Mark Flekken (Closed Thread)

[longtimeagobee]

I think the age points are not really relevant, Raya had been a first choice goalkeeper before joining us at 23 or whatever age, they’ve played about the same number of games with Flekken being older than him.

Also Flekken was a lot older when he finally became a first choice. Todays goal was not an error there’s no point diving for it he’s not saving it, also if he spent his time taking up positions where he’d save that shot he’d concede significantly worse goals and much softer goals because he’d be stood leaning against the post. No goalkeeper is saving that shot, some people need to give over it’s ridiculous the confirmation bias.

Raya was not one of us he wanted to go 4 years ago after his “positioning error” cost us promotion against the Tarquins and Arsenal offered us pittance for him. He’s never been committed to the cause anymore than he needed to be as a player under contract. Even in all his interviews after leaving i haven’t seen him say anything about his time at Brentford its like we did nothing to get him where he is today. Raya may be the best keeper we’ve had and possibly the best we’ll have for some years, I have no expectation that Flekken will exceed him in that respect, it’s clear Flekken is not a shot stopper or a conventional goalkeeper, the club know what they signed when we signed him. His distribution is his best asset and he’ll be expected to improve everything else. Strakosha is not a viable replacement his technique on everything is much worse and more unconventional than Flekken. Flekken hasn’t been at fault for anywhere near as many of the goals he’s being blamed for aside from Forest which I will accept as he was caught in no man’s land.

We've conceded a lot of soft goals and as a keeper I’d have been disappointed to concede a lot of them but more importantly almost all the goals that he’s getting a kicking for have been avoidable if we defended properly.

My main issue is that we had a crap pre season messing around on that America tournament instead of a more focused and development program, we’re not defending on the front foot, the team is depleted, more starters are injured than not the least of our concerns is that our goalkeeper didn’t save a shot that was as top corner as you can put it. We’re not going down we all want to win games and hopefully come January a break in the season will give us a chance to have a second pre season get these injured lot back to fitness and players who need some confidence a chance to develop as well.

There’s my two cents worth I don’t care if anybody agrees.

Bang on, I’d put your prices up, worth way more than 2cents?

 

[hanworthbee]

I've been critical of Flekken in the past but watching the highlights he seemed to play quite well yesterday

 

[Stanley]

Had a decent game yesterday, caught what he had to catch and saved what he needed to. His foot work was excellent ( Raya good) with maybe only one rushed clearance which went into touch. Its like having an extra sweeper at the back at times. Had no chance with the goal.

Seems to me he is gradually getting used to the PL and English football. Will be a big asset to us

 

[To Bee Someone]

He's a good keeper for me. As Thomas rightly said, United goal was the moment of quality both sides needed.
Did a lot of the bread and butter stuff quite stuff. Still clench my stomach (might have been the pie) when he's playing out the back though.

 

[WARFIELD BEE]

I think the age points are not really relevant, Raya had been a first choice goalkeeper before joining us at 23 or whatever age, they’ve played about the same number of games with Flekken being older than him.

Also Flekken was a lot older when he finally became a first choice. Todays goal was not an error there’s no point diving for it he’s not saving it, also if he spent his time taking up positions where he’d save that shot he’d concede significantly worse goals and much softer goals because he’d be stood leaning against the post. No goalkeeper is saving that shot, some people need to give over it’s ridiculous the confirmation bias.

Raya was not one of us he wanted to go 4 years ago after his “positioning error” cost us promotion against the Tarquins and Arsenal offered us pittance for him. He’s never been committed to the cause anymore than he needed to be as a player under contract. Even in all his interviews after leaving i haven’t seen him say anything about his time at Brentford its like we did nothing to get him where he is today. Raya may be the best keeper we’ve had and possibly the best we’ll have for some years, I have no expectation that Flekken will exceed him in that respect, it’s clear Flekken is not a shot stopper or a conventional goalkeeper, the club know what they signed when we signed him. His distribution is his best asset and he’ll be expected to improve everything else. Strakosha is not a viable replacement his technique on everything is much worse and more unconventional than Flekken. Flekken hasn’t been at fault for anywhere near as many of the goals he’s being blamed for aside from Forest which I will accept as he was caught in no man’s land.

We've conceded a lot of soft goals and as a keeper I’d have been disappointed to concede a lot of them but more importantly almost all the goals that he’s getting a kicking for have been avoidable if we defended properly.

My main issue is that we had a crap pre season messing around on that America tournament instead of a more focused and development program, we’re not defending on the front foot, the team is depleted, more starters are injured than not the least of our concerns is that our goalkeeper didn’t save a shot that was as top corner as you can put it. We’re not going down we all want to win games and hopefully come January a break in the season will give us a chance to have a second pre season get these injured lot back to fitness and players who need some confidence a chance to develop as well.

There’s my two cents worth I don’t care if anybody agrees.

Not as good as Chesney as far as I am concerned.

 

[Isleworth_Bee]

Had a good game yesterday. Anyone who thinks he should have saved that goal yesterday is living in cuckoo land.

picking faults for the sake of it.

Can’t believe people are having a go because he didn’t “dive”

 

[dickie]

Not as good as Chesney as far as I am concerned.

He was certainly the one and only.

 

[James30]

Had a good game yesterday. Anyone who thinks he should have saved that goal yesterday is living in cuckoo land.

picking faults for the sake of it.

Can’t believe people are having a go because he didn’t “dive”

Doesn’t help himself when he stands rooted on his line and doesn’t move …

 

[BaildonBee]

I am just waiting for the YouTube montage that someone will put up soon to highlight his perceived errors. Some of you will recall that the same was done for Raya early on in his Brentford career. Maybe that spurred David on to greater things or maybe like the rest of us he ignored it and concentrated on his game.

 

[Isleworth_Bee]

Doesn’t help himself when he stands rooted on his line and doesn’t move …

Mate it was miles away and dipped wickedly at the end. A dive would have been more pointless then the air dives Pickford attempts just to make himself look like he was close to it.

he wasn’t the issue with that goal

pinnocks crap clearance and the lack of pressure to close the shot down.

 

[James30]

Mate it was miles away and dipped wickedly at the end. A dive would have been more pointless then the air dives Pickford attempts just to make himself look like he was close to it.

he wasn’t the issue with that goal

pinnocks crap clearance and the lack of pressure to close the shot down.

Agree should never of had space to put it the corner anyway that’s the problem at the minute we are vulnerable out wide with no proper full back … I thought overall he did well and saved us in the end with 2 quality saves.

 

[aawharris]

Not sure that answered the question tbh.

It didnt.
But always easier to have a go at someone if you arent answering a question where you would have to support him.

 

[aawharris]

Mate it was miles away and dipped wickedly at the end. A dive would have been more pointless then the air dives Pickford attempts just to make himself look like he was close to it.

he wasn’t the issue with that goal

pinnocks crap clearance and the lack of pressure to close the shot down.

I think you have hit the nail on the head.
Pickford just dives around like an utter bellend with his T Rex arms, getting nowhere near the ball, but im.sure that would make some of our fans happier to see.

 

[W13 Bee]

The stats say that he should have prevented 4 more goals than he has: Premier League Goalkeeper Stats | FBref.com
Pretty much the worst of any goalkeeper in the league along with Johnstone at Palace.
This isn't an "anti Flekken" agenda, the stats are there for all to see. He is not preventing goals that he should.

He is great with his feet but his overall goalkeeping (including his ability to read tricky crossing situations) appears to be average at best.

 

[GP200]

he wasn’t the issue with that goal

pinnocks crap clearance and the lack of pressure to close the shot down.

...............spot on..............

 

[Isleworth_Bee]

I think you have hit the nail on the head.
Pickford just dives around like an utter bellend with his T Rex arms, getting nowhere near the ball, but im.sure that would make some of our fans happier to see.

yep, and what’s the point in throwing yourself at something that looked like it was sailing over until it dipped.
Knowing our luck he throws himself at a pointless save and dislocates a shoulder etc.

 

[jlove]

Yesterday, he saved everything that was savable and kept us in the game during the first 20 minutes of the second half. I can’t understand why anyone would have any complaints.

 

[StevieSteve]

This isn't an "anti Flekken" agenda, the stats are there for all to see. He is not preventing goals that he should.

It's a bit more nuanced than that.

Take the goal Palace scored against us. Had a low xG caused by a mixup between Flekken and IIRC Collins. Jury was out on who was primarily to blame.

So the team let in more goals than it should but that's not necessarily down to the keeper.

 

[Lozza]

Yesterday, he saved everything that was savable and kept us in the game during the first 20 minutes of the second half. I can’t understand why anyone would have any complaints.

Agree. Excellent yesterday. He and damsgaard stood out in a good way.

 

[birdy67]

It's a bit more nuanced than that.

Take the goal Palace scored against us. Had a low xG caused by a mixup between Flekken and IIRC Collins. Jury was out on who was primarily to blame.

So the team let in more goals than it should but that's not necessarily down to the keeper.

He's also chosen to ignore the fact that Notts Forest are also deemed worse at goalkeeping overall and of course the fact that the two goals Strakosha let in against Man Utd would add to that overall score, so definitely not an indicator of Flekken's (in)ability.

 

[W13 Bee]

He's also chosen to ignore the fact that Notts Forest are also deemed worse at goalkeeping overall and of course the fact that the two goals Strakosha let in against Man Utd would add to that overall score, so definitely not an indicator of Flekken's (in)ability.

All very amusing. I have simply looked at the season as a whole (to try and exclude any noise or 'nuance' from individual situations), looked at the goalkeepers and seen that for keepers that have played the majority of games this season (to again try and exclude noise or individual situations), he is one of the keepers that is conceding goals from shots that he is expected not to.

And Strakosha has his own score if you want to have a look at that.

 

[birdy67]

All very amusing. I have simply looked at the season as a whole (to try and exclude any noise or 'nuance' from individual situations), looked at the goalkeepers and seen that for keepers that have played the majority of games this season (to again try and exclude noise or individual situations), he is one of the keepers that is conceding goals from shots that he is expected not to.

And Strakosha has his own score if you want to have a look at that.

You also missed Bournemouth by the way. So some of the noise is actually relevant. If you're going to use facts and stats lets at least try and get them correct!

 

[W13 Bee]

You also missed Bournemouth by the way. So some of the noise is actually relevant. If you're going to use facts and stats lets at least try and get them correct!

I looked at goalkeepers, not teams. You seem to be missing this point.

 

[birdy67]

Ok you missed Radu's stats. Trust me I get your (negative) point. I just don't understand the point of raising it?

 

[W13 Bee]

Ok you missed Radu's stats. Trust me I get your (negative) point. I just don't understand the point of raising it?

Radu has played two 90 minutes.

You haven't read my previous posts on trying to have a decent sample size.

I will leave it there.

 

[birdy67]

Ok here's a stat for you from your table. There are 13 Premier League keepers this season that have conceded more goals than Flekken. I guess you can possibly argue that they may have played more games than Mark somehow or some other outlier that makes your stats work. For the life of me though I can fathom why you would? Unless it's just to try and knock a guy due to your negative perception of him.

 

[kevalutonbee]

Mate it was miles away and dipped wickedly at the end. A dive would have been more pointless then the air dives Pickford attempts just to make himself look like he was close to it.

he wasn’t the issue with that goal

pinnocks crap clearance and the lack of pressure to close the shot down.

I saw the lack of pressure on McAtee andcrhen realised that the reason was that the clearance hit Janelt.

So then I was wondering why Janelt was over there and/or why was there no one filling in on the left

 

[hanworthbee]

He's also chosen to ignore the fact that Notts Forest are also deemed worse at goalkeeping overall and of course the fact that the two goals Strakosha let in against Man Utd would add to that overall score, so definitely not an indicator of Flekken's (in)ability.

His post shot expected goals is -4.The table isn’t necessarily an indication of ability as raya and ederson are also in the bottom 7

 

[Gaz71]

Doesn’t help himself when he stands rooted on his line and doesn’t move …

Pointless comment. He wasn’t on the line. He was positioned off it, ready to come for a cross.

 

[birdy67]

His post shot expected goals is -4.The table isn’t necessarily an indication of ability as raya and ederson are also in the bottom 7

Pretty much the worst of any goalkeeper in the league

 

[W13 Bee]

His post shot expected goals is -4.The table isn’t necessarily an indication of ability as raya and ederson are also in the bottom 7

The stat is likely to be noisy with the fairly small sample size of games - I get that.

Perhaps Flekken has been really unlucky and the stat is misleading. I am aware that this could be the case. On the face of it, as I said above, both him and Johnstone stand out in this stat for regularly playing keepers.

So what is this stat an indication of if it is not necessarily an indication of ability? Let's say we looked at (for example) 1,000 games, to try and reduce the random noise. What would it be telling us?

 

[aawharris]

Everytime i see a new post in here, i wonder who will have accused him of dropping a cross / standing still etc now

 

[WarrenBee]

With the way the ball dipped and swerved, I'm not sure there was much that he could have done about it. He also made two good stops in the second half.

 

[birdy67]

Everytime i see a new post in here, i wonder who will have accused him of dropping a cross / standing still etc now

Take your pick mate. There's plenty of haters!

 

[Owlsmoor_Bee]

Doesn’t help himself when he stands rooted on his line and doesn’t move …

Nonsense. I had as much chance of saving that as he did. And I was in Berkshire at the time.

 

[detours]

Since that strange goal vs Forest (which I'd lean towards being a marginal error) I don't think any of the goals Flekken's conceded since he's been at fault for IMO.

There's been loads of negative chatter on Twitter, and I know some fans have been poring over every second of every game to find him at fault. But I genuinely don't think he's done much wrong... and actually done a lot of things very well.

Would love to know what the coaching staff think. I wonder if they might actually be pretty positive about how he's been playing since coming back from appendicitis.

 

[North London Bee]

Since that strange goal vs Forest (which I'd lean towards being a marginal error) I don't think any of the goals Flekken's conceded since he's been at fault for IMO.

There's been loads of negative chatter on Twitter, and I know some fans have been poring over every second of every game to find him at fault. But I genuinely don't think he's done much wrong... and actually done a lot of things very well.

Would love to know what the coaching staff think. I wonder if they might actually be pretty positive about how he's been playing since coming back from appendicitis.

My guess is that they love him given his dexterity with the ball at his feet.

 

[Beefuddled]

xG is such a potentially faulty measure - eg for the Arsenal games Ramsdale kept a clean sheet even with a high xG, largely due to goal-line clearances and the woodwork - great stats but nothing to do with the GK. Good defenders and unlucky attackers also have a huge effect on the xG difference and therefore xG is a long way down my list of priorities.

 

[Mr Tree]

The stat is likely to be noisy with the fairly small sample size of games - I get that.

Perhaps Flekken has been really unlucky and the stat is misleading. I am aware that this could be the case. On the face of it, as I said above, both him and Johnstone stand out in this stat for regularly playing keepers.

So what is this stat an indication of if it is not necessarily an indication of ability? Let's say we looked at (for example) 1,000 games, to try and reduce the random noise. What would it be telling us?

Can't see him getting to 1000 games chap, he's already nearly 30...

Think he's growing into it nicely. Might not reach that top top level where other clubs envy us for him, but he should hold us steady for a while.

I'll tell ya now tho, some bugger's gonna jump his "left foot chip to right-sided defender" soon enough!

 

[mobbeez]

I dislike bumping this thread, but please apply statistics cautiously. Interpreting exceeding XGa as indicating poor keeping lacks caution. There will be more than one model for calculating this, and if you use a simplistic one overly focused on the forwards position, you will ignore other factors, such as defenders present. If you incorporate this, it still may be a poor indication of keeping ability. For example, a crowded box may result in fewer shots going through, but it may mean that the keeper often gets an obstructed (or late) view of the shot.

It is always important to remember what a stat is for: XG and XGa, are primarily gambling tools, geared to assess team performance (particularly over a season). I am not saying that they are uninteresting, or unworthy of mention; but when trotting them out to discuss an individual, there is a chance that, rather than being affected by the noise, they ARE the noise.

 

[hanworthbee]

The stat is likely to be noisy with the fairly small sample size of games - I get that.

Perhaps Flekken has been really unlucky and the stat is misleading. I am aware that this could be the case. On the face of it, as I said above, both him and Johnstone stand out in this stat for regularly playing keepers.

So what is this stat an indication of if it is not necessarily an indication of ability? Let's say we looked at (for example) 1,000 games, to try and reduce the random noise. What would it be telling us?

Maybe the more shots you face the more saves you make,
.probably why kaminski is right up there

 

[W13 Bee]

I dislike bumping this thread, but please apply statistics cautiously. Interpreting exceeding XGa as indicating poor keeping lacks caution. There will be more than one model for calculating this, and if you use a simplistic one overly focused on the forwards position, you will ignore other factors, such as defenders present. If you incorporate this, it still may be a poor indication of keeping ability. For example, a crowded box may result in fewer shots going through, but it may mean that the keeper often gets an obstructed (or late) view of the shot.

It is always important to remember what a stat is for: XG and XGa, are primarily gambling tools, geared to assess team performance (particularly over a season). I am not saying that they are uninteresting, or unworthy of mention; but when trotting them out to discuss an individual, there is a chance that, rather than being affected by the noise, they ARE the noise.

I have said above that the stat could be misleading and I have tried to treat it with caution! Perhaps it is useless. Perhaps it is not.

However, no one has been able to answer the question above about what "expected goal minus goals allowed" indicates, if we were to have a large and good enough sample.

 

[TorbayBee]

Everytime i see a new post in here, i wonder who will have accused him of dropping a cross / standing still etc now

I agree , I think what he allegedly messed up now. It is so one eyed

 

[mobbeez]

I have said above that the stat could be misleading and I have tried to treat it with caution! Perhaps it is useless. Perhaps it is not.

However, no one has been able to answer the question above about what "expected goal minus goals allowed" indicates, if we were to have a large and good enough sample.

It is a gambling metric. One use of it is to identify teams that are better than current results suggest (or the opposite) and identify those where it is expected they will return to the norm.

Where odds overly reflect results over underlying performance, it can identify good value for money. Even as an assessment of one team or one match it is of modest value, but as a guide to how you spread a multiple of bets over time, it more useful.

 

[W13 Bee]

It is a gambling metric. One use of it is to identify teams that are better than current results suggest (or the opposite) and identify those where it is expected they will return to the norm.

Where odds overly reflect results over underlying performance, it can identify good value for money. Even as an assessment of one team or one match it is of modest value, but as a guide to how you spread a multiple of bets over time, it more useful.

Yes I understand xG performance and how a team performs over or under. There will be reasons why a team is performing over or under. It could be randomness (as per your point of returning to the norm) or it could be a mix of that and other factors, potentially skill?

Anyway, back to Mark Flekken.

 

[detours]

The stats say that he should have prevented 4 more goals than he has: Premier League Goalkeeper Stats | FBref.com
Pretty much the worst of any goalkeeper in the league along with Johnstone at Palace.
This isn't an "anti Flekken" agenda, the stats are there for all to see. He is not preventing goals that he should.

You're saying "he's not preventing goals that he should" -- I don't think anyone with a data background would put it in those terms though.

Post shot expected goals (minus goals against) is a useful measure, but it can still be very misleading. Just to take a few examples:

• The Luton game, Flekken was given a Post Shot Expected Goal score of 0.1. That's 0.9 goals he "should" have saved.
• Same with Forest, given a PSXG score of 0.1 but the header has flown in the net, and that's another 0.9 goals.
• Tottenham is PSXG of 1.1 but he's conceded 2 goals, that's another 0.9 goals.
• Against West Ham he got PSXG score of 1.2 but conceded 2, so that's 0.8 more added to goals he "should" have saved.

From those 4 games he's got a score of +3.5 (psxg minus goals against). That's 3.5 "goals he should have saved" as you put it.

Now, I've seen all those goals, and (perhaps Forest freak header aside) I wouldn't expect Flekken to make any of those saves... I'd even go so far as to argue that most top keepers don't make those saves majority of the time.

There are really fine margins at play here.

 

[hanworthbee]

I have said above that the stat could be misleading and I have tried to treat it with caution! Perhaps it is useless. Perhaps it is not.

However, no one has been able to answer the question above about what "expected goal minus goals allowed" indicates, if we were to have a large and good enough sample.

Post shot expected goals being -4 basically means he's let in 4 more goals than he should have

 

[Edmundo]

Post shot expected goals being -4 basically means he's let in 4 more goals than he should have

No it doesn't as that takes no account of how well the striker took his chance. A worldie from outside the area has a low xG, but may be completely unstoppable.

 

[hanworthbee]

So what does -4 mean then ?

 

[W5BeesFan]

Flekken is steady but unspectacular so far. Maybe we are judging him harshly against the stronger points of his predecessor. He can seem a little immobile at times and slow to react. On the plus side he is a bigger keeper than Raya so should be able to command the box and his positional play/angles is generally good. Not the best and not the worst but it's his first season in the EPL so we should cut him some slack.