@BarcaOG
You are crazy if you take an inefficient striker over an efficient one. That is what that example I gave you was illustrating and how your simple point of 'only goals matter' is very flawed.
i dont think either team would complain much about having a forward contribute 20 goals.
This is simply put nonsense. It depends how quickly he scores the 20, from how many opportunities and what quality these opportunities were. Which is why complete mongoloids overrate Benzema because everyone from Aguero, through Cavani to Dzeko in Benzema age bracket would convert the chances Benzema gets and many other younger strikers would get a similar or higher volume of chances.
To illustrate even better:
ill take 20 goals at 400 shots any time over 1 or 2 goals in 32 matches aaaaaaaaaaany day. aaaaaanyyyy day. easy trade.
Would you still take the 20 goals at 400 shots over 2 in 32 games, if they were scored in 500 games?
im not sure because i dont care about phantasm stats. but i would guess something like how many goals they should score given both their total chances and their quality of chances? really, i couldnt care less. (...) you can jerk off to phantom would-begoals if you want
You could just write - I don't understand the metric. It would save us a lot of trouble. Especially since you're giving your opinion on something you yourself admit you do not make an effort to understand, which kind of invalidates any opinion you may have on the topic. Few days back you complained how Gniddybro is uninformed in some other thread. I hope you have as much scrutiny for yourself on this.
@Morten
In the graph i cant find right now, according to xG, Son`s xG is 40-50% higher than Lewandowski, meaning, if you place him in Bayern, he would score 70-80 goals a season.
Now, would Son, quality as he is, really score that many goals? Of course not, thats just silly.
No? Because that's not how xG works? It doesn't stack or just reinsert into a different team
...
Did you even read the article? The graph is telling you the player scored 40% more goals than the average striker would from the positions Son has shot from. Lewandowski doesn't outperform his xG because it's bang on the money with the quality of opportunity. It's not a mark of player value, but of the quality of chances the striker gets and how well he converts them.
Not to mention that Son is the outlier in the distribution (which yes, on the pitch he IS THAT ON FORM this year) and you're using him as an example of a problem. lmao
PS Benzema does look bad and that's because HE DOES MISS MORE THAN OTHERS. Good lord why is this so difficult? It's why xG is valuable because good finishers tend to overperform their xG or are right on the number, while relatively poor ones regularly underperform it. Look who he's worse than.
Also turns you completely made up the 16-20 Lewandowski xG comment then? Good to know.
And btw, Bayern must be really pissed that a German club sold Werner to somebody else but them,
I mean, according to xG, the Chelsea striker, who is already labeled as a flop, is apparently a better striker than Lewa too.
You are utterly horrendous at interpreting the numbers man. Not what the stat is indicating. Not even sure which xG it is you're referring to, because nobody knows if it's cumulative xG or a different one. Suppose it's cumulative and if it's higher it doesn't need to mean he's better at getting in a better position, can also mean he gets a bigger volume of poorer chances. Which is why you need to have an idea how they play in order to get at least some idea of the context. What you're doing is using a number flat out without consideration.
And yes, Jović has good stats. Because he DOES get in good positions, he does play good passes, he does get shot opportunities and he does it in the limited time provided. It's those who don't watch him and look at 'muh 27 games 2 goals' that are the idiots.
