Topic: "Chances Created" - a glance at the stats

[Number 7]

Very insightful post Cptrios.

The various stats in this thread illustrate that the chances are occurring and the crosses are going, etc, but the goals just aren't happening. There is no question we should have more goals than we have. We've also hit the post/bar 36 times apparently and had half of those gone in we'd be much higher.

When we were analyzing our potential targets last summer it was no secret that the 'chance created' was a huge factor in those eventual purchases. Adam, Downing, Enrique and Henderson all created a hatful of chances last season. The problem of course for us was that we banked on Suarez and Carroll putting them in. I'm sure we'll go after a clinical striker in the summer.

[dumbo]

Perhaps Downing's per game goal return would be better if he was rotated in and out depending on sharpness and fitness like United can afford to do with all of their different options?

Downing has played the majority of his career, and his early time with us as a winger.  He's wide on the left, and only strikes the ball with his left foot.  It would be exceedingly difficult for Downing to score many goals in that role.

We definitely cannot afford to set up a side that has a plan "a" in terms of getting goals, and possibly a plan "b", but when they fail, we fail. Unfortunately, that is how we have been for a long, long time and it has cost us compared to United who have plans "a" to "h" and therefore, not surprisingly, find a way to score a goal when one is needed.

I wouldn't disagree - but our transfer policy last summer was very much 'putting all the eggs in 1 basket'.

id be even more worried if we were signing players based on their goals to games ratio.

it shows they havent been scouted properly

You identify players and scout them.  But if you're playing them in the same formation, in the same area of the pitch then their goal-to-game ratio is a very good idea of how many goals you should expect them to score.

(the players I've mentioned above have a fairly consistent ratio at each club they've played for)

[woof]

I watched the match highlights of the Barca v Chelsea UCL semis. For Barca's goal, when the cross came in, there were at least 3 Barca players running into the goal from 5 yards. Now put that image in your mind and compare that to what we've been doing. Almost every time that Downing or someone else puts a good, dangerous cross in, there is maybe 1 Liverpool player in the box at most. No wonder our poor conversion rate. This "problem" can certainly be rectified on a coaching level. I'm just wondering why Kenny & co don't instruct more players to get in and attack the cross???

Mind boggling that....

[Pistolero]

an amusing, at times accurate if not overly pessimistic view from The Daily Post

http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/sport/liverpool-fc/liverpool-fc-news/2012/04/26/red-watch-liverpool-fc-s-standard-of-finishing-would-leave-bogus-decorators-shamed-99623-30840368/?

[6BigCups]

http://www.eplindex.com/14159/opta-stats-analysis-epl-strikers-reliance-clear-cut-chances.html

Found that piece interesting. It seems that 3 of the worst culprits in the league this season for converting clear cut chances are Suarez, Kuyt and Carroll.

Interesting, though not as if we needed stats to back that up!

[drpepe]

The "almost as good as Rafa's best side" claim is obviously ridiculous at first blush, but when you really think about it, it's not incredibly far-fetched. That's kind of the point of the whole thread; even if you ignore the "chances created" stats and just go with what your own eyes have seen...seriously, in every single match this season (aside from the big loss to Spurs perhaps), there has been at least one, and often many more, "holy crap I can't believe he missed that. He'd have buried it on any other occasion" missed chance. And like I said, with an extra goal per game, we'd be in the title hunt (actually even more in it than I originally said, as I failed to take into account the 5 and 3 points we'd have removed from United's and City's tallies, respectively) and that claim wouldn't look nearly as crazy.

personally, i think this kind of analysis is more down to rred-tinted specs, because i'm sure our opposition could easily say they missed golden opportunities in games against us. I have also never agreed with the 'every game except spurs' argument either - we have been dire in many many games this season. Our league position is fully deserved.

Our defense now, when fully fit, is better than the 2006-2009 Rafa defense. Not by miles, but better.

statistically , or by subjective measure, our current defence is far worse (the 'when fully fit' argument doesn't wash either, because all teams in all seasons will have injuries - we haven't been particularly unlucky this season with that). We averaged 0.7 goals conceded per game in each of the seasons 06-09 and are conceding at a rate of 1.1 /game this season. imo we have seen lots of ridiculous errors which appear to be due to lack of concentration or lack of method.
 

Our wingers are no worse. Suarez would be every bit as good as Torres if he put away all of those near-misses

should have, would have, could have 

Our overall performances are often just as good as they were during those years (we play better in general against the bad teams, I think, than we did) in every way but the actual goalscoring.

not in a million years are our performances as good as 06-09 

And even in midfield, the one area where we're significantly worse - the biggest reason for thinking that is that we had three of the very best players on the planet in Mascherano, Xabi, and Gerrard in his prime. Even if we were producing the same numbers, our innate reaction would be that our midfield wasn't as good as that one. Of course it's not as good right now...but I wonder if we'd feel differently if Lucas hadn't been injured.

more ifs...

i think if the management had managed to anticipate such an injury we'd have been less vulnerable as a team to losing our one and only class DM

[TheoRacle]

i think if the management had managed to anticipate such an injury we'd have been less vulnerable as a team to losing our one and only class DM

Any one got a breakdown of our chances created pre and post Lucas' injury?

[jpr]

Found this excellent reply to Royhendo's Anfield Wrap piece post-West Brom:

Alex Johnson
23 April 2012 at 12:14 pm

Agree that much is good about this team, especially defensively and with Lucas fit. I am not entirely sure that finishing is our biggest issue, and I wonder whether the poor goals/chances created ratio stems from our build-up play.

We certainly create a huge number of chances, but how many of our misses are due to poor finishing? On Sunday we had 28 goal attempts, but only Kuyt’s miss could be counted as a bad miss. Throughout the season, most of our misses fall into the following categories:

- Suarez narrowly misses after creating his own chance after long mazy run / often off balance
- Carroll headed chance from static position
- shots from midfielder blocked by defender in congested penalty area
- speculative shots from players with limited passing options

It seems to me that its the sort of chances we are creating that are the problem, not the finishing itself.

What is also interesting is that we score freely in the cups, and tend to play better in faster-paced, more evenly contested games. Finishing seems not to be an issue in these games.

It seems to me that the problems stem from our build up play. We are composed and patient until we reach the final third, allowing the opposition to organise itself. Then we hit a brick wall and lose our composure rather than continue the patient approach of teasing the opponent out of position, we snatch at a chance, or cross to Carroll (who is either standing still in the penalty area and heavily marked, or not there at all), or we pin our hopes on some single-handed Suarez magic. Effectively we have the worst of all worlds – slow build-up in the middle of the pitch comfort zone, flustered and direct in a congested final third. All of this far more likely to happen in one-sided league game at Anfield against teams outside the top 10.

The problem stems from the 2011 summer recruitment. Individually not bad signings at all, but collectively poor. Enrique, Henderson, Adam, and Downing – the common theme is that they are all sourced from the lower half of the PL table, from teams who do not play patient build-up football against teams who “park the bus”. We should probably not be surprised that these players, when put in the same team together, struggle to find the killer ball, or prefer to pass backwards rather than lose the ball.

Maybe the answer then is to invest in an intelligent midfielder who can sit alongside Lucas, and organise our build-up play. Someone who can spot gaps appearing, dictate the tempo, decide when to be direct, and when to swith the play, and help drag opponents out of position. With a limited transfer budget, perhaps this is the place to invest and invest heavily. I still think that the Carroll/Suarez partnership has a lot to offer, and they have suffered a great deal as a result of our “easy-on-the-eye / easy-on-the-opponents” build-up play.

One of our greatest strengths could be that we can combine the pass and move short passing game with a more direct physical approach. We are a long way off a successful combination here, but we need a brain in the middle of the pitch to combine these approaches effectively, and I suspect that then the finishing would take care of itself.

I agree with Alex that composure and game intelligence are 2 facets that would really improve our overall game.

It’s obvious that our coaching team have worked hard on movement, awareness and intensity to improve our passing game. However, I am of the opinion that the intensity has had an impact on the composure and mentality required in the final third. The game intelligence, decision making and composure required in the final third is very different but not beyond the capabilities of the players we have. To clarify my point I go back the home game against Arsenal, which for me was the defining moment in our league campaign:

1.   Martin Kelly didn’t need to take a swing at the ball in the manner that he did right in front of goal. It’s not that he doesn’t have the ability or technique but merely lacked the composure to make the right call. He should no doubt be forgiven as he is young and will learn with experience.
2.   Dirk Kuyt’s follow-up to the penalty. Again difficult to be critical but in terms of reaction there was a Liverpool player just behind him in a better position to bury the ball. We are talking seconds / milliseconds and in this case an instinctive reaction so again bit harsh but with a little composure we have a different result.
3.   Downing had skinned Sagna on the left and got to the by-line in the penalty area. He only had to compose himself and make a slide rule pass to Suarez’s feet and Schezney had no chance.
4.   Adam breaks through the middle with Henderson breaking on the left. If he spots him and makes the early pass to Henderson, he’s through on goal.

The last 2 are less forgivable. These are relatively experienced players who should have a higher level of game intelligence, composure and accordingly should make better decisions.

You could take the argument that this is the difference between “good” players and world class players. However, even if that is the case you still wouldn’t expect the goals to game ratio be so low for so called good players.

My opinion is where we have worked hard on the intensity of our play it’s often a little “helter skelter” and this is having a negative impact in the final third. I guess it is work-in-progress. I agree that an “Alonsoesque” player who has the game intelligence to control the tempo and a striker with similar intelligence and composure can take this team to another level.

[cptrios]

personally, i think this kind of analysis is more down to rred-tinted specs, because i'm sure our opposition could easily say they missed golden opportunities in games against us.

Honestly I don't disagree enough with most of the points in your post to make any kind of argument. It's sound stuff. But I do think that our "golden opportunities" have clearly outnumbered those of our opponents in nearly every match - bar, off the top of my head, Spurs away, United away, and City away.

Really though, I certainly do have slightly red-tinted glasses on. Not horribly so, but definitely a bit. But is there anything all that wrong with that? I'm not sitting around blindly denying that the team doesn't have big problems, because we do - but I see little point in wallowing in negativity and coming on here every morning to vent my spleen. As a supporter, and a foreign one at that with little opportunity to influence the club, I just don't see why I'd bother diminishing the enjoyment it brings me even further [than our league performance already has] by taking the time to craft purely negative opinions and then post them on here (I'm not accusing you of that, by the way drpepe - just a general thing).

The way I see it, as long as there are positive signs for the future, it makes little sense not to turn most of my attention to those. Of course, it'll be a completely different story if nothing changes next season - but I'd much rather look at those positives through my red-tinted glasses than stare into the middle distance and await our impending relegation.

[FlashingBlade]

Very succinct and intelligent analysis here............as for me, Im more of a " just put your fucking boot through the ball!!" type.

[drpepe]

Honestly I don't disagree enough with most of the points in your post to make any kind of argument. It's sound stuff. But I do think that our "golden opportunities" have clearly outnumbered those of our opponents in nearly every match - bar, off the top of my head, Spurs away, United away, and City away.

Really though, I certainly do have slightly red-tinted glasses on. Not horribly so, but definitely a bit. But is there anything all that wrong with that? I'm not sitting around blindly denying that the team doesn't have big problems, because we do - but I see little point in wallowing in negativity and coming on here every morning to vent my spleen. As a supporter, and a foreign one at that with little opportunity to influence the club, I just don't see why I'd bother diminishing the enjoyment it brings me even further [than our league performance already has] by taking the time to craft purely negative opinions and then post them on here (I'm not accusing you of that, by the way drpepe - just a general thing).

The way I see it, as long as there are positive signs for the future, it makes little sense not to turn most of my attention to those. Of course, it'll be a completely different story if nothing changes next season - but I'd much rather look at those positives through my red-tinted glasses than stare into the middle distance and await our impending relegation.

absolutely fair enough mate.

i know the management have had big problems/deficiencies to deal with and the solutions are not simple.
i feel that there are obvious things  that they should still have done better though...

[eLToRo]

What is a chance?

A chance is when Downing couldnt be bothered to take it around someone and boots it into the box time after time at Carroll.

He has made the most crosses but its clear that the standard of them is shocking.How many times this year have we see him just shift the ball on his to left foot and whip it and it cant beat the front man.Other times he gets it past the front man and the striker either isnt there or has to run backwards and header it while running away front goal.

He puts in maybe one good ball a game where we dont get on the end of it.When you cross the ball the centre back is generally favourite so the standard of the cross has to be good in order for your striker to win it.When its carroll up front you should be making the most of chances to cross it by putting in a decent cross where he has at least a  50/50 shot and he will generally win it.

Maybe when we signed Downing we overlooked his crossing stat.I remember out of Young Downing  ,downing had a remarkably bigger crossing number. The fact is that you can boot the ball into the box as many time as you want but the standard needs to be good in order for it to be considered a chance imo.

[Acaustiq]

If I were to give you a brand new Ferrari you’d quite understandably be ecstatic.

If I were to give you another brand new Ferrari you’d be incredibly happy.

If I were to give you yet another brand new Ferrari you’d be grateful.

If I give you one hundred brand new Ferrari’s you’d want to charge me for storage.

Economists call this notion the law of diminishing marginal utility -  the more an individual consumes of a certain good, the less utility or value they derive from it.

People seem to get very excited whenever these kind of macro numbers are posted - as if they've been shown behind the curtain in some way, it always reminds me of a lot of the reverential way endings to video games used to be talked about in school (no bloody save points back then, three lives and that was your lot). Those who share these numbers are thanked for their 'insight' and so it was last year when the now infamous 'chances created' table was posted.

At the outset, let's be clear - there is no evidence this was used by Comolli or anyone at the club, people saw the table and declared that this was why we had signed the players we did, without explaining why were never linked to Chris Brunt or Kevin Davies. However, to understand why at the time I thought 'this is completely worthless' - have a look at the following (from this season) because there's something quite startling about it.

Plurality is paramount - which is why the mancs single player on the chances created table is towards the bottom, Arsenal don't have a single player on there either.

As we've just witnessed, creating boatloads of chances doesn't explicitly seem to result in a concurrent number of goals, I suspect this is down to a loose form of marginal utility - whether a malaise sets in after a certain point meaning players treat chances with less respect when they know another will be along shortly, or there is some sort of psychological reinforcement at play.

The following is the average for the top eight in 09/10 - the x axis is the number of chances, the y axis is the percentage conversion rate.

The trend is apparent, there is an optimal number of chances for a side to create, after that the chances of conversion decline quite dramatically - with a more granular trendline.

For the entire league.

The trend here is less exaggerated than for the top eight, it probably would have been more interesting had I excluded those sides and just used the bottom twelve. Again, with the more granular trendline.

But surely a chance is still a chance, should they be deliberately forgone because one might be worth less than another? Probably not, but buying runs isn't the answer either.

It might be worth finding out how closely the conversion curve of certain players (van Persie, say) track the trend for top sides, but alas, I can't be arsed.

[joe ®]

Erm... it looks like you've posted a list of the Serie A top scorers instead of something about chance conversion  there mate.

[Acaustiq]

I'm making a point about plurality there aren't I - Juventus won the title without having a single player in the top 15 goalscorers.

It's better to have six Garcias/Benayouns than one Falcao.

[mikey_LFC]

Surely the chance conversion drops dramatically because nobody has reached that many chances created so the computer will take that as zero chances created and the curve of best fit will therefore be dragged down because of this.

[Acaustiq]

That's the reason it stops at 30 and not 40 or 50.

I've deleted all the data but as I recall the opposite is the case when you get to that end of the spectrum, the mancs for instance, I think had created three or four chances and converted half of them which massively bumped up the average.

Which I was surprised by.

[Black Bull Nova]

It was a bit criminal to go into this season (and remain so after christmas) with essentially two strikers. I know we can can count Kuyt as one but that's not what he's been doing. Most clubs had options and used them when their main weapons failed. We had none and apart from making the first choices keener it allows you to change games. It's not been unusual for us, often when Torres was unfit or on poor form we had little to fall back on, look what Utd did against Munich when it wasn't working, what City did against QPR, it's simple stuff really. If Van Persie had been injured this year Arsenal would have been relegated.

[mikey_LFC]

That's the reason it stops at 30 and not 40 or 50.

I've deleted all the data but as I recall the opposite is the case when you get to that end of the spectrum, the mancs for instance, I think had created three or four chances and converted half of them which massively bumped up the average.

Which I was surprised by.

That is surprising. You would have thought because there was so few chances created it would have little effect on the average.

However looking at the general trend if you discount the dip at the end, it seems as though the more chances you create the higher the percentage of chances our finished, although the variance and fluctuations of the data does make it quite hard to really read anything from it. But it does seem to be a general line up.

I guess the data could be skewed at both ends due to the small sized samples that the data would be derived from. However there does seem to be an upwards trend especially for the top 8s data.

Not really sure what to make of the fluctuations though.

Good work by the way, that must have taken a while to create.