Evaluating Frankfurt's Defense
Conte noted that Frankfurt defends well, but the user highlights their stats: third most goals conceded in UCL and second in Bundesliga. Without external data, I have to treat these as given. I think raw goals conceded can be misleading, especially in small sample sizes. Factors like defensive structure, individual errors, injuries, and game contexts matter. In the 22/23 season, Frankfurt had a solid defense, conceding 52 in Bundesliga—not second most—and just 8 in the UCL group stage. So, it's complex.Explaining Frankfurt's Defense
I see the user's claim about Frankfurt's defense, but let's respond conceptually. It’s possible for both to be true. Here are some points to consider:
I don't fully agree that "good defense" simply means "less goals conceded." Defensive quality can be measured better through factors like xG per shot and successful pressing rates.
Potential contradictions arise from:
- Opponent quality in the UCL
- Game scripts that may lead to conceding late goals 
- Higher set-piece goals
To assess “good defense”, I’d look at shots allowed, xGA, and other defensive metrics.
If we only consider goals allowed, it doesn’t reflect true defensive strength. If you have specific data, I can help analyze further!
不完全认同，用“失球数”直接否定“防守好”也不严谨。
- 丢球多 ≠ 防守结构差：失球受样本小、赛程强度、比赛脚本（落后后拉开打）、门将状态和个别低级失误影响很大。
- 教练说“防守好”多指结构与纪律：阵型收缩、半空间保护、对禁区的压缩与回追速度，这些不一定马上体现在失球数上。
- 可能造成“防守好但丢球多”的原因：强对手和客场密集赛程；定位球/点球占比高；终结端对手超常发挥；球队战术取舍（更重转换，给对手更多高质量机会）。
- 更合理的评估指标：对手禁区内射门数、xGA/90、xG/shot、反抢成功率与PPDA、定位球失球率、领先/落后时的防守数据分裂。
结论：仅凭“欧冠失球第三多、德甲失球第二多”很难推翻“防守做得好”的判断；但如果这些失球伴随高xGA和大量禁区内被射，那就说明结构也在出问题。给我明确赛季/阶段，我可以按xGA、PPDA和定位球占比做一次更硬的数据对照。