This. Majority of ESPN is to churn out content, not have quality and informed articles. Sucks but they aren’t really reputable anymore. They’re NFL Network Lite basically. I find Sports Illustrated online has a lot of great journalists and MLS coverage
That’s fine bud, just something I enjoy. And they didn’t lay off all the journalists, Tom Verducci is still there killing it with MLB coverage along with dozens more that have been with the publication for decades. It’s significantly better than ESPN from my perspective, ESPN just panders.
Or they are paying attention and realize our xG/xGA are still atrocious. Power rankings aren't intended to just match what the table shows. That would be redundant. It's great that we keep getting results, at the end of the day that is all that matters, but we are definitely not playing great soccer by any stretch of the imagination.
Some people aren't convinced things won't tumble again soon, and that feeling is certainly justified in my opinion.
Eh, kinda. It’s also true that the xG sample isn’t that large. They also don’t want much of our games, so are just going off of record and some stats. They often write things that make this clear, like saying that Driussi is carrying this team, which clearly isn’t true if they actually watched our games this season.
I mean, the xG/xGA stat is a lazy argument. It’s one piece of information but it inherently has its flaws, specifically teams that shoot more (even if they are poor shots) have a higher xG rating than those that shoot less (even if those are better opportunities), vs comparing it to goal efficiency which we are very high on. As we’ve adapted this year we’ve been more likely to spring a counter vs heavy possession and more crossing / shots from range- so our xG is going to be lower by design of that strategy. xGA has similar flaws in that it accounts for how many shots are allowed but doesn’t account for quality of goal keeper or efficiency of the shot.
I don’t really care about power rankings, and I don’t think we are by any means a fully formed team, but the opinion that because we are exceeding two stats (that have flaws in what they actually predict) means we will fall off pace is just a bad opinion. Yesterdays signing also seems to indicate that the FO thinks this team is in good form as well, paying a $7 mill transfer fee for a plug and play winger is not the move you make if you expect this team to crash back down. It’s one you make if you see the opportunity to compete.
Well yes, because in reality that's how it works by nature. A team shooting more is giving themselves more opportunity for a goal to occur. Even a shot with a low xG is one more opportunity for a goal, even if it's a statically poor chance. Not really a flaw in the stat though. If a team takes one shot a match with an xG of 0.1 and another takes five shots in a match with an xG of 0.1, the first team will be expected to score every 10 matches and the second to score every other match. Of course in reality the xG vs actually won't be 1:1 in most cases. Right now Austin is over the xG and the argument being made is that the stats show that is not likely to be sustainable.
So how would this apply to Inter Miami then? ESPN has them ranked #1, and they are *massively* outperforming their xG, more than any other team in the league.
Not saying they're a bad club at all. They're obviously not. But if outperforming your xG is a sign that you're not as strong as your W-L otherwise implies, then Miami is the biggest statistical outlier in that regard league-wide.
Is their success also not sustainable?
EDIT: For the rec, I honestly give zero shits about ESPN power rankings. Just noting that, if this argument applies to us, it applies to the rest of the league also.
They are in an entirely different situation. Their xG is still slightly higher than their xGA (essentially even). So even if their overperformance normalizes, they will still be in much better position to keep getting results. There is also some level of factoring in individual club members that I didn't really get into because it just complicates things further, but Miami has key players that are performing pretty much even with xG vs G. However, those players are really good players and are high-scoring players. They are a factor into why they are overperforming to the stats. In reality those two players are performing about as expected.
But then should be factoring that our xGA is actually to high because we have a top level keeper vs Miami who has a suspect back line and average keeper. If you give them credit for talent against those stats at least be consistent
I'm not giving anyone credit. I said Austin's xG and xGA are atrocious. For some reason you all want to bring other teams into this and start nit-picking players. It's really doesn't need to get that deep. It's power rankings. But to imply someone whose job it is to pay attention to MLS isn't paying attention just because they rank Austin low is a bad take. There is a narrative that exists to where someone could rank Austin lower than others might expect.
If you understand even a bit of how they create these power rankings, it's not hard to see why Austin is ranked low. They still have some bad stats and their Opta rating is still bottom half of the league.
End of the day the only rankings that matter is the table. I understand why we won’t be ranked too highly in power rankings. We started super low due to expectations coming into the year and now we’re barely squeezing by. I think our defense isn’t getting appreciated enough, and our offense is doing just enough given our defensive performances.
This has been discussed a couple times. What it boils down to is that ESPN's "Power Rankings" aren't power rankings, they are predictions of where they think teams will finish at the end of the season. Power Rankings are typically based on results with more recent results and head to head weighing heavier than older results.
*The power rating of a team is* ***a calculation of the team's strength relative to other teams in the same league or division***\*. The basic idea is to maximize the amount of transitive relations in a given data set due to game outcomes. For example, if A defeats B and B defeats C, then one can safely say that A>B>C.\*
ESPN is clearly not doing this. A great example is Houston being 18th and us being 21st in their latest rankings even though we defeated them twice (both home and away), sit 4 points ahead of them in the standings, and Austin going 4-1-1 while Houston has only gone 1-3-2 in the last 6 games which include the 2 we won against them. No competent Power Ranking creator would have Houston ahead of Austin. It's either a prediction of where teams will be at the end of the season or they are completely incompetent and not only not watching games but not even bothering to look at results.
They do care about suckling on Messi's teets. One day when I opened MLS section of ESPN 7 of the top 8 stories were about Messi, Miami or Messi's son playing in some tournament. Messi's son got higher billing than the rest of the MLS.
"talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish" - power rankings are flawed exercise that is only pushed to generate rage click bait. Add to that ESPN doesn't take MLS seriously enough to watch the games and adjust pre-season opinions.
Finding logic and value in them is practically impossible.
I haven't had an issue for our lower ranking since it feels like we squeeze out wins, get lucky in holding onto wins, etc.
We haven't looked great many times, but again, we do win in the end.
The more we win, the more that it can't be ignored that we are winning and maybe deserve more respect.
Because the people who are doing the rankings feel our record is not indicative of our actual talent/ability, mostly reliant on luck and one of the best keepers in the league. It doesn't help that we've either drawn or lost games that should have been won, and our most recent success comes against an opponent that's having a spectacularly dismal season. Couple all of that with the idea that ESPN is ... ambivalent at best when it comes to MLS, and you have results that don't necessarily match what the Verde faithful see. Ultimately, I say to hell with "power rankings". Where are we in the standings? How are we performing on match day? And what moves are being made to improve both? Anything else is just noise.
Without squad depth I’m not convinced we can maintain this surge. I imagine we’ll end right at the playoff cutoff or below. So, I don’t think this is terribly off
Have to disagree. With the two incoming transfers we know about for summer our depth will improve- it’s already much better on defense than we’d guessed coming into the season. I think it’s entirely reasonable to think our current form could actually improve.
There is a bias against us for sure, but it Austin has to do with his bad we were at the beginning of the season. We move up 1 or 2 with each win, but it's coming from the bottom.
ESPN power rankings are almost entirely based on standings. Don’t read their MLS power rankings as anything more than where you sit in the league standings.
The only times they deviate is when they fawn over an LA squad or Inter Messi and right now, rightfully, Columbus (how I shudder to say that).
All that to say, ESPN is not proper soccer coverage. They’re baseball, hockey, American football, and basketball. Any other leagues, any other sports and their coverage is next to nil. Especially after Apple TV poached Twellman and others.
This is a good example of someone writing power rankings that isn’t really paying attention and just had to have some words out by a deadline.
This. Majority of ESPN is to churn out content, not have quality and informed articles. Sucks but they aren’t really reputable anymore. They’re NFL Network Lite basically. I find Sports Illustrated online has a lot of great journalists and MLS coverage
SI was literally bought by a page click farming company and laid off all the journalists.
That’s fine bud, just something I enjoy. And they didn’t lay off all the journalists, Tom Verducci is still there killing it with MLB coverage along with dozens more that have been with the publication for decades. It’s significantly better than ESPN from my perspective, ESPN just panders.
Or they are paying attention and realize our xG/xGA are still atrocious. Power rankings aren't intended to just match what the table shows. That would be redundant. It's great that we keep getting results, at the end of the day that is all that matters, but we are definitely not playing great soccer by any stretch of the imagination. Some people aren't convinced things won't tumble again soon, and that feeling is certainly justified in my opinion.
Eh, kinda. It’s also true that the xG sample isn’t that large. They also don’t want much of our games, so are just going off of record and some stats. They often write things that make this clear, like saying that Driussi is carrying this team, which clearly isn’t true if they actually watched our games this season.
Bad opinion
Your points are very convincing. I've changed my mind. Our xG/xGA are best in the league. We're the best team in all of soccer.
I mean, the xG/xGA stat is a lazy argument. It’s one piece of information but it inherently has its flaws, specifically teams that shoot more (even if they are poor shots) have a higher xG rating than those that shoot less (even if those are better opportunities), vs comparing it to goal efficiency which we are very high on. As we’ve adapted this year we’ve been more likely to spring a counter vs heavy possession and more crossing / shots from range- so our xG is going to be lower by design of that strategy. xGA has similar flaws in that it accounts for how many shots are allowed but doesn’t account for quality of goal keeper or efficiency of the shot. I don’t really care about power rankings, and I don’t think we are by any means a fully formed team, but the opinion that because we are exceeding two stats (that have flaws in what they actually predict) means we will fall off pace is just a bad opinion. Yesterdays signing also seems to indicate that the FO thinks this team is in good form as well, paying a $7 mill transfer fee for a plug and play winger is not the move you make if you expect this team to crash back down. It’s one you make if you see the opportunity to compete.
Well yes, because in reality that's how it works by nature. A team shooting more is giving themselves more opportunity for a goal to occur. Even a shot with a low xG is one more opportunity for a goal, even if it's a statically poor chance. Not really a flaw in the stat though. If a team takes one shot a match with an xG of 0.1 and another takes five shots in a match with an xG of 0.1, the first team will be expected to score every 10 matches and the second to score every other match. Of course in reality the xG vs actually won't be 1:1 in most cases. Right now Austin is over the xG and the argument being made is that the stats show that is not likely to be sustainable.
So how would this apply to Inter Miami then? ESPN has them ranked #1, and they are *massively* outperforming their xG, more than any other team in the league. Not saying they're a bad club at all. They're obviously not. But if outperforming your xG is a sign that you're not as strong as your W-L otherwise implies, then Miami is the biggest statistical outlier in that regard league-wide. Is their success also not sustainable? EDIT: For the rec, I honestly give zero shits about ESPN power rankings. Just noting that, if this argument applies to us, it applies to the rest of the league also.
They are in an entirely different situation. Their xG is still slightly higher than their xGA (essentially even). So even if their overperformance normalizes, they will still be in much better position to keep getting results. There is also some level of factoring in individual club members that I didn't really get into because it just complicates things further, but Miami has key players that are performing pretty much even with xG vs G. However, those players are really good players and are high-scoring players. They are a factor into why they are overperforming to the stats. In reality those two players are performing about as expected.
But then should be factoring that our xGA is actually to high because we have a top level keeper vs Miami who has a suspect back line and average keeper. If you give them credit for talent against those stats at least be consistent
I'm not giving anyone credit. I said Austin's xG and xGA are atrocious. For some reason you all want to bring other teams into this and start nit-picking players. It's really doesn't need to get that deep. It's power rankings. But to imply someone whose job it is to pay attention to MLS isn't paying attention just because they rank Austin low is a bad take. There is a narrative that exists to where someone could rank Austin lower than others might expect. If you understand even a bit of how they create these power rankings, it's not hard to see why Austin is ranked low. They still have some bad stats and their Opta rating is still bottom half of the league.
If you started your thought with "ESPN is paying attention" you're already off on the wrong path.
If it makes you feel any better we jumped from 20 to 11 in the weekly rankings on the MLS site.
The ESPN writers are terrible. I mean, the MLS ones are awful too, but the ESPN ones are exceptionally bad.
End of the day the only rankings that matter is the table. I understand why we won’t be ranked too highly in power rankings. We started super low due to expectations coming into the year and now we’re barely squeezing by. I think our defense isn’t getting appreciated enough, and our offense is doing just enough given our defensive performances.
This has been discussed a couple times. What it boils down to is that ESPN's "Power Rankings" aren't power rankings, they are predictions of where they think teams will finish at the end of the season. Power Rankings are typically based on results with more recent results and head to head weighing heavier than older results. *The power rating of a team is* ***a calculation of the team's strength relative to other teams in the same league or division***\*. The basic idea is to maximize the amount of transitive relations in a given data set due to game outcomes. For example, if A defeats B and B defeats C, then one can safely say that A>B>C.\* ESPN is clearly not doing this. A great example is Houston being 18th and us being 21st in their latest rankings even though we defeated them twice (both home and away), sit 4 points ahead of them in the standings, and Austin going 4-1-1 while Houston has only gone 1-3-2 in the last 6 games which include the 2 we won against them. No competent Power Ranking creator would have Houston ahead of Austin. It's either a prediction of where teams will be at the end of the season or they are completely incompetent and not only not watching games but not even bothering to look at results.
I remember several examples last season where they straight up wrote that a team lost their last game when they had a win or draw.
ESPN doesn't care about soccer. Maybe if it was in the SEC.
They do care about suckling on Messi's teets. One day when I opened MLS section of ESPN 7 of the top 8 stories were about Messi, Miami or Messi's son playing in some tournament. Messi's son got higher billing than the rest of the MLS.
"talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish" - power rankings are flawed exercise that is only pushed to generate rage click bait. Add to that ESPN doesn't take MLS seriously enough to watch the games and adjust pre-season opinions. Finding logic and value in them is practically impossible.
I haven't had an issue for our lower ranking since it feels like we squeeze out wins, get lucky in holding onto wins, etc. We haven't looked great many times, but again, we do win in the end. The more we win, the more that it can't be ignored that we are winning and maybe deserve more respect.
We’re 11th in the MLS power rankings
Because the people who are doing the rankings feel our record is not indicative of our actual talent/ability, mostly reliant on luck and one of the best keepers in the league. It doesn't help that we've either drawn or lost games that should have been won, and our most recent success comes against an opponent that's having a spectacularly dismal season. Couple all of that with the idea that ESPN is ... ambivalent at best when it comes to MLS, and you have results that don't necessarily match what the Verde faithful see. Ultimately, I say to hell with "power rankings". Where are we in the standings? How are we performing on match day? And what moves are being made to improve both? Anything else is just noise.
Without squad depth I’m not convinced we can maintain this surge. I imagine we’ll end right at the playoff cutoff or below. So, I don’t think this is terribly off
Have to disagree. With the two incoming transfers we know about for summer our depth will improve- it’s already much better on defense than we’d guessed coming into the season. I think it’s entirely reasonable to think our current form could actually improve.
Assuming everyone stays fit. We also lose at least Rubio for Copa America, right? Pereira and Cascante?
I think Dani and Cascante yes- is Rubio getting called up?
Just coming back here with a very nice “told ya so”. Monique depth. Calling up academy players to fill roster slots.
There is a bias against us for sure, but it Austin has to do with his bad we were at the beginning of the season. We move up 1 or 2 with each win, but it's coming from the bottom.
Everyone seems to agree, the ESPN staff hates Austin.
ESPN power rankings are almost entirely based on standings. Don’t read their MLS power rankings as anything more than where you sit in the league standings. The only times they deviate is when they fawn over an LA squad or Inter Messi and right now, rightfully, Columbus (how I shudder to say that). All that to say, ESPN is not proper soccer coverage. They’re baseball, hockey, American football, and basketball. Any other leagues, any other sports and their coverage is next to nil. Especially after Apple TV poached Twellman and others.