My journey around Europe (figuratively not literally) now takes me to France where I continue my quest for all things efficient to see who needs the least shots before scoring in each of the five major league across the continent. I’ve already analysed England, Germany and Spain this week so let’s now cross the English Channel to Ligue 1.

Once again thanks to whoscored.com for all the necessary data.

Here is the Ligue 1 table after 13 weeks while also working out the amount of total shots taken.

R Team Shots pg Games Played Total Shots
1 Paris Saint Germain 16 13 208
2 Monaco 14.5 13 189
3 Lyon 14.5 13 189
4 Marseille 16.2 13 211
5 Nantes 10.8 13 140
6 Caen 13.1 13 170
7 Saint-Etienne 11.7 13 152
8 Montpellier 11.8 13 153
9 Bordeaux 13.7 13 178
10 Toulouse 10.2 13 133
11 Rennes 12.3 13 160
12 Amiens 9.2 13 120
13 Dijon 11.8 13 153
14 Troyes 9.5 13 124
15 Guingamp 11.5 13 150
16 Angers 12.1 13 157
17 Nice 12.8 13 166
18 Strasbourg 13.1 13 170
19 Lille 12.6 13 164
20 Metz 10.5 13 137

And here they are in terms of shot efficiency rankings (smallest to largest)

Team GF Total Shots Shot Efficency
Paris Saint Germain 43 208 4.8
Monaco 35 189 5.4
Lyon 32 189 5.9
Marseille 27 211 7.8
Dijon 17 153 9.0
Angers 17 157 9.3
Troyes 13 124 9.5
Bordeaux 17 178 10.5
Rennes 15 160 10.7
Guingamp 14 150 10.7
Saint-Etienne 14 152 10.9
Amiens 11 120 10.9
Toulouse 12 133 11.1
Nice 15 166 11.1
Strasbourg 15 170 11.4
Nantes 12 140 11.7
Lille 12 164 13.7
Montpellier 9 153 17.0
Caen 9 170 18.9
Metz 5 137 27.3

The next step is to turn that data into a graph so it is easily digestible

Ligue 1

As you can see PSG’s ruthlessness is easily reflected in this chart, as they require just 4.8 shots per goal this season. Now a lot of league leaders or ‘big teams’ will create a lot of chances but not convert, I’d say Real Madrid and to a lesser degree Bayern Munich are classic examples of this.

But PSG for all their flair can back it up there 208 shots have warranted an incredible 43 goals after week 13 of the season, an average of 3.30 goals per game. If you also add their Champions League goals into the mix then across both competitions they are averaging even more as the figure then increases to 3.72.

However they are not the team that has had the most efforts this season as Marseille have three more chances (211 to 208) to their name. They only sit fourth in the shot efficiency ranking though, there is a neat symmetry in the fact the top four teams in terms of goals scored are also the four most efficient.

Monaco may well struggle to defend their Ligue 1 crown this season but they are certainly free flowing when it comes to goals, Leonardo Jardim’s side only require 5.4 efforts before breaching the opposition’s defence, scoring an average of 2.69 goals per game this season.

There is little to cheer for Metz as they bring up the foot of the table when it comes to shot efficiency, they require 28.3 shots before scoring at the other end. That however is by no means the worst record when it comes to teams around Europe

Let’s see how this charts looks in comparison to the Ligue 1 table

PSG

Last week it was Angers and Troyes who were the big winners as they were a staggering 12 places higher than their league position suggests. Once again it is Angers who sit pretty at the top of the table but they only have a 10 place positive variance while Troyes have seen their positive variance move from 12 places to seven.

Dijon move up to the second highest team that has profited from their shot efficiency as they find themselves eight places better off than their current Ligue 1 standing. Their situation has improved from last week when it was at plus seven.

The group of teams where there is no change paints an interesting picture as the top four teams in the league are the top four teams in terms of goal scored and also in terms of shot efficency, while there is also no change for Amiens and Metz who are rock bottom of both charts.

There are some wild swings when we look at the big losers though as Montpeillier, St Etienne and Caen all have double figures negative variance. Montpeiller are 10 places worse off, Nantes are 11 while St Etienne are a unlucky 13.

Let’s look at the three parameters and just how the table is split

9 Positive
6 Neutral
5 Negative

Nearly half of the teams in Ligue 1 are actually more efficient than their league placing would suggest but at the same time there are a sizeable amount of teams who match exactly where their current position is.

Let’s now rank the teams in terms of shots in Ligue 1

Team Total Shots
Marseille 211
Paris Saint Germain 208
Monaco 189
Lyon 189
Bordeaux 178
Strasbourg 170
Caen 170
Nice 166
Lille 164
Rennes 160
Angers 157
Dijon 153
Montpellier 153
Saint-Etienne 152
Guingamp 150
Nantes 140
Metz 137
Toulouse 133
Troyes 124
Amiens 120

As mentioned there is a slight difference here in that Marseille top this chart but they do not have the same ruthlessness in front of goal as PSG have but again it is that select group of four teams that dominate this chart also.

Now let’s have a look at how the shot efficiency ranking has differed from Week 12 to Week 13

Ligue 1

The big winners are Amiens who moved up five places from last weekend while Dijon, Bordeaux, Saint-Etienne, Guingamp and Lille have all profited, however there are more teams that have not moved with eight teams staying in the same position (top four of Ligue 1 included) while Toulouse are by far the big losers dropping seven places.

Next week I’ll look to implement a chart which shows the difference in terms of shot efficiency from week to week while we can also start to look at it from a shot conversion point of view, whether that is in a separate article series I am yet to decide but the project is certainly getting bigger by the week.

Next up will be articles on shot efficiency in Italy – so do keep an eye out for that one.

 

I hope this was of interest to you and if you have any football data work available then please contact me at realfootballmanwordpress@gmail.com as I am always looking to undertake additional projects to the ones I already have. Thanks, Dan.