Quote Originally Posted by magpie_mania View Post
This is a genuine question - at the end of the season - which would we prefer?

Over-achieving in the xG data and getting promoted.
Under-achieving in the xG data and missing out.

I suppose that over a season, like penalties etc it should even itself out - I'm sure there must be data available to give results. It does seem though that often teams get promoted by winning games when they don't play well.

We obviously need to over-achieve when xG is low and achieve when it's good. I agree though that relying on the first over a long period is simply not sustainable. But is 7 points really that much? It's only winning 2 and drawing 1 you didn't deserve to based on 'fair play'
Don’t shoot the messenger

Joking aside you are of course right, as a fan I just want to see us win games regardless of performance. However, as I’m now entrenched in the football statistics world I do now view the game in a slightly different way.

Ultimately xG and other fair score metrics are essentially there to assist managers and coaches in identifying areas that require improvement, How many people on here during their working lives have had to make changes to the way they work because their company have been recording key performance indicators (KPIs)? It’s the same thing.

One thing is obvious though, performances from an attacking perspective have without doubt improved, unfortunately we need to start taking our chances, do that and the defensive issues won’t matter so much and will become fewer as time progresses.