A different view on Bruce... [this thread contains xG and stats]

[SW4Baggie]

Trying out some new work software last night, I decided to undertake some analysis of Bruce (and Val)'s reigns to see if there was anything in how we seem to have been unlucky for well over 18 months now IMO.

For this, I have looked at expected goals (xG), expected goals against (xA), and used those to generate expected results (xR) and expected points (xP).

First, is a rolling chart of xG and xA for all our games last season and this. The gaps show where Ismael was sacked, and where the new season started. It runs from right to left, with far right being summer 2021 and left being our last match.

[attachment=694]

What's clear is we started last season highly dominant in games - we had consistently higher xG than xA meaning we ought to have comfortably won matches before going into a tricky spell after the defeat at Stoke where for the first time that season we were completely outplayed. The Bristol game aside, we were poor for 5 or so games, before we started to see improvement again - however our performances didn't receive the points they merited. Up until the final two games under Val, we were consistently the better side in games and it feels like here the players lost faith in what Val was doing and utimately downed tools against Preston and Millwall.

What's startling is that Bruce's arrival coincides with the two lines closing - we started OK in and ought to have gained more points in his first 5 or so games, but we became far less proficient going forward and our defending worsened, he made us a much poorer side before our final couple of games where we played opposition with little to play for and recorded a few very positive performances.

This season however, Bruce has been VERY unlucky. Our performances have warranted far more points than we've accrued. Our pattern is remarkably similar to Val's first 10 games, however we've accrued 10 points vs. the 22 we got under Val. Indeed, if you look at our xR and xP measures we should be second in the league on 21 points based on how we've played which is why there's so much disagreement over whether or not Bruce is doing a decent job.

My concern is that the lines have merged again, suggesting the players are losing faith in what Bruce is trying to do, and performances are worsening. Unfortunately, unlike last season, we don't have a points cushion, and if we start to take fewer points from games due to worsening performances we will very much be in trouble. Looking at the above graph, I'm not really sure what more Bruce could be doing...

Breaking it down by game...

• Val was sacked with us on 45 points from 29 games - or 1.55PPG
  
• We started strongly with Val, reaching a high of 2.6 PPG after 5 games and 2.2 form his first 10 games dropping to 1.2 in his final 10 games. The worst spell was the 5 games between the 0-3 at Fulham and the 0-0 at Blackpool where we took 5 from 5 at 1PPG.
  
• If we take the xP  during that time we'd have accrued 57 points by the time Val was sacked - there were 7 games we should have won (6 we drew and the Derby A game we lost) and 3 games we lost where a draw was a more accurate result (the defeats at Swansea, Hudds and QPR) - there were also 3 games where we took maximum points where we ought to have drawn (Luton H, Blues H and surprisingly the 4-0 at Cardiff where 3 of our goals were stunners)
  
• When we look at his tenure, our first 15 or so games, we roughly got what we deserved from games and we chugged along at roughly 2 PPG.
  
• The following 14 games we stopped getting what we deserved. We came out 11 points worse off than we ought to have, taking 17 from 14 whereas we ought to have taken 28 - keeping us well on track to be in the top 2 spots.
  
• What happened was we stopped scoring goals... we scored 8 where we should have scored 23 - compared to the previous 15 where we managed 26 against an expected 29.
  
• Throughout both spells, the opposition scored slightly fewer than they ought to have, which I would put down to SJ making some excellent saves.
  

In a nutshell, something happened after 15 games where our goals just dried up. I don't know if this was down to an injury, or a tweak in the system, but we suddenly stopped scoring very finishable chances at an alarming rate and this led to us accruing too few points.

What was interesting was up until the final 2 games, those two awful defeats against Millwall and Preston, we were still running at 2.11 points for the season. Those two results really stand out as the first games where we were deservedly well beaten. Although it seems the fans had turned long before these games, we had no right to. It was only these final 2 games where we put in performances really worthy of getting the manager the boot. Indeed the 5 games up until those 2 games should have resulted in 8 more points than we achieved which would have had us comfortably in the top 2 spots. 

So over to Bruce then:

Our luck didn't change when Bruce arrived... Although he started badly in terms of points accrued, we actually continued then trend of receiving far fewer points than our performances merited.  

• We racked up 1 point from his opening 5 games where we ought to have accrued 7.
  
• Whilst this was a drop in terms of both actual and xP vs Val it does show that we continued to be unlucky. The driver behind this was we had a spell of the opposition  being more clinical.
  
• We conceded 2 in games we ought to have conceded 1, namely down to defensive errors following the adjustment to a back 4, and the opposition being slightly more clinical. We also played some stronger sides in this spell.
  
• Following those 5 games we reverted to a far more balanced results:performances ratio, gaining max points vs Bournemouth  and nicking a draw at Bristol where we should have only drawn and lost, and dropping 2 points in the draw with Coventry at home and deserving a point against Blues away. In this spell we took 21 points from 12 games which was bang on our xP tally. This was mainly fuelled by us improving how clinical we were in front of goal, scoring 17 from xG 19 and conceding 13 from an xA of 13.
  

Over the course of last season, we should have had 85 points, which would have seen us finish 3rd, just behind Bournemouth.
Based on total PPG from all their games, Val ought to have delivered 90 points which would have seen us joint top with Fulham but in second on GD, and had Bruce had the full season we'd have finished on 76 points which would have seen us finish 5th. Bruce conclusively made us worse last season.

This season we have taken underperformance to a whole new level... 

• According to xP we ought to have a whopping 21 points currently which would put us 2nd behind Sheff Utd. 
  
• We ought to have taken max points in our games with Watford, Blackburn, Cardiff, Huddersfield and Blues on the balance of play, and ought to have lost at Wigan. 
  
• We should have scored 17 goals vs the 10 we have, with this extending to 15 vs 5 if we remove the Hull result. 
  
• In terms of goals against, we have conceded 10 where we ought to have conceded 10 - suggesting that Button is actually doing OK - he's just not quite as good as SJ was.
  

Overall, I think I'm inclined to stick with Bruce for a bit longer which I never thought I'd say.
I've maintained throughout that we were wrong to sack Val - he changed our style in reaction to teams "finding us out" and we were delivering perofrmances again until the players downed tools.

We find ourselves in the exact same position now under Bruce as we did when we decided to give Val the boot... A team playing OK, doing the right thing, but players not converting chances. The consistency here is that we have built a squad with an attitude problem, and that cannot score for toffee. The most sackable thing Bruce has done is not bring in another striker, as with  fit Dike, or someone more use than a carrot up front, we'd be at least 7-8 points better off.

I'd also argue had we done a deal for in the summer, we'd have got promoted last season.

[baggiebloke]

Wow.

I'll read this tomorrow, thanks for posting it.

[Birdman1811]

Excellent post.

And you're right, it does actually point to giving Bruce some time to see if luck balances itself out. Often it does feel purely like luck has deserted us, regardless of manager.

[Remi_Moses]

Great reporting - sometimes it's important to remove the emotional factor. I'm still convinced Bruce is yesterday's man without the hunger we need. Nice guy but enthusiastic manager he ain't.

[Mr vertical]

Thanks for that - a lot of work. It's interesting that Gourmet has said Brucey has a long-term future, maybe this is why. We need to break the cycle of sacking managers at some point too, I just wish we'd appointed someone else to do it.

[Slowpoke Gonzalez]

I appreciate the effort you went to for this post. It's like you've quantified what many fans are feeling at the moment.

What's obvious is we haven't been getting what we deserve. Who the fault lies with isn't as clear. Ultimately, Bruce will get sacked eventually. He won't ride us off into the sunset and he was never going to.

[BaggieBaggieBromBrom]

Steve Bruce for life. 1-1 forever

[SW4Baggie]

Thanks for that - a lot of work. It's interesting that Gourmet has said Brucey has a long-term future, maybe this is why. We need to break the cycle of sacking managers at some point too, I just wish we'd appointed someone else to do it.

Agree with this.

Our luck has to change at some point but it doesn’t seem to be coming. The short term trajectory looks like Bruce will make us a worse team and results will not improve.

It’s a real stick or twist moment, and I’m inclined to give Bruce a little more time, as history suggests that another manager will only see the same pattern repeat. Fundamentally the squad is the problem.

[Kit Kat Chunky]

Does this analysis include "crisp packet hands"? 

[Tom Joad]

Actually that's pretty much as I have seen it. Of course, individual errors play a massive part in derailing what might have/should have been. In this case, do we blame the player, the bloke that picked him, or how we come to employ that player?
Ultimately, we do have some unprofessional attitudes at the club that are hampering any managers efforts. I've no doubt this is why successive mangers have spoken of wanting 3 or 4 windows. Sooner or later, someone needs to get the big stick out and that requires backing from the club.