With the season coming to a close (one way or the other…) I’m looking back through the archives and kind of wondering…what of what I do here is of value to the fans who (assuming that’s someone other than my immediate family and whoever is responsible for surveiling soccer blogs from the Department of Homeland Security) frequent the joint.
What’s worth keeping, and what isn’t, for 2026?
Some content isn’t going away. For next season’s games I’ll still begin with a general recap of the match. I suspect I’ll have some specific observations on tactical or roster issues that came up during that particular match.
I get good information from Andre’ Carlisle’s passing plots, and from the “xG race” plots from both the Vaudevillian Cane site and from Chris Henderson’s whatever-he-calls-what-used-to-be-All-White-Kit, so those will be here so long as they’re not paywalled.
The “ratings and comment” section, obviously, will remain.
But what about the other “statistical” sections? I’m looking for either up- or downvotes; is there a strong feeling for retaining, or 86ing, the sections discussing:
- Corner kicks
- Turnovers
- Pressing
- Possession
I enjoy tracking them (although the possession data is a real chore; it means LOTS of stop-rewind-start-rewind-start again) but the more I think about that data, while it’s fun for me and often useful, it’s not as useful as it could be predominantly because I don’t really have good context.
For example, we’ve been using old EPL studies on shots and goals generated from corner kicks. But how well do those apply to the 2025 NWSL? It would be helpful – more helpful, IMO – to know how the Thorns’ corner kick production compares to their league rivals…but that means dragging the league results every week to find the shot and goal production from each and every other match.
That’s not impossible! But it would mean (in practice) that I’d have to take the time I spend working on TFC (call it “T”) which is now divided into six or eight or ten segments where there’s a fraction of that time devoted to each subtopic like corners or possession…
(And right now the “possession” segment is easily .3T or .2T where turnovers and corners and pressing are all about .1T. The ratings and comments are another .2T and so is the general introduction and tactical breakdowns. “Possession” is the single biggest time-suck.)
…and either increase the total time T, or cut into some of the other sections’ time.
So…
Are there (or is there) any of these which you the reader:
- Would like to see/read more about or in more detail, or with additional features like wider coverage of the league? or
- Don’t really have any/much interest in, so would be fine to see/read less of, or even drop entirely?
If you recall, we’ve done this “drop the study” thing twice; once with throw-ins, and, earlier, with goalkeeper distribution.
Both were studies on specific issues concerning each game action – with throw-ins, the perception that the Thorns were particularly poor at taking/getting tactical advantage from throws, with distribution, the perception that poor Thorns keeper distribution often resulted in opponent pressure on the Portland goal – and both resulted in “null sets”; that is, the data showed that the initial perceptions (let’s call them “hypotheses” to make them sound more science-y) were not supported by the data.
The Thorns were about NWSL-average in the tactical outcome of their throw-ins, and the Thorns’ keepers downfield deliveries weren’t either particularly dangerous (in generating opponent chances or dangerous attacks) or productive (in generating Thorns attacks). Once we had analyzed the data and gotten the result (and a “no evidence” result IS a result; it’s useful to know if there is evidence of absence rather than simply absence of evidence…) we stopped tracking those metrics.
One last thing
One feature I dropped during the 2024 season – partially out of my own sloth and partially because the end of that season was so dire that it no longer seemed much fun, having to pick how many goals the Thorns would lose by! – was the Prediction Game.
That was a Richard Hamje thing in particular. I enjoy(ed) it, but he was the real prediction master, and without his guidance I didn’t pursue it after 2024 or for this season.
But…it WAS fun, provided that Ken wasn’t driving the team bus off a cliff. Is there interest in bringing it back?
And on the subject of “lost things”…the podcast?
Well…I miss it. But I also lack any rudiment of podcasting skill, or the equipment, or, well, everything.
So podcast, no. It’s gone, never to return barring a miracle.
But if there’s interest we can revive the prediction game.
So..?
Let me know – hit me up in comments, or, if you’d prefer, drop me a line at jlawes@comcast.net – whether or not you’d like to see any or all of this.
Thanks.
And let’s flatten the Wave this Sunday.
C’mon, you Thorns.
- Thorns FC: FWE - November 22, 2025
- Thorns FC: A damn nice thing - November 17, 2025
- Thorns FC: Multitudes - November 8, 2025
While I appreciate the work that goes into breaking down stats for things like throw-ins, pressing, ect., I read the blog for two things; the overall game break down and individual player ratings. The only time I look at stats is in the context of a larger overall game analysis. For example, if we are saying “the Thorns won the game because they had the majority of the possession”, I would want to see that statistic. Otherwise, I wouldn’t care much.
If the blog didn’t change at all, I would still be perfectly happy and continue to read every week. Thankyou for you work.
John:
I love your blog, mostly for your colorful language and interesting insights. I am a data person, but the statistics can be overwhelming and some of that must take ages. Sometimes I just spin passed them, and that is not fair to you who puts in the time. I would not be unhappy if you dropped the big-time sinks and just include the passing plots and the Henderson stuff. I really like the player ratings (they are the best) and your comments. What is really valuable to me is how you see the game. You have a much more jaundiced eye or maybe jewelers’ eye than I do. I tend to judge the players like a proud parent, trying to forget the mistakes and a getting chuffed about all the good plays. But again, thanks for all you do.
I’ll second this commeny 100%! Some of your analytical information just makes my eyes glaze over, but I do love your player ratings and comments. I also like Erik’s idea below of doing a season long player rating trend.
I second all the above. I love the analysis you provide. That said, here are a few semi-coherent ideas.
The two most valuable data points are Trend and Benchmarks. So with a ton of respect to how much work you do to pull these reports together, a few thoughts.
Example: What is the player PMR trend during the season as a running total. Is player X trending up or down? Is their PMR static? To my uninformed soccer brain this sounds like something useful. (I may be using the wrong acronym but I mean the player ratings per game.)
Those of us who are deeply invested in the Thorns get easily bogged down in “Thorns World” and perhaps loose track of where the team is performing relative to their primary competitors. Sure Gale has made some decisions that look brain dead on occasion. But how do the Thorns compare to their competitors?
If there are trending data points that can be easily benchmarked to best in league against the Thorns, that would be valuable context. Example, the Thorns corners are X% successful. But how does that compare to their primary competitors or best in league? If that type of data is easily available, it would offer valuable context for the deeply embedded Thorns fan who may be laser focused on their team and lack the context of how they sit relative to the balance of the league.
No matter what, know I really appreciate the work you put into these posts. I love them and look forward to them weekly.
Thank you for all you put into this John. I expectantly look for your report every week. I look at the +/- section and want your insights into what happened. Your insights are very valuable to those of us less versed in the game and not watching as intently. I like the idea of you backing off on most of the statistics I don’t read to make providing this valuable service to the Thorn Fan Community less of a chore for you.
Thanks for all you do. Bruce McFadden
I’ll echo all of the thanks here – I greatly enjoy your write-ups every week.
* The most interesting stats to me are the PMRs, and as Erik points out, tracking them over the season would be helpful.** (Which you used to do, yes? Maybe that’s in the year-end write-up about the players’ performances.)
* I’d also like to see a “whole-team PMR” where you just add up all the players’ PMRs, to see how well it compares to my general feeling about the game and how well it matches up with wins and losses. Comparing these across games might reveal something.
* I can live without possession stats since they’re so much effort, and I’m not sure how they relate to how well the team did. Sometimes a big possession number means we dominated the game, but sometimes it just means the other team is a defend-and-counter team and it’s their whole plan to hand us possession.
* Also I’ve come to feel that xG is a more useful thing to know than possession. Did our attack get off good shots? Did our defense give up good shots? You’ve been including xG numbers from someone (in addition to the xG race charts, which don’t necessarily cover the whole game), so thanks for that.
* I can also live without the detailed breakdown of corner kicks. Just knowing how many each kicker took, and whether we scored from any of them, would do.
* Your analysis of goalkeeper kicks was really interesting simply because it revealed that distribution doesn’t matter, which I didn’t know or even suspect. Thanks for that! No need to restart that analysis though.
* As for pressing stats, I think it’s more revealing to see the “Attack Momentum” graphs of how the field is tilting across the 90 minutes. The graphs tell me something about how hard the team is *trying*, compared to how hard the other team is trying, which I find very interesting. Were we attacking or defending for our lives? We we really going for it out there or were we on mental vacation?
* I haven’t figured out what to do with the turnover stats. I read them and think “hmmm” and that’s about it. Partly this is because context is important: a turnover near the opponent’s goal is harmless, and may even indicate we made a good attack that didn’t quite make it, while a turnover at the top of our own box can be disastrous. If the turnover stats are very much work, drop them. (However it would still help to have commentary when the team, or any individual, has an especially bad turnover game. I don’t think you need stats for that though – it should be obvious, and show up in the PMR too.)
* Another thing that might be interesting is looking at player changes. It’s my impression that Moultrie improved over the winter, and then continued to improve throughout this season. Do the stats (PMRs or whatever) back that up? Was Castellanos any better, statistically speaking, late in the season?
—————————————
** I’m not sure how to compare a player’s PMRs across games in which she played different amounts of time. You could always scale the PMRs to be per-90 numbers, but that risks inflating a small number from short minutes to a crazily large number. Maybe use scaled per-90 values, but put an asterisk on any that represent less than, say, 45 minutes of play.
So I’ve been providing season plots for individual PMRs in the “final grades” pieces like this one from 2024: https://rivetingpdx.com/2024/01/29/2023-final-grades-the-forwards/
Typically I use the “net” PMR rather than try and graph the full value, and use the squad average net for context.
Thank you, John, for doing this work. I started reading about two years ago and thoroughly enjoy your takes. You make me a better, more informed fan. If you haven’t posted by Wednesday after a game, there are a lot of refreshes as the day goes on looking for your post.
The two things I’m looking for from you are 1) interpreting and teaching us more about the game, 2) doing so in a salty and entertaining way. You consistently knock it out of the park.
Specific feedback – I appreciate your interpretations of tactics and game stats, like the pass charts. I also appreciate your tactical play breakdowns. As far as stats go, what’s most interesting to me is the final analysis. Turnovers is big and I like seeing that. I pass over corner kicks. I like seeing the summary of the possession charts. I skip over the pressing and just look at the summary. I do very much appreciate that you take on new statistical projects and see if they add value.
Your player and coach ratings are gold. They are more meaningful because you take the time to figure out the +/-‘s. Thank you for doing that.
I would love to listen to a Thorns podcast that was much more heavy on strategy and analysis, and less on vibes. In your blogs, I’d also appreciate more background and teaching around soccer strategy in general. There are probably more people like me out there – love the Thorns, but not steeped in strategy, but wanting to learn.
I’m gonna pile on with others – I enjoy all of it. I am a late comer to the Thorns and to Football in general. What I’ve gleaned from this site is a more complete understanding of football. And I mean football in general. I like certain teams, in the premiere league, in Bundesligsa, in Lowlands Scottish league, whatever. I’ve learned so much from this site that it is indescribable. John, Thank You! I genuinely appreciate you’re work and contribution to the game more that I can explain. Whatever you serve up, I’m here eating it up. I love the tactics, the turnovers, the +/-, the coaching insights, and the pressing stats. All of it. I appreciate what you do.
I’ve become a better consumer of football because of you.
I always look forward to your analysis, John. We both hail from the “show your work” generation, but I admit I sometimes skim your data tables and look for something more compelling in your prose. I trained in a field that comes “dangerously close to approaching science” so I don’t need to see all your math. At this point I have read Riveting long enough to either a) trust your grasp of the data you assemble, or, b) understand where you’re coming from even when I might have seen something differently about a game or an individual performance. I’m not suggesting you do away completely with your data tables. But you could probably streamline your use of them a little in terms of a “I did what I always do and came to these conclusions” fashion.
Yes, that may befuddle a new reader. But it seems you always supply a “how I do what I do” primer at the beginning of each season? Nothing wrong with referring to those to guide the novices.
I like the notion of resuming the podcast, perhaps with a rotating group of the (un)usual suspects. Alas, I am a Luddite even though (or perhaps because) I long ago passed audio-visual training and knew how to plug in a microphone. Appreciate your work a great deal, at any rate, as I have said via our email asides.
John, hi – Lots of great comments here, and I’ll be brief. I love the blog and I am definitely not a stats guy, much like math class of long ago, my eyes glaze over, it’s too much for me, and not what grabs me. I pay attention to the player comments, the pluses and minuses, and your overall sense of humor, sense of the absurd, sense of the shithole country we’re living in.
I have not been a fan of Gale since day 1, and yet here the Thorns are in the semi-finals. Sports is its own wonderful and bizarre universe. Keep up the good work – Mark