10 | Jack Grealish - 2022/23 Performances

[Keeper!]

That is completely wrong in every way possible.

Apologies Keeper I normally like your posts but you are way out of your depth on this one. I’d move on if I were you!

I don’t want to sound patronising but you need to read up on it before going further imho!

No problem all about opinions, but the definition of the word expected contradicts the reality.

 

[Cobwebcat]

No problem all about opinions, but the definition of the word expected contradicts the reality.

Expected goals are a better predictor of future results than goals themselves.

It hasnt been opinion for about 15 years.. it’s fact.

I won’t change your mind nor do I want to and I’m guessing you don’t want to read about it so I’ll leave it there!

 

[Agueroooo9320]

it's a ridiculous and pointless stat that has no relevance to a football match.

this a ridiculous and pointless suggestion by you. Grealish put it on a plate for Haaland twice in two matches don't you think that counts for anything and should be quantified

 

[Keeper!]

this a ridiculous and pointless suggestion by you. Grealish put it on a plate for Haaland twice in two matches don't you think that counts for anything and should be quantified

Did we score?

What was the final result?

So what difference does expected goal make to anything?

Or do you now get extra points for expected goals?

 

[Lauz9888]

Did we score?

What was the final result?

So what difference does expected goal make to anything?

Or do you now get extra points for expected goals?

Expected goals gives you an idea of the amount and quality of chances you're having.

In one match, no, expected goals doesn't really mean much. Because actual goals are what counts.

But taken over several games or a season, it can tell you certain things about players.

A player with a high xG who isn't scoring just needs to keep doing what they're doing in terms of positioning and decision-making and focus on honing their finishing and the goals will absolutely come.

A player with a low xG who's scoring more than expected is either on a lucky streak that's bound to come crashing to a halt, or is a top finisher who needs to be pushed up into more threatening positions when the team needs a goal (you can work out which just by seeing for how long and to what extent they're exceeding xG).

Example. https://understat.com/team/Manchester_City/2021

Last season,
Sterling's xG was 15.78. He scored 13. Shots per 90 were 2.46.
Mahrez's xG was 10.12. He scored 11. Shots per 90 were 3.74.
KDB's xG was 5.95. He scored 15. Shots per 90 were 3.17.
Grealish's xG was 5.53. He scored 3. Shots per 90 were 2.05.

That tells you, if you didn't know it already, that:

Sterling gets into a bunch of great shooting positions, is a decent finisher but misses a few relatively easy chances.

Mahrez takes a lot of shots, often from reasonable goalscoring positions, and he scores from them a little more often than expected.

De Bruyne's a huge danger from unlikely distances or angles. He tries shots when others wouldn't, and scores from difficult shots way more than most players would.

It also tells you that if we're expecting Grealish to be a big goalscorer, we need to make multiple changes. He needs to shoot more often, from positions more likely to result in a goal, and he needs to work on his finishing too. I think that fits with what we've seen on the pitch - he's absolutely capable of good finishing, but inconsistent, and too many of his shots are too central or too easily read.

Having the numbers to back it up makes it more concrete, and makes improvement easier to track.

His last season at Villa, he scored 6 goals from 5.19 xG and 2.06 shots per 90. So he's shooting the same amount, from slightly better positions, but scored half as many. So what's the difference between him at Villa in 20/21 vs City in 21/22?

I'd suggest a combination of facing more congested defences and a little bit of a mental block resulting from his difficulties settling and the high expectations. Neither are insurmountable.

I believe we can get him scoring 5-10 with minor tweaks to his game and his confidence. More than that would require a bigger overhaul, and I'm not sure that's what we bought him for.

 

[CPPSC]

Expected goals gives you an idea of the amount and quality of chances you're having.

In one match, no, expected goals doesn't really mean much. Because actual goals are what counts.

But taken over several games or a season, it can tell you certain things about players.

A player with a high xG who isn't scoring just needs to keep doing what they're doing in terms of positioning and decision-making and focus on honing their finishing and the goals will absolutely come.

A player with a low xG who's scoring more than expected is either on a lucky streak that's bound to come crashing to a halt, or is a top finisher who needs to be pushed up into more threatening positions when the team needs a goal (you can work out which just by seeing for how long and to what extent they're exceeding xG).

Example. https://understat.com/team/Manchester_City/2021

Last season,
Sterling's xG was 15.78. He scored 13. Shots per 90 were 2.46.
Mahrez's xG was 10.12. He scored 11. Shots per 90 were 3.74.
KDB's xG was 5.95. He scored 15. Shots per 90 were 3.17.
Grealish's xG was 5.53. He scored 3. Shots per 90 were 2.05.

That tells you, if you didn't know it already, that:

Sterling gets into a bunch of great shooting positions, is a decent finisher but misses a few relatively easy chances.

Mahrez takes a lot of shots, often from reasonable goalscoring positions, and he scores from them a little more often than expected.

De Bruyne's a huge danger from unlikely distances or angles. He tries shots when others wouldn't, and scores from difficult shots way more than most players would.

It also tells you that if we're expecting Grealish to be a big goalscorer, we need to make multiple changes. He needs to shoot more often, from positions more likely to result in a goal, and he needs to work on his finishing too. I think that fits with what we've seen on the pitch - he's absolutely capable of good finishing, but inconsistent, and too many of his shots are too central or too easily read.

Having the numbers to back it up makes it more concrete, and makes improvement easier to track.

His last season at Villa, he scored 6 goals from 5.19 xG and 2.06 shots per 90. So he's shooting the same amount, from slightly better positions, but scored half as many. So what's the difference between him at Villa in 20/21 vs City in 21/22?

I'd suggest a combination of facing more congested defences and a little bit of a mental block resulting from his difficulties settling and the high expectations. Neither are insurmountable.

I believe we can get him scoring 5-10 with minor tweaks to his game and his confidence. More than that would require a bigger overhaul, and I'm not sure that's what we bought him for.

Thanks for the clear explanation as I’m a foc and didn’t have a clue what everyone was on about.

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

Did we score?

What was the final result?

So what difference does expected goal make to anything?

Or do you now get extra points for expected goals?

People have said things like "we should have won 4-0 given the chances we created" or "if we had a striker who could score we'd be top of the league now" or variations. Managers and players have always implicitly read the game that way, knowing that a poor result or two is fine is fine if you're limiting chances and creating your own. This is just a way of quantifying that.

 

[Maly]

Expected goals gives you an idea of the amount and quality of chances you're having.

In one match, no, expected goals doesn't really mean much. Because actual goals are what counts.

But taken over several games or a season, it can tell you certain things about players.

A player with a high xG who isn't scoring just needs to keep doing what they're doing in terms of positioning and decision-making and focus on honing their finishing and the goals will absolutely come.

A player with a low xG who's scoring more than expected is either on a lucky streak that's bound to come crashing to a halt, or is a top finisher who needs to be pushed up into more threatening positions when the team needs a goal (you can work out which just by seeing for how long and to what extent they're exceeding xG).

Example. https://understat.com/team/Manchester_City/2021

Last season,
Sterling's xG was 15.78. He scored 13. Shots per 90 were 2.46.
Mahrez's xG was 10.12. He scored 11. Shots per 90 were 3.74.
KDB's xG was 5.95. He scored 15. Shots per 90 were 3.17.
Grealish's xG was 5.53. He scored 3. Shots per 90 were 2.05.

That tells you, if you didn't know it already, that:

Sterling gets into a bunch of great shooting positions, is a decent finisher but misses a few relatively easy chances.

Mahrez takes a lot of shots, often from reasonable goalscoring positions, and he scores from them a little more often than expected.

De Bruyne's a huge danger from unlikely distances or angles. He tries shots when others wouldn't, and scores from difficult shots way more than most players would.

It also tells you that if we're expecting Grealish to be a big goalscorer, we need to make multiple changes. He needs to shoot more often, from positions more likely to result in a goal, and he needs to work on his finishing too. I think that fits with what we've seen on the pitch - he's absolutely capable of good finishing, but inconsistent, and too many of his shots are too central or too easily read.

Having the numbers to back it up makes it more concrete, and makes improvement easier to track.

His last season at Villa, he scored 6 goals from 5.19 xG and 2.06 shots per 90. So he's shooting the same amount, from slightly better positions, but scored half as many. So what's the difference between him at Villa in 20/21 vs City in 21/22?

I'd suggest a combination of facing more congested defences and a little bit of a mental block resulting from his difficulties settling and the high expectations. Neither are insurmountable.

I believe we can get him scoring 5-10 with minor tweaks to his game and his confidence. More than that would require a bigger overhaul, and I'm not sure that's what we bought him for.

What a fantastic, well researched & succinct posts

 

[WallyA]

He will pair extremely well with Sergio Gomez and gives us more options for combinations.

For example:

1) Play Gomez LB and Grealish LW in a 4231. This can then tilt on the left to let Gomez play like LM and Grealish to play in the half space to be more effective. Probably want a midfield 2 in this situation of Rodri and Bernie/Phillips, so the attack becomes a 3241.

OR

2) Like we saw recently, We pair Cancelo and Foden together and could do the exact same as above to tilt Cancelo wide and Foden inside, or what Pep did was have Cancelo play inverted and keep Foden wide (since he's left footed he's much better than Grealish imo for this). Cancelo is extremely flexible like this, but is best paired with Foden imo.

Now that I think about it, Gomez could probably play inverted too (and be compatible with Foden as well) considering he has midfielder-like instincts, but the idea of playing wide and/or inside as a fullback will need time to develop in him and perhaps Pep will rather have him learn the wide part first before having him mix it up.

 

[01cravend]

Injured?