Chicago Fire
Chicago Fire operate as a clinical attacking unit relative to league average, generating 1.56 xG per match whilst maintaining a respectable defensive shape at 1.26 conceded. Recent form has proven inconsistent—two successive losses preceded their current two-game winning streak—suggesting volatility in converting chances and structure. With no fixtures currently scheduled in the modelling window, the focus remains on Fire's underlying efficiency metrics, which favour attacking-side breakdowns; Bawler's Banker selections on this team have landed at a solid 57% clip across seven settled matches.
How to read this: the green bar shows the average goals Chicago Fire were expected to score per match (their xG output). The red bar shows what opponents are expected to score against them. The diamond on each bar marks the USA: MLS average — if the bar extends past the diamond, Chicago Fire are above average there.
How to read this: the solid line is the goals Chicago Fire actually scored each match. The dashed line is the goals the model expected them to score (xG). When the solid line is above the dashed, they overperformed — they finished better than the chances they created suggested. When it's below, they underperformed. Persistent underperformance often regresses; a one-off gap usually doesn't.
How to read this: each tile is one settled match, most recent first. Green = win, amber = draw, red = loss. Numbers show the actual scoreline from Chicago Fire's perspective. Tap a tile to see Bawler's full prediction for that match.
When Bawler issues a Banker pick on a Chicago Fire fixture, the model lands 5 out of 8 (63%). Every pick is logged before kickoff and settled publicly.
How to read this: each row groups settled Banker picks Bawler issued on Chicago Fire fixtures by market type, so you can see where the model has the strongest read on this team. Higher hit rate = more reliable category for Chicago Fire matches.