Pisa have earned 18 points from 32 Serie A matches this season. Expected points models say they should have 34.12. That gap of -16.12 points is the largest in the division, and it lands them a Luck Index of -71 on the CURSD scale, the worst in Italy's top flight. By any reasonable measure of fortune, no one in Serie A has had it worse.
But fortune is only part of this story. Pisa are cursed, yes. They are also not good.
The xPoints Gap: 16 Points That Vanished
A team sitting on 34 points instead of 18 is not safe, but it is breathing. It is 16th or 17th, scrapping for survival with a puncher's chance, not 20th and sinking. Pisa's 2-12-18 record tells you they have converted almost nothing. Two wins from 32 matches is historically grim. Their expected points model, built on the chances they created and conceded across those games, suggests something closer to 6 wins and a handful more draws. The gap between what the pitch said should happen and what actually happened is enormous. Twelve draws and 18 losses means Pisa found every possible way to not win football matches.
The Finishing Problem: 9.34 Goals Below Expected
Pisa have scored 23 goals from 32.34 xG, a finishing delta of -9.34. That is not a slump. That is a season-long inability to convert presentable chances into goals. Their 311 shots rank among the lowest in the league, so when they do create something, they are wasting it at a staggering rate. At a conversion rate even slightly below league average, Pisa would have 28 or 29 goals. At their expected rate, they would have 32. Instead, 23. Nine ghost goals sitting in the xG column with nothing to show for them on the scoreboard.
Nine goals is the difference between relegation and a fighting chance.
The Defense: Leaking Beyond the Model
Pisa's expected goals against stands at 51.7, which is already poor. They have conceded 58, a defensive variance of +6.30. Their opponents have been clinical where Pisa have been wasteful. Facing 478 shots in 32 matches, roughly 15 per game, means the back line is under near-constant siege, and the underlying defensive structure is genuinely porous. A net xG of -19.36 confirms that even in a theoretical world where finishing variance disappears entirely, Pisa are still significantly outclassed.
This is not a good team being robbed. This is a flawed team being robbed on top of being flawed.
Injuries and Schedule: The Compounding Factors
Pisa's injury burden sits at 151, well above the league average of roughly 120. That additional strain matters more for a squad with limited depth than it would for a side rotating freely across 25 first-team options. Their schedule strength of 1.3, meaning they have faced a fixture list 30% tougher than average, has offered them very few soft weeks to pick up cheap points. When you cannot finish, cannot defend, and draw the hard fixtures disproportionately early, 18 points is almost inevitable.
What Regression Could Actually Buy Them
Pisa have six matches remaining. If finishing and defensive variance reverted to expected levels over those games, the models would project something like 7 to 9 points from the run-in, roughly two wins and a couple of draws. Added to their current 18, that lands them at 25 to 27 points. Whether that is enough to survive depends on the teams around them, but historically, Serie A's safety line hovers between 32 and 36 points. Even full regression likely leaves Pisa short.
The honest conclusion is uncomfortable but clear. Pisa deserve more points than they have. The xPoints gap is real, the finishing drought is measurable, and the Luck Index confirms genuine misfortune. But regression to the mean would move them from doomed to merely desperate. The curse made a bad season historic. It did not create the bad season from nothing.
Sometimes the cruelest thing the numbers can tell you is that the luck was real, and it still would not have been enough.