FromPollockToSilva
Well-Known Member
Because he occasionally gets in the way of shots at goal?
He has a lower save percentage than Ederson, so that can't be it
Because he occasionally gets in the way of shots at goal?
Percentage save rate is absolutely useless as a measure of a keeper on its own as it doesn’t take into account the quality of shots faced (xG).It's literally on the last page, there's only 2 keepers in the league with a higher shot percentage save rate
See above.He has a lower save percentage than Ederson, so that can't be it
See above.
Then listen to this:
The goalkeeping blind spot - why is it so hard to measure the performance of keepers?
The Athletic's Michael Cox and Ali Maxwell are joined by our new analytics writer Mark Carey to tackle the thorny issue of how we measure the performance of thapodcasts.apple.com
Shots save percentage is not remotely useless in assessing shot stopping per se.
Whilst I think expected goals is a largely bullshit stat I do agree with the principle of what you're saying that's why in that post I mentioned the fact that ederson actually faces fewer speculative shots than other keepers due to opponents struggling to have any meaningful possession in areas to shoot from.Percentage save rate is absolutely useless as a measure of a keeper on its own as it doesn’t take into account the quality of shots faced (xG).