One of the main aspects of a good graph is that the audience should be able to easily understand the data within 30 seconds. This graph is not such a graph.
The badges are large enough to be legible without being so large their crowd each other too much.
The line is obviously connecting 2 points, one being the badge, and the change in width tells you immediately that’s it’s a progression from the thin point to the thick one. They’re also coloured well so you can immediately tell who is who.
There are lines on the background to help group without even using the axes.
![[The Athletic] How Premier League teams' expected goals have changed](https://alien.top/pictrs/image/9fd6d991-aa7e-4169-837b-7ca83f928266.webp){kind=link}
One of the main aspects of a good graph is that the audience should be able to easily understand the data within 30 seconds. This graph is not such a graph.
Really?
The badges are large enough to be legible without being so large their crowd each other too much.
The line is obviously connecting 2 points, one being the badge, and the change in width tells you immediately that’s it’s a progression from the thin point to the thick one. They’re also coloured well so you can immediately tell who is who.
There are lines on the background to help group without even using the axes.
You can also tell because the newly promoted sides are just the badge, so the badge has to represent this year.
Also, it says it at the top of the graph.
There is even a graphic at the top explaining this.
If it takes you more than 30 seconds to read the title, axes and look at the lines then idk what to tell you.
Could it be simpler? Sure. Is it so confusing that it should take someone who has heard about xG longer than a minute to understand? i dont think so.