This season vs last season....Stat comparison.

[atticusfinch1048]

We could do with regular stats like this so we can compare and also it means we have a basis to shut down those who always look on the bleak side

 

[Scooby Blue]

We didn't play the same ten teams in our first ten games this season to what we did last season.

I'd like to see a direct comparison to the direct same teams we've played. But even then form, injuries, suspensions, officials, time of year, time of day...are all different.

^^ I think this is a polite version of "Stats are useless"

but to answer your question....the same key point still stands if you compare with the equivalent games from last season.

WE ARE CREATING MORE ATTEMPTS ON GOAL THAN LAST SEASON BUT NOT SCORING AS MANY GOALS BECAUSE OF A MUCH LOWER STRIKE RATE.

I can't put it any clearer than that.

 

[Deleted member 14625]

We didn't play the same ten teams in our first ten games this season to what we did last season.

I'd like to see a direct comparison to the direct same teams we've played. But even then form, injuries, suspensions, officials, time of year, time of day...are all different.

^^ I think this is a polite version of "Stats are useless"

but to answer your question....the same key point still stands if you compare with the equivalent games from last season.

WE ARE CREATING MORE ATTEMPTS ON GOAL THAN LAST SEASON BUT NOT SCORING AS MANY GOALS BECAUSE OF A MUCH LOWER STRIKE RATE.

I can't put it any clearer than that.

No no. I think certain stats are essential in an argument. But when comparing one season to another there are so many different aspects that can explain the reasons behind them that it can make them a little redundant.

But yes. Sometimes the ball just comes off the boot slightly wrong or right and hits the back of the net or hits the fans behind the goal. We are creating chances this season and that's a good thing. Maybe it's just a bit if poor finishing form and we'll fight through that and start converting those chances.

I reckon we're goin to give someone a good hiding soon.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Somebody's gonna cop it soon!

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

I think stats are very useful but they have to be handled with care. The press are very selective with the stats they use and nearly always do not compare like with like because they live by creating controversy and stimulating anger, outrage and panic rather than rational thought. So last season City wouldn't win the title because they lacked nerve, experience, team spirit and so on. At one point we were ready to capitulate. Now we're nowhere near as good as we were last season! Mancini out! Guardiola in! Our defence is a shambles!

In fact we're doing OK. We're third, two points off the top and unbeaten. We dominated the game yesterday but missed several, gilt-edged chances. We've now played 10 league games and let in only 9 goals. Four of these were in our first two games, so in the last 8 matches we've let in 5 goals, which is pretty good. In fact, we've let in 1 goal in the last 4. Not bad for a shambles created by a manager who is always "rotating" the back four and fiddling with the formation so that sometimes ther's only a back three. In fact Mancini NEVER rotated the central defenders last season when he had the choice, and the same is true this season. Injury has made a settled central pair impossible.

We have scored "only" 18 league goals so far. As has been pointed out our conversion rate is a disappointing 17%, compared to 44% in our first ten matches last season. I think we have to say that our forwards are not in the form they were last season, but Sergio is back from injury and not yet back to his predatory best, Mario is sadly out of touch and Carlos has lost some of his early form, temporarily I'm sure - only Edin is firing as we might like. The other points to make - and there are two - is that our first ten matches last season were against different teams - a direct comparison with the matches against the same teams last season shows a distinct improvement: and secondly, at the start of last season we were in the form that had us scoring goals at a rate not seen since the 19th century! No team, this season, last season or any other season, has been as good as we were until last November!

The other argument is that we have been "poor" in Europe. Maybe, but very hard to prove. We lost 3-2 in Madrid to two goals in the last 5 minutes - far better than any side did at the Bernabeu in last season's CL! Dortmund must be the in form team in Europe at the moment. The defeat in Amsterdam was disappointing but other sides have lost and will lose there this season. That's why it's the group of death!

 

[Mr Ed (The Stables)]

We didn't play the same ten teams in our first ten games this season to what we did last season.

I'd like to see a direct comparison to the direct same teams we've played. But even then form, injuries, suspensions, officials, time of year, time of day...are all different.

Taking last season's corresponding fixtures we are 4 points better off, we have scored the same amount and conceded two less.

( obviously the newly promoted sides aren't included in this comparison )

If you allocate them we are 2 points better off. So on for a 91 point finish after 10 games!!

 

[Chippy_boy]

Thanks for that.

Can I ask, where did you get these stats from?

I keep a record from bbc sports website (mainly for betting purposes to be honest) and occasionally have to use Sky / guardian website to fill in gaps.

Opta stats are arguably more reliable but you have to pay a subscription fee for some info...and difference in methodologies / accuracy is negligible from freely available info on bbc etc.

For what its worth...the net figures of shots on tgt vs shots conceded is encouraging for Norwich + Aston Villa....but makes pretty grim reading for Sunderland (who are bottom of my league table on this measure).

In any single match (or even run of 2 to 3 matches) luck can obviously be more important than stats....but ultimately if you consistently allow the other team to have more attempts on goal than you are managing yourselves....you are making it very difficult to win football matches.

City are top of my net shots on goal per game league table:
(i.e. average shots on target - average shots conceded)

MCFC : + 5.8
Spurs : + 4.0
Everton: + 3.8
Arsenal: + 2.6
Chelsea: +1.6
Liverpool: + 1.6
Man Utd: + 1.3
... ....
bottom three are:
QPR: - 2.4
Reading: - 3.9
Sunderland: -4.1

My interpretation of above stats is that Everton + Spurs are playing pretty well generally + deserve to be at top end of table.
City should be higher...but clearly need to improve finishing as i said in OP.
Utd are relying on a very high strike rate to win football matches...as they are not creating as many chances as other top teams.
Sunderland have real problems in creating chances + will get sucked into a relegation battle if they don't improve.

I can see value in this sort of analysis, but also serious flaws.

For example, if a team has the most fantastic midfield in the world, but inept strikers, it could be running at +10, and yet still be bottom of the league. Alternatively with a fantastic goalkeeper and the world's most clinical striker, you could be -10 and top of the league.

i.e. your stats take no account of how effective a given side's players are. 2 shots on target per game is absolutely fine if you have Tranny on the end of them. You can draw no comfort from a score of +5.8 if your strikers are generally wasteful (as ours have shown to be). Aguero has squandered chance after chance ever since he arrived and is far from clinical. He scores as many goals as he does because he usually has upteen chances and with a better conversion rate he'd score 60 a season not 30. The same can be said for Tevez, but perhaps to a slightly lesser degree.

Dzeko is more clinical, but doesn't get many chances. Mario somewhere in between.

 

[Richie]

Somebody's gonna cop it soon!

I think we will start to peak sometime around 9th December!

 

[BlueAnorak]

After drawing with West Ham we are only +2 points in like for like games (West Ham replace one of the relegated teams - Wolves if third top replaces the bottom PL club - who we had a 100% record against last season).

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

After drawing with West Ham we are only +2 points in like for like games (West Ham replace one of the relegated teams - Wolves if third top replaces the bottom PL club - who we had a 100% record against last season).

This is where the comparison does become difficult. I suppose we have to substitute our result at Upton Park for last season's at the Reebock, Ewood or Molyneux but this is unsatisfactory. Blackburn were always struggling (to say the least) last season as were Wolves. Bolton got a good win on day one but were flattered greatly by a 3-2 defeat to us on day 2 - after that they got routine thumpings. West Ham, at the moment at least, are in good form and scoring goals at home. Only Arsenal have won there and they were really up for us. A point is disappointing but our performance required much more than those at the relegated clubs last season.