Lincoln City v West Ham United: What The Numbers Tell Us

Lincoln City’s meeting with West Ham United on Wednesday brings together two sides whose biggest difference so far has been their ability to turn chances into goals.

I’m going to use stats, and I don’t care. I like stats because a scoreline has a habit of deciding how we remember everything that happened before it. We win at Preston and Bristol City, and we’re clinical, then a couple of defeats later we’re apparently desperate for someone who can finish, even when we’re creating better chances.

For me, the bigger concern is when those chances dry up, because consistently decent xG gives you reason to believe goals will come, while consistently poor xG leaves you wondering where they’re supposed to come from. The numbers give us some perspective beyond the frustration of watching another opportunity go begging, and they can challenge the idea that everything was brilliant when we won, and everything was rubbish when we lost.

There is a fair counterargument, though, because similar numbers don’t necessarily mean similar quality in the moments that decide a game. An accurate cross might reach a teammate without giving him much chance of scoring, while a poor first touch can kill a promising attack before there’s even a shot to record.

Two excellent chances can also lift the xG without telling you how effective we were for the rest of the afternoon, particularly if one comes when the game is already beyond us, and the opposition are happy to protect their lead. I still think the stats are useful, but they need that context, and no amount of respectable passing figures or chances created is going to make three avoidable goals feel any less bloody frustrating. Still, all the biggest clubs in the world use numbers, so they have value.

Coming back to tomorrow, this looks like a fairly uncomfortable comparison. West Ham have scored 23 times in nine Championship games, while we’ve managed seven, and coming into this one after a 3-0 defeat at Sheffield United, I suspect most of us would prefer an opponent with slightly less firepower.

However, having worked through the numbers, there are reasons to think we can cause them problems. Their attacking figures are impressive, but their defensive numbers and away results offer some encouragement, while our own figures underline just how much we’ve been leaving behind in front of goal.

The comparison

These are Championship averages per match, with possession and pass accuracy shown as percentages. They cover the opening nine league games for each side.

The difference in front of goal

The most obvious gap is between their scoring and ours, but the comparison with expected goals is more revealing. West Ham are averaging 2.56 goals from 2.49 xG, which means their scoring is broadly in line with the chances they create. There is plenty of substance behind those 23 goals.

We’re averaging 0.78 goals from 1.55 xG, meaning our actual return is roughly half our expected return. Across nine games, those rounded averages put us at about 14 expected goals, against the seven we’ve scored, which will hardly come as a revelation to anyone who has watched us recently.

That doesn’t mean we’re owed another seven goals, or that Wednesday is automatically the night everything starts going in. It does suggest we’re creating enough to have scored considerably more, and that is both encouraging and a bit frustrating. Unfortunately, nobody is going to let us start this one 1-0 up as compensation.

There is a difference in the shooting figures as well. West Ham average almost 15 attempts to our 11, with 39.6% on target compared with our 29.3%, so they are getting more shots away and directing a greater proportion towards goal. We need to improve what we’re doing with our opportunities if we’re going to keep up with an attack like that.

We know what playing without the ball looks like

West Ham average 57.76% possession, while we’re at 39.16%, and their passing figures are substantially higher. They attempt around 507 passes per game against our 296, completing 85.4% compared with our 73.5%, which suggests we’re going to spend a fair amount of Wednesday trying to disrupt their play.

Our opponents have averaged 60.84% possession this season, so that part of the challenge is familiar enough. We’ve already shown we can win games while the other side has more of the ball, with Bolton, Preston and Bristol City providing the obvious examples. The important part is making something happen when we get it back.

The defensive workload shows up elsewhere in the figures. We average 48.11 interceptions and 32.11 clearances, compared with West Ham’s 35 and 21.33, but those higher totals also reflect how much defending we are willing to do.

There should be chances for us

One of the more interesting comparisons is at the other end of the pitch. Despite our latest result, we’re conceding slightly fewer goals per match than West Ham, at 1.22 against 1.33, and our expected goals conceded figure is lower as well, at 1.39 against 1.66.

We allow more shots, averaging 13.44 against their 11.22, yet those efforts add up to less xG. That suggests the chances opponents get against us are, on average, less dangerous than those West Ham allow. It gives a bit more context to our defensive work than simply counting how often somebody has a shot.

We’ve kept four league clean sheets, while West Ham have managed two, both at home against Derby and Wrexham. Their attack has understandably caught the eye, but there is enough in the defensive comparison to suggest we should get opportunities.

Their away results reinforce that. They’ve drawn at Burnley, Watford and Millwall, with their only away victory coming at Bolton, and have conceded in all four matches, shipping seven goals in total. They remain unbeaten on the road, but three of those four opponents have taken a point.

Can we make our strengths count?

There is a possible route for us in the aerial figures, although I wouldn’t get too carried away with it. We win 49.6% of our aerial duels compared with West Ham’s 46.6%, and contest 50 per game against their 29.56, which tells you something about the different games the two sides tend to play.

Our crossing accuracy is higher as well, at 41.1% against their 31.9%, despite us putting in fewer crosses. I’d like to see us make use of those wide areas and get better deliveries into the box, particularly if we’re struggling to put sustained passing moves together. The aerial comparison offers a little encouragement, provided we give ourselves something worth competing for.

At the other end, West Ham average 6.33 corners per game against our 3.89, while we’ve been conceding 7.44. That is one figure I’d like to see us bring down on Wednesday, because repeatedly handing a side with this attacking output another delivery into our box feels like an unnecessary invitation.

What it means for Wednesday

West Ham have the stronger attacking numbers, and I don’t think there is much point trying to dress that up. They create more, shoot more and are getting the goals their chances suggest they should, while we’re coming off another afternoon when opportunities went begging.

However, their away record and defensive figures give us a reason to believe we can get something. We need to defend with the discipline we’ve shown in our wins, then make better use of the chances that come our way. All three of our league victories have come away, and Wednesday would be a useful time to bring one of those performances back to Sincil Bank.

After Sheffield United, I’d happily take an evening with fewer encouraging numbers and a bit more to celebrate on the scoreboard.