Goal Difference!

[Snowball]

If we maintain our points per game ration we should end up outside the play-offs, even if we maintain the GD, shirley?

And I'm saying, if we continue to improve our GD by .5 of a goal per game
we will improve our points-per-game

There you go again, saying we will, there is no reason why our points average per game should improve if the GD is same or very close, our GD is good because we are not losing by many goals, but are beating teams by 3 on a few occasions, so we are doing well defensively when we lose.

Wanna bet?

[T.R.O.L.I.]

And I'm saying, if we continue to improve our GD by .5 of a goal per game we will improve our points-per-game

Not necessarily - "we will more than likely" would have been a better sentence. Example:

Currently 40 points from 26 games (1.538 ppg) with a GD of +13

20 more games to go so by your example we'd be on a GD of +23 at the end of the season.

What happens if we win 5 games 5-0 and lose the other 15 games 1-0?

Our GD is +23 at the end of the season and our points per game is (40+15)/46 = 1.196.


Just saying.

[Snowball]

And I'm saying, if we continue to improve our GD by .5 of a goal per game we will improve our points-per-game

Not necessarily - "we will more than likely" would have been a better sentence. Example:
Currently 40 points from 26 games (1.538 ppg) with a GD of +13
20 more games to go so by your example we'd be on a GD of +23 at the end of the season.
What happens if we win 5 games 5-0 and lose the other 15 games 1-0?
Our GD is +23 at the end of the season and our points per game is (40+15)/46 = 1.196.

Just saying.

We won't. We could lose 0-14 to Hull and have a minus GD. We won't.

BTW I'm on about our ppg for the next 20 being better than it is for the first 26.

So far our season has broken into three obvious sections.

The games with Gylfi but a dodgy defence.
Then we solidified the defence but found goals a bit harder
The we brought in Elwood and unleashed Shane Long


Our first four games with Gylfi gave us a GD of 0 and just one win. (25%)

Since then, up to Elwood arriving, say (and 442) we won 36% of our games

And in the latest run we have won 50% of our games.

Games 01-04 P04 W1 D2 L1 05-05 GD 00 = 0.00 GD per game and 1.25 ppg Equivalent of a 57 Point Season
Games 05-18 P14 W5 D5 L4 23-17 GD 06 = 0.43 GD per game and 1.43 ppg Equivalent of a 66 Point Season
Games 19-26 P08 W4 D3 L1 17-10 GD 07 = 0.88 GD per game and 1.88 ppg Equivalent of a 86 Point Season


We may only be marginally over 1.5 ppg for the season, on target for 70 points, but we have taken two clear steps up and we
could be looking for a ppg of 1.7 (74 Points) and 2.0 (80 Points) between now and the end of the season.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

And I'm saying, if we continue to improve our GD by .5 of a goal per game we will improve our points-per-game

Not necessarily - "we will more than likely" would have been a better sentence. Example:
Currently 40 points from 26 games (1.538 ppg) with a GD of +13
20 more games to go so by your example we'd be on a GD of +23 at the end of the season.
What happens if we win 5 games 5-0 and lose the other 15 games 1-0?
Our GD is +23 at the end of the season and our points per game is (40+15)/46 = 1.196.

Just saying.

We won't. We could lose 0-14 to Hull and have a minus GD. We won't.

BTW I'm on about our ppg for the next 20 being better than it is for the first 26.

You missed his point, which was that improving the goal difference is not a guarantee that we'll take more points per game.

You've only got to look at the league table to see that there isn't a direct correllation to goal difference and points per game, so it's daft to state as a fact that improving our goal difference (per game) will improve our points per game.

As he said, it would be the most likely outcome, but that's not the same as saying it will happen.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

If we finish the season with the 3rd best GD we'll finish 2nd, 3rd or 4th, probably 3rd.

We've already been around this little loop once.

Please try to grasp that "most likely" and "probably" do not mean the same thing.

Probably means that something is more likely to happen than not happen.

That is not the case in this example. The team finishing with the 3rd best goal difference is more likely to finish third than any other of the positions, but this does not mean they'll probably finish third.

[ZacNaloen]

Please try to grasp that "most likely" and "probably" do not mean the same thing.

I think you need to get your dictionary out again mate.

[Snowball]

One definiton of probably is:

easy to believe on the basis of available evidence

[weybridgewanderer]

and here we go, you think we will easily make the play offs based on your evidence

I feel we will just miss out on the play offs based on my evidence

Your evidence seems to be that we are better now than we were at the begining of the season and if we maintain that we will make the playoffs.

I agree that if we maintain our current form we will make the playoffs.

My evidence is that we have been too inconsistent this season and I think we will come just short.

Pretty much why I felt we would not get automatic promotion a couple of season ago, while your evidence said we would make it, "all things being equal".

All we can do is wait and see. I may end up pleasantly surprised. You may end up disappointed, again.

Oh, and your stats be proven to predict the correct outcome sometimes. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Snowball]

Oh, and your stats be proven to predict the correct outcome sometimes. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

But (to the nearest minute) it's wrong for 1338/1440ths of the time.

I was right about Kebe, right about Long.

And, incidentally, I was NOT arguing that we WOULD make the play-offs based on our GD

I said IF we maintain this GD (would mean a GD of 23) THEN we'd make the play-offs.


During this discussion, NOT based on GD but on the fact that we have twice taken a step up
in points per game and are now in the kind of form that would normally get second place,
I've come to think we have a great chance of the POs.

But PLEASE NOTE that is NOT "because we have a GD today of +13".

[Ian Royal]

Given we had the third best goal difference a month ago, but only had the seventh best points total when this thread started. And we have the third best goal difference now and are still seventh, 4 games, 6 goals and 7 points later, what exactly is it that makes people think having the third best goal difference at seasons end will mean we'll finish third, or in the play offs in general?

I'd suggest that rather than talking about things that don't directly and primarily affect league position and how we're likely to finish somewhere if we maintain a comparative goal difference we currently have, wouldn't it be far more sensible to talk about points - the things that actually define where you finish?

Because I predict, nay guarantee, that if we finish with the third highest points total* we'll finish third in the league. Anyone want a bet?

Our current form (last 10 games) is good enough to see us finish top six in about 6 of the last 8 championship seasons (depending on GD in 2 of those) and narrowly missing out on the remaining 2. But then our season to date form sees us narrowly miss out most seasons (shock horror, seeing as that's exactly where we are now).

So to have a good chance of making it we need to maintain, or improve, what's probably the best form we've had all season over the remaining 20 games. Now given our consistency over more than half the season so far (including the fact we're yet to win three league games on the bounce) says to me we're going to be too inconsistent to do it. But it'll probably be close.

The goal difference only tells me we have the quality when we play well to finish play offs comfortably, the problem is the points tells me we don't play to that level of quality often enough. And that's exactly what watching games tells me as well.





*not including joint third highest points total

[weybridgewanderer]

you need to stop hiding behind the word IF

its easy to make predictions and then say "but I said IF"

If we buy good players in the transfer window we will make the play offs....

If we score more goals we will make the play offs....

[weybridgewanderer]

So to have a good chance of making it we need to maintain, or improve, what's probably the best form we've had all season over the remaining 20 games. Now given our consistency over more than half the season so far (including the fact we're yet to win three league games on the bounce) says to me we're going to be too inconsistent to do it. But it'll probably be close.

The goal difference only tells me we have the quality when we play well to finish play offs comfortably, the problem is the points tells me we don't play to that level of quality often enough. And that's exactly what watching games tells me as well.

Exactly, Snowball this is exactly what I referred to as my "evidence".

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

Please try to grasp that "most likely" and "probably" do not mean the same thing.

I think you need to get your dictionary out again mate.

If you throw two dice, the most likely result is 7.

That does not mean if you throw two dice you'll probably throw a 7. It means 7 is the most likely outcome.

[Snowball]

It's hilarious to say we are inconsistent.

Our record is W10 D10 L6 and four of those games were the almost-no-defence first four games when Gylfi was here.

Since then we've been W10 D8 L5 = 5 defeats in 23 games

H 3-0 Crystal Palace
A 0-0 Millwall
A 1-3 Middlesbrough
H 3-0 Barnsley
H 1-0 Ipswich Town
A 1-1 Preston

W3 D2 L1 9-4 11 points from six games

H 0-1 Swansea City
A 0-1 Bristol City
A 4-0 Burnley
H 4-3 Doncaster
A 1-3 QPR FLC
H 1-1 Cardiff City

Our worst six games

W2 D1 L3 10-9 7 points from 6 games (two defeats to the two sides currently first and second)

H 3-3 Norwich City
A 1-1 Watford
H 0-0 Leeds United
H 0-0 Coventry City
A 2-1 Derby County
H 4-1 Bristol City

W2 D4 L0 10-6 10 Points from 6 games


A 1-1 Hull City
A 0-1 Swansea City
H 2-1 Burnley
H 1-0 WBA
A 3-0 Doncaster

P5 W3 D1 L1 "10 points" from 5 games

11 from 6
07 from 6
.............18 from 12
10 from 6
10 from 5
.............20 from 12


Sorry but I don't think we are inconsistent. IMO we are a top side defensively, and would be second
but for those 5 draws where we could have won most of them with luck or strikers on top form

[ZacNaloen]

Please try to grasp that "most likely" and "probably" do not mean the same thing.

I think you need to get your dictionary out again mate.

If you throw two dice, the most likely result is 7.

That does not mean if you throw two dice you'll probably throw a 7. It means 7 is the most likely outcome.

Can't be bothered to argue semantecs.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

I said IF we maintain this GD (would mean a GD of 23) THEN we'd make the play-offs.

And that is an incorrect statement.

Firstly, having the third best goal difference doesn't mean you'll be in the top 6.
Taking the last 8 seasons from http://www.rsssf.com, showns that in the 24 team leagues, a team with the 3rd best goal difference missed the top 6 twice.
True, that shows that 22 times out of 24, the 3rd best team got in, but it's not something you can take for granted.

Secondly, there's no guarantee at all that having a GD of 23 would mean we have the 3rd best.

Thirdly, with it being so tight, it's a very big IF as far as extrapolations go.


Overall though, this whole thread is just stating what's obvious - teams with good goal differences tend to finish higher than teams with worse ones. A team with the 3rd best goal difference would be expected by most people to be right up there. It's not exactly a revelation.

[Snowball]

Overall though, this whole thread is just stating what's obvious - teams with good goal differences tend to finish higher than teams with worse ones. A team with the 3rd best goal difference would be expected by most people to be right up there. It's not exactly a revelation.

In the last ten years NO side with a GD of 23 or higher has failed to make the top six.
The highest GD to miss out was 21, position 7th

But the thread started to make the point that our then current GD suggested we were a better team than our position actually showed. I still maintain that. This is why I say that if we continue our goal-scoring and defensive rates we will finish in the top six DESPITE THE FACT that right now our third-best GD has us in seventh.

[Snowball]

If you plot a graph of our league position and how it has steadily improved
the trend line has us finishing first or second, NOT that I am saying this will occur.

I'd post it but can't figure out how to.

[Snowball]

I said IF we maintain this GD (would mean a GD of 23) THEN we'd make the play-offs.

Taking the last 8 seasons from http://www.rsssf.com, showns that in the 24 team leagues, a team with the 3rd best goal difference missed the top 6 twice.
True, that shows that 22 times out of 24, the 3rd best team got in, but it's not something you can take for granted.

22 successes v 2 fails = 11-1.

Almost exactly what a correlation of .91 predicts

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

That's completely nonsense.

Likely and probably are synonyms of each other.

Most likely is just using an unnecessary qualifier for emphasis.

Probably means something is more likely than not. It does not mean "most likely of the possibilities", particularly with statistics. Probability is a statistical term, after all, and something would need a probability over over half to be probable.


In the context of an internet discussion it could be said to be splitting hairs, but in the presentation of statistics it's rather more fundamental.