I agree that we we've been pretty eye-bleeding a lot of the time this season but I can't understand the comparison with Heckingbottom at all. Under him we were soft and fell apart constantly at the back. We're the opposite now, and we might be pretty dull but there's a good spine that was totally lacking from the PHB team, and indeed our lack of creativity partly arises from the simple fact that we're playing more (and better) defensively.
If we keep performing like this for the whole season we will drop more points on average than we have so far because we've had a good dose of luck in our first five games. But I don't think we'll concede nearly as many goals as we did under Heckingbottom.
I think Jack is doing it the right way.
Shore up the back, something we all demanded a year ago.
Then work our way forward from there.
Expecting the finished article from the get go is just unrealistic.
There has to be something said for winning 'ugly'. The Sheep do it regularly, even the Thellick do, thing is they can muster a goal out of nothing, with their multi million pound strike force....
The fitness levels of SPL teams are generally high and therefore play tight pressing games which stifles our creativity. In one sense, if the opponents are occupied chasing/closing down our players, they're less likely to score goals. Equally, if our defence is sh*te we will lose goals, and games.
Hibs cumulative for xG this season is 6.64, when you add in the penalties and we've scored 8 that is about the norm. However our cumulative against xG is 7.04 plus the penalties. But we've only conceded 1 non penalty goal all season and that was on the opening day.
And there's no cheating xG - these will even themselves out
Very simply, xG (or expected goals) is the probability that a shot will result in a goal based on the characteristics of that shot and the events leading up to it. Some of these characteristics/variables include:
Location of shooter: How far was it from the goal and at what angle on the pitch?
Body part: Was it a header or off the shooter's foot?
Type of pass: Was it from a through ball, cross, set piece, etc?
Type of attack: Was it from an established possession? Was it off a rebound? Did the defense have time to get in position? Did it follow a dribble?
Every shot is compared to thousands of shots with similar characteristics to determine the probability that this shot will result in a goal. That probability is the expected goal total. An xG of 0 is a certain miss, while an xG of 1 is a certain goal. An xG of .5 would indicate that if identical shots were attempted 10 times, 5 would be expected to result in a goal.
There are a number of xG models that use similar techniques and variables, which attempt to reach the same conclusion.