At the mid-season point of the 2023/2024 Croatian Football League, I published a brief overview of the clubs' performance, comparing them based on certain defensive and offensive statistics. For the mid-season report, you can check the link here. The data used for this analysis was sourced from the fbref website. Now that the season has concluded, it is time for a renewed analysis, this time for the entire season. At mid-season, it seemed that the race for the championship would be tight. Up to that point, Dinamo had been performing solidly but was not unbeatable. However, after being eliminated in the Round of 16 of the Conference League, Dinamo shifted into a higher gear and went on an 11-game winning streak in the league. This impressive series of victories allowed them to pull away from their followers, securing the title with ease and earning a spot in the playoffs of the 2024/2025 Champions League. Alongside Dinamo, other clubs also fought for places in European competitions. Rijeka secured a spot in the Europa League qualifications, while Hajduk and Osijek earned their places in the Conference League qualifications. Unfortunately, Rudeš has been relegated and will return to the second division after just one season, managing only 1 win in 36 matches. Now that the championship is over, let's take a detailed look at the comparison of teams based on selected statistics:

The first graph shows the average number of points each team earned at home compared to their away performances over the entire season. Dinamo showed outstanding overall performance, securing an impressive average of 2.33 points at home and 2.22 points away. Only Rijeka surpassed Dinamo's home record, earning an average of 2.44 points, highlighting their strong home dominance. Remarkably, Hajduk and Lokomotiva excelled on away turf, getting more points on the road than at home. Hajduk averaged 1.94 points away compared to 1.83 at home, while Lokomotiva got an average of 1.44 points away and 1.39 at home. Varaždin demonstrated consistency by earning an identical average of 1.17 points both at home and away. This balance was also seen in Lokomotiva, though slightly leaning towards away performance. Conversely, Rudeš encountered significant struggles, managing only 0.39 points at home and a very low 0.11 away, ultimately leading to their relegation.

On the next graph, we can see a strong correlation between the number of victories each team achieved and the percentage of matches in which they did not concede a goal, suggesting that a strong defense is key to success in the league. Dinamo, according to statistics, secured an impressive 25 victories during the season, confirming their dominance. However, what made them even more convincing was their high percentage of matches without conceding a goal, standing at 47%. This clearly showed their strong defense, crucial to their success. Hajduk also stood out with their results, achieving 21 victories and a solid percentage of 44% of matches without conceding a goal. This demonstrated their dominance and defensive stability. Rijeka, although perhaps with fewer victories than Dinamo, recorded 23 wins and an impressive percentage of 53% of matches without conceding a goal. This placed them among the league's leading teams with an exceptionally strong defense and the ability to maintain results. However, there were surprises like Osijek. Despite achieving a decent number of victories, their percentage of matches without conceding a goal, at 28%, indicated a weakness in defense, which could be an area for improvement in the next season. At the other end of the spectrum, we find Rudeš, who didn't secure a single victory and had an extremely low percentage of only 11% of matches without conceding a goal. This clearly indicated significant problems they needed to address to get back into the game. This analytical view of the relationship between the number of victories and defensive solidity provides us with valuable insights into the key factors that determine success in the league. While the number of victories can be an important indicator, it's not sufficient without a strong defensive system that can maintain results and ensure consistency throughout the season.

The chart above provides insight into how each HNL club performed this season in terms of goals scored and conceded. Dinamo and Rijeka stand out for maintaining an impressive difference between goals scored and conceded, highlighting their ability to balance attacking prowess with solid defense. Particularly noteworthy is Hajduk's performance, boasting the fewest goals conceded per match, indicating an exceptionally efficient defense. However, despite their defensive strength, Hajduk ranks fourth in terms of goals scored, suggesting room for improvement in their offensive play. On the other hand, Rudeš, Istra 1961, Slaven Belupo, and Gorica show a negative difference between goals scored and conceded, signaling a need for enhancement either in defense or attacking efficiency. As for Osijek, while they score a high number of goals per match, they also concede quite a few, hinting at an open, attacking style of play but also highlighting the need for improvement in defense.

This graph shows the relationship between the number of expected goals scored and the number of expected goals conceded per match for each team. Expected Goals (XG) is an advanced statistical method used to predict the number of goals a team should score based on the quality and quantity of their chances. The XG model considers various factors such as distance from goal, angle of shot, type of shot (header, foot), speed of play, and other variables to estimate the likelihood that a particular chance will result in a goal. Thus, XG provides a more objective assessment of a team's performance compared to traditional statistics like possession percentage or shots on goal. Dinamo leads the league in expected goals scored per match with an impressive 2.09, indicating an exceptional ability to create quality chances. Simultaneously, they also boast the lowest number of expected goals conceded, just 1.07 per match, establishing themselves as the league's best defense. Rijeka also demonstrates a high level of quality with 1.95 expected goals scored. Hajduk, although not leading, achieves a respectable 1.57 expected goals per match, suggesting their ability to create opportunities. However, they significantly lag behind the leaders, implying there is room for improvement and potential for better results. Osijek, despite a high number of expected goals scored per match, also concedes a high number of expected goals. As concluded in the previous graph, this may indicate an open, attacking style of play, but also suggests there is room for improvement in defense. On the other hand, Rudeš, Gorica, Slaven Belupo, and Istra 1961 find themselves at the bottom of the table in terms of expected goals scored per match, indicating their challenges in creating quality chances. Additionally, they have a high number of expected goals conceded, highlighting the need to enhance defensive capabilities.

defensive analysis

The following graph explores the correlation between the number of goals conceded by each team per match and their goalkeeper’s save percentage. Hajduk stands out for allowing the fewest goals per match and boasting a high goalkeeper save percentage. This suggests they have a really strong defense and great goalkeepers. On the other hand, Rudeš and Slaven Belupo find themselves at the opposite end of the spectrum, conceding the highest number of goals per match, indicating a pressing need to strengthen their defense. Gorica and Lokomotiva, while conceding goals at a rate similar to Osijek and Varaždin, have goalkeepers who boast a significantly higher save percentage. In contrast, Dinamo and Rijeka, known for letting in fewer goals per match, exhibit a lower goalkeeper save percentage than Hajduk, Lokomotiva, and Gorica.

The next graph illustrates the correlation between the goalkeeper’s save percentage and the percentage of matches in which each team does not concede a goal. Hajduk stood out as a notable example, showcasing a high goalkeeper save percentage of 74% alongside a high percentage of clean sheets at 44%. This suggested a formidable defense, where not only were fewer goals conceded, but also the goalkeeper was highly effective in preventing those shots that did come through. Similarly, Dinamo and Rijeka were both strong defensively, with Dinamo having a slightly better goalkeeper save percentage (72%) compared to Rijeka (71%), while Rijeka demonstrated a higher clean sheet percentage at 53%. On the other hand, Gorica and Lokomotiva boasted a goalkeeper save percentage of 74% and 75%, despite their clean sheet percentages being 31%. This implied that their goalkeepers were remarkably efficient in stopping shots on target, even if they didn't secure as many clean sheets as other teams.

This graph illustrates the relationship between the number of fouls committed and the number of fouls suffered by each team per match. Dinamo stands out prominently in this analysis. Despite committing notably fewer fouls compared to most teams, including Hajduk, Gorica, and Rijeka, Dinamo is consistently the most fouled team, with an average of 14.61 fouls suffered per match. This contrast suggests that Dinamo not only played with a disciplined approach, committing fewer fouls themselves (10.47 per match), but also faced aggressive tactics from opponents. Istra 1961 emerges as a team that committed the most fouls per match (15.44), while also enduring a significant number of fouls from opponents (13.83 per match). Additionally, Rudeš and Gorica are noted for their tendency to both commit and suffer a similar number of fouls per match, indicating a balanced dynamic in their gameplay. On the other hand, Lokomotiva, Osijek, and Slaven Belupo are also recognized for their inclination to commit a high number of fouls per match, suggesting a potentially aggressive playing style.

This graph illustrates the relationship between the number of cards each team receives and the number of fouls they commit per match. Dinamo and Istra 1961 stand out in this analysis. Dinamo is noteworthy for their disciplined playing style, receiving fewer cards (1.69 per match) compared to other teams, despite committing fewer fouls (10.47 per match). This suggests a controlled approach on the field, where they manage to maintain discipline while remaining competitive. Istra 1961, on the other hand, receives a significantly higher number of cards per match (2.94), which correlates with their high number of fouls committed (15.44 per match). This indicates a more aggressive playing style, where their intensity sometimes leads to disciplinary action from referees. Additionally, Slaven Belupo emerges as a team with one of the highest numbers of cards per match (2.72), reflecting their aggressive approach on the field. Conversely, Hajduk and Gorica are notable for their playing styles, receiving fewer cards despite their competitive nature. Hajduk receives 1.78 cards per match, while Gorica receives 1.97 cards per match. This suggests that they are able to maintain a balance between competitiveness and discipline.

This graph illustrates the relationship between the number of shots each team takes and the number of shots they allow opponents per match. Rijeka and Dinamo stand out prominently in this analysis. Dinamo is second in the league in the number of shots per match, with an average of 16.69 shots, indicating their proactive approach in creating scoring opportunities. Additionally, they have one of the lowest numbers of shots allowed to opponents per match (8.47), demonstrating their defensive prowess in limiting opponent chances. Similarly, Rijeka also excels in both offensive and defensive aspects. They have the highest number of shots per match (17.06) and the lowest number of shots allowed to opponents per match (7.78), showcasing their effectiveness at both ends of the field. On the other hand, Gorica and Rudeš are notable for allowing opponents a high number of shots per match (16.00 and 16.19, respectively), indicating potential weaknesses in their defense. Despite this, they themselves do not take a large number of shots on goal, suggesting opportunities for improvement in their offensive and defensive strategies. Furthermore, Istra 1961 emerges as a team that takes a relatively low number of shots per match (10.08), while also allowing a moderate number of shots to opponents (11.47). This indicates a balanced approach, where they focus on maintaining defensive stability while seeking opportunities to capitalize on offensive chances.

offensive analysis

Next, upon analyzing the expected goals (XG) and actual goals scored per match for different teams, several notable trends emerged. Dinamo, despite having a high number of expected goals (2.09), scored slightly fewer goals than expected, with an average of 1.86 goals per match. This indicated a slight underperformance in converting scoring opportunities into goals. Rijeka demonstrated a different scenario, where they met expectations closely. With an average of 1.95 expected goals per match, they managed to score 1.92 goals, showcasing a high level of efficiency in converting their chances into goals. Similarly, Osijek performed well in this aspect, scoring more goals (1.72) than would be expected based on their expected goals (1.65). This suggested a clinical finishing ability and efficiency in front of goal. Hajduk, Lokomotiva, and Varaždin exhibited a trend of slightly underperforming in terms of goal-scoring compared to their expected goals. While they had relatively high expected goals, their actual goal-scoring fell slightly below expectations. Varaždin, in particular, had a notable difference of -0.35 between expected goals and actual goals scored. On the other hand, Slaven Belupo, Istra 1961, and Gorica scored approximately as many goals as would be expected based on their chances, indicating a balanced performance in converting scoring opportunities. Rudeš stood out as the team with the largest gap between expected and actual goals scored. Despite being expected to score almost one goal per match (0.98 XG), they actually scored significantly fewer goals (0.61), suggesting inefficiencies in their attacking play.

This graph presents a comparison between goals scored and assisted goals per match for different teams, shedding light on their teamwork and attacking efficiency. Teams like Dinamo, Osijek, and Rijeka showcased strong performances in both goals and assisted goals per match. Dinamo, for instance, not only scored an average of 1.86 goals per match but also benefited from 1.28 assisted goals, indicating effective teamwork and fluid attacking play. Similarly, Osijek exhibited commendable attacking prowess with an average of 1.72 goals and 1.06 assisted goals per match, reflecting their ability to create scoring opportunities and capitalize on them with the help of teammates. Rijeka also stood out with an impressive performance, scoring 1.92 goals and benefiting from 1.31 assisted goals per match, demonstrating their cohesion and effectiveness in the attacking third. On the other hand, teams like Rudeš and Istra 1961 struggled in both goals scored and assisted goals per match. Rudeš, for instance, scored an average of 0.61 goals and benefited from 0.50 assisted goals, highlighting challenges in their attacking play and the need for improvement in teamwork and build-up play leading to goals. Similarly, Istra 1961 recorded lower numbers in both categories, with an average of 1 goal and 0.69 assisted goals per match, suggesting areas for enhancement in their attacking strategy and collaboration in front of the goal. Other teams, such as Gorica, Lokomotiva, Hajduk, and Slaven Belupo, demonstrated varying degrees of performance in goals scored and assisted goals per match, indicating different strengths and areas for improvement in their attacking dynamics.

This graph provides a comparison of the number of shots and goals scored per match for different teams, offering insights into their attacking efficiency and prowess. Rijeka continued to demonstrate a dominant presence in terms of shots taken per match, maintaining the highest average of 17.06 shots. Their efficiency in converting these opportunities into goals was also commendable, with an average of 1.92 goals scored per match, highlighting their attacking potency and accuracy. Osijek, despite registering fewer shots compared to Rijeka, showcased exceptional efficiency in front of goal. With an average of 12.92 shots per match, they managed to score 1.72 goals, indicating clinical finishing and effectiveness in converting scoring chances into goals. Dinamo maintained a balanced performance between the number of shots and goals scored per match. With 16.69 shots per match, they achieved an average of 1.86 goals, showcasing a consistent attacking threat and efficiency in front of goal. On the other hand, teams like Gorica, Istra 1961, and Rudeš faced challenges in both the number of shots taken and goals scored per match. Gorica and Rudeš, in particular, registered lower averages in both categories, indicating a need for improvement in their attacking strategies and execution. Hajduk, Lokomotiva, Slaven Belupo, and Varaždin exhibited variations in the number of shots taken and goals scored per match. While they did not maintain identical averages in both metrics, the differences observed could stem from various factors, including game tactics, the quality of attackers, or finishing abilities, highlighting the complexity of attacking dynamics in football. Overall, this analysis underscored the importance of not only generating scoring opportunities but also capitalizing on them effectively to achieve success in football.

This graph presents a comparison of the number of shots on target and goals scored per match for different teams, providing insights into their attacking precision and efficiency. Dinamo and Rijeka continued to assert their dominance with the highest number of shots on target per match. With an average of 6.11 shots on target, Dinamo maintained their aggressive attacking style, which was reflected in their average of 1.86 goals scored per match. Similarly, Rijeka exhibited a high level of attacking precision, recording an average of 5.39 shots on target and 1.92 goals scored per match, indicating their effectiveness in converting scoring opportunities into goals. Osijek, despite registering slightly fewer shots on target compared to Dinamo and Rijeka, maintained the highest number of goals scored per match. With an average of 4.89 shots on target and 1.72 goals scored per match, Osijek showcased exceptional efficiency in converting shots on target into goals, underscoring their clinical finishing abilities. On the other hand, teams like Rudeš, Istra 1961, and Gorica faced challenges in both the number of shots on target and goals scored per match. Their lower averages in both metrics suggested a need for improvement in their attacking precision and finishing abilities to enhance their offensive effectiveness. Hajduk, Lokomotiva, Slaven Belupo, and Varaždin exhibited variations in the number of shots on target and goals scored per match. While their averages in both metrics may not align perfectly, these differences could be attributed to various factors such as game tactics, quality of attackers, or finishing abilities. Overall, this analysis underscored the significance of not only generating shots on target but also converting them into goals effectively to achieve success in football

conclusion