

10 minutes ago, Guest said:

I'm increasingly of this mind too. You think about the essentials you want in a centre back, then you think about which of them he's actually good at, there's basically no overlap. I don't usually like the shouts to move players around the pitch (Barnes to striker, Ndidi to centre back etc.) but anything that gets him further away from our box is worth serious consideration.

Admittedly game state tax but he's looked at his best in midfield and wide areas either at RB or the wide CB when chasing games. In the absence of having no real DM aside from Choudhury (Faes is better technically I think) it is worth trying.

[filbertway]

10 hours ago, Dan said:

Wout Faes is not a defender. What started as a slightly light hearted thing has become something I'm astounded no coach realises. The bloke is not a centre half and quite clearly a midfielder who for some reason plays in defence.

 

His defensive stats are frankly concerning even for a midfielder!

Reverse Kisnorbo. That being said, he's not an attacking midfielder that's for sure and his defensive instinct aren't great, also he's never played the position so god knows where he'd end up

 

I'd just leave him out the starting 11 and save him for when we're chasing a goal to cause some chaos.

[Dan]

7 hours ago, Guest said:

I'm increasingly of this mind too. You think about the essentials you want in a centre back, then you think about which of them he's actually good at, there's basically no overlap. I don't usually like the shouts to move players around the pitch (Barnes to striker, Ndidi to centre back etc.) but anything that gets him further away from our box is worth serious consideration.

 

7 hours ago, Stadt said:

Admittedly game state tax but he's looked at his best in midfield and wide areas either at RB or the wide CB when chasing games. In the absence of having no real DM aside from Choudhury (Faes is better technically I think) it is worth trying.

I'm the same, a classic one that often seems to happen with England is X player can play a nice diagonal so must be a midfielder (Rooney, Trent) but Faes is so poor defensively and actually quite a capable footballer (sometimes).

 

There's a world where I read this in a few months and piss myself laughing though.

[Sky Blues]

19 hours ago, Guest said:

xG tries to measure how likely a shot is to result in a goal, based on a load of different factors like where it was taken from, what sort of pass preceded it, where the defenders/keeper were and so on. If you've got a tap-in on the line under no pressure whatsoever, that shot's got a very high xG, whereas if you're shooting from miles out or the angle is basically impossible, that shot will have a very low xG. We will all have looked at chances and thought "he should really score that", "he could shoot a hundred times from there and it'd only go in once" - xG is just putting a number on it.

 

I think a lot of people instinctively take against it because they see the name and conclude that it's somehow trying to predict how many goals are going to be scored ahead of time - if it were called something like "chance quality" then people would probably be more accepting.

When Coventry beat QPR 7-1 earlier in the season they had an xG of 1.11 🤔

[Ric Flair]

On 29/10/2025 at 07:19, Stadt said:

Stolarcyzk is joint top for most post shot xG prevented too. We should be about 15th and it’s a couple of Fatawu screamers propping us up atm

Said this on the other week, read a fair bit of criticism on Stolarczyk for a few perceived mistakes but he is simply been our most important player so far this season, by rights we should be comfortably near the bottom 6.

[Sly]

11 hours ago, funkyrobot said:

When you say Thomas steady I assume you mean Silko Thomas? Luke has been anything but steady. He’s currently our worse player. 

Statistically as fullbacks go on this division, he’s actually in the top 25% for defensive contributions. 

 

He’s a far cry from what we’ve had previously, his limitations that impact the overall team Is actually offensively, as by not venturing forward, he doesn’t generate space for Mavididi or Monga. 

[funkyrobot]

1 hour ago, Sly said:

Statistically as fullbacks go on this division, he’s actually in the top 25% for defensive contributions. 

 

He’s a far cry from what we’ve had previously, his limitations that impact the overall team Is actually offensively, as by not venturing forward, he doesn’t generate space for Mavididi or Monga. 

Thomas has statistically one of the worst tackling records in The Championship this season, he literally barely makes a tackle. On top of that his defensive mistakes led directly to conceding a goal and a penalty in the last match alone. Terrible positioning for one of the goals conceded against Hull too. 

[Vowels]

Downward trajectory since the club ignored the many calls to swap the family stand and kop over.

 

I don't think they realised it was just a case of allocation and not physically moving the bricks, mortar and steels of the structure.

 

Nicky Maynard.

[AKCJ]

13 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Said this on the other week, read a fair bit of criticism on Stolarczyk for a few perceived mistakes but he is simply been our most important player so far this season, by rights we should be comfortably near the bottom 6.

He's a steady goalkeeper that has a howler in him. Bit of a David James type where you won't notice him doing well but you'll notice the massive error that results in a goal.

[slymunn]

On 29/10/2025 at 23:40, Guest said:

xG tries to measure how likely a shot is to result in a goal, based on a load of different factors like where it was taken from, what sort of pass preceded it, where the defenders/keeper were and so on. If you've got a tap-in on the line under no pressure whatsoever, that shot's got a very high xG, whereas if you're shooting from miles out or the angle is basically impossible, that shot will have a very low xG. We will all have looked at chances and thought "he should really score that", "he could shoot a hundred times from there and it'd only go in once" - xG is just putting a number on it.

 

I think a lot of people instinctively take against it because they see the name and conclude that it's somehow trying to predict how many goals are going to be scored ahead of time - if it were called something like "chance quality" then people would probably be more accepting.

That's a great explanation of xG. My only issue is that it cannot account for the level of player who's having the chance. Daka and Soumare's xG is the same as Vardy/Haaland/Ronaldo for the same chance.

But honestly, its no different to the other 'discussions' about amount of shots/corners/possession stats when you don't take the chances either way, just a more modern one to throw into the mix.