Staying on track: Deep dive into Atlanta United’s high-quality chances

As Atlanta United and MLS develop a deeper understanding and use of data analytics, we’ll look behind the curtain at some of the specific statistics valued by the club. In our new weekly content series, we look at a metric provided by StatsBomb that may not stand out at first glance, but upon closer evaluation is a useful tool for measuring team performance. This is Staying on Track presented by MARTA.

Our statistic this week talks about the quality of the shots. According to StatsBomb and a majority of MLS coaches, an important principle of soccer is wanting to push players to take the highest quality shots possible. A team must find ways to attack that create high-quality shots.

This is a fundamental truth of football that is guided by a few principles defined by StatsBomb:

From a data perspective, Atlanta United’s metric breaks down like this, measured in expected goals per shot:

The league average is 0.1 expected goals per shot.

In the match against Houston Dynamo on June 15, Atlanta United created five good chances. Four of these chances had a value greater than 0.2 xG. (Higher quality chances have higher xG value.)

To illustrate this concept, we look back at the goal scored by Daniel Ríos in the match against the Houston Dynamo. The goal came in the 25th minute and was Ríos’ second MLS goal of the season.

Much like Jamal Thiare’s goal against New York City FC, Saturday’s goal started with a long punt from goalkeeper Brad Guzan that gave the striker room to run. Ríos collected the pass and blocked Houston’s attempt at the goalkeeper, giving Ríos plenty of space with the ball.

He passed to Luke Brennan who then placed a low cross into the center of the area. Thiago Almada had the first attempt, which was smothered by Houston goalkeeper Steve Clark. But Ríos was there to collect the rebound just at the top of the penalty area. He scored to tie the game 1-1.

This opportunity was considered a high quality opportunity due to several factors: