Telegraph Report - Suggesting we are unlucky

[Lambo]

 
Friday April 16 2021
Football Nerd

Fulham should stick with Scott Parker as this data shows

By Daniel Zeqiri

Fulham are running out of games to avoid relegation but regardless of their fate this season the stock of head coach Scott Parker has undoubtedly risen.

Their recruitment in the summer transfer window was shrewd, making Fulham a far more competitive Premier League outfit than many expected.

Remember, there were gloomy predictions of Fulham not matching Derby County's lowest-ever Premier League points tally of 11 after they were stuffed by Arsenal on the opening day.

Pep Guardiola once said a coach's job was to get their team into the final third as frequently as possible, from where the intuition of individual players takes over. By this measurement, Parker has done some fine work considering the level of talent at his disposal.

Much has been made of Brighton's profligacy, but Fulham have actually suffered the biggest underperformance relative to expected goals in the league. The difference between their 35.9 expected goals, just behind Everton, and their 24 goals scored is the biggest in the division. Their xG tally is higher than Burnley, Southampton, Wolves and Crystal Palace.

In this week's Football Nerd, I ask whether that is down to misfortune or if we should expect relegation-threatened sides to miss more chances than those at the top.

[Steeeeeeeeeed]

Another Telegraph article today...

Basically saying why Parker should stay...

Fulham should stick with Scott Parker whatever their fate - as these numbers show
Football Nerd: Is it really bad luck when a team with no good striker underperforms their expected goals?

   
Fulham have impressed despite their perilous position
Fulham have impressed despite their perilous position CREDIT: AFP
Daniel Zeqiri
16 APRIL 2021 • 9:25 AM
It is possible for a manager to be relegated from the Premier League but enhance their reputation. Alan Curbishley and Sean Dyche stayed for the rebuild and bounced back with Charlton and Burnley. Daniel Farke is on his way to doing likewise with Norwich. Roberto Martinez landed the Everton job after Wigan Athletic were relegated but won the FA Cup in 2013. Gareth Southgate was relegated with Middlesbrough in 2009 - whatever happened to him? 

Scott Parker is also a candidate for this slightly hollow accolade. Fulham could be seven points adrift with six games remaining by the time they kick off at Arsenal on Sunday, but have been far more competitive than most judges expected them to be at the start of the season, certainly since a raft of successful new signings arrived. Whatever their fate, Parker deserves to stay. Fulham may even face a battle to keep him.


Much has been written about Brighton's impressive football and apparent misfortune in front of goal, but Fulham have actually suffered the biggest underperformance relative to expected goals in the league. The difference between their 35.9 expected goals, just behind Everton, and their 24 goals scored is the biggest in the division. Fulham's shot conversion rate of 6.4 per cent is also the lowest in the league. Their expected goals conceded tally is also safely lower mid-table.

This will come as no surprise to Fulham fans who have cursed the lack of a reliable goalscorer. The same is true of Sheffield United and Brighton who are the league's second and third biggest underpeformers relative to expectation.

At this point it is common to hear the argument: is this not the problem with expected goals? That it fails to take account of the quality of individual players. That the reason Manchester United, Leicester and Tottenham are the league's big overperformers is not luck but the calibre of their strikers. Should we not expect relegation-threatened teams with Championship-grade forwards to miss more chances?


There is some truth to these claims when small samples are analysed, but expected goals benefits from the law of large numbers because most models are based on hundreds of thousands of shots on goal. This gives a strong indication of the true probability of a chance going in. Regardless of whether you have Harry Kane or Jamie Vardy, it is extremely difficult and improbable to sustain significant overperformance across a long period, as Tottenham's faltering title challenge and Leicester's dip last season attest.

So there is no contradiction in saying Fulham lack quality but have also been unfortunate. They could well be relegated before any positive return to the mean can take place. Their performance levels though, suggest Parker is the right man to bring them back up.

End.

[filham]

Sorry, its goals that count and only nine goals from 17 home games clearly shows a regular inability to score. That is not continuous bad luck but it does equate to relegation.

[blingo]

No it is not bad luck Mr Filham it is down to having a very inexperienced manager at the helm. I'm sure that Fat Sam would have had us more than safe by now, but TK decided to give out a 3 year contract (which seemed ludicrous to me), and seems unwilling to face up to his inadequate level of directorship.

[Dougie]

There is some truth to these claims when small samples are analysed, but expected goals benefits from the law of large numbers because most models are based on hundreds of thousands of shots on goal. This gives a strong indication of the true probability of a chance going in. Regardless of whether you have Harry Kane or Jamie Vardy, it is extremely difficult and improbable to sustain significant overperformance across a long period

This doesn't make sense. If xG does not take into account the competence of those players for whom those chances fall at converting xG, then you can't determine whether a side is lucky/unlucky. A chance that falls to Jamie Vardy doesn't really have the same probability of being converted if it falls to Anthony Knockaert.

An approach to generate true xG would involve multiple each chance by the historical conversion efficiency of the players to whom each chance falls.

[Sgt Fulham]

You can't be unlucky for a whole season. We deserve to go down, and barring a miracle, that's exactly where we're going.

[FFC1987]

A lack of quality in the final third isn't necessarily all Parkers fault. I think the way he sets us up, his inability to make impactful changes consistently and generally the slow build up with stagnant static final third play at times is probably more the issue. Its up to individuals to take changes and create them with final balls but a lot can be said by our generally slow paced build up.

[MJG]

If you don't play players who have a proven record in scoring goals and they are fit to picked i put year down to the manager.

[Nero]

Get rid of Parker and get me a lucky manger