Mikel Arteta: Aston La Vista To The Title?

[Macho]

I liked the pic with his kids ngl. Reminds me he's human after all his f*ckeries.

 

[Riou]

Let me guess, you rate it because we won a community shield in that period?

No.

I like it, because I am an Arsenal fan...though I guess that's the difference, tbh.

 

[AbouCuéllar]

Data and stats aren't mathematical absolutes and paint one picture that anyone can interpret anyway they choose-especially if they're not pisted in isolation.

Indeed, but I'm not the one who posts data in isolation, I actually do the opposite of that.

Singling out random stats like big chances created *(1) or omitting completely the actual state of the team that Em*ry picked up *(2) or that Em*ry left *(3) is what people do when trying to distort the narrative and make it seem like Em*ry is better than he was and Arteta worse than he actually is (a narrative which is the party line and political ideology of Arteta haters)

*(3) you do here:

This. Emery at least left him something to build on. It wasn't proven but it was a start and much of the hard work was done for him.

*(1): @Sebastes elegantly points out here why metrics like xG (xPTS) are far preferred to selectively picking out statistics like big chances created, which really don't have any necessary correlation to success or results (even if we were to go into statistics used in a specious way, possession would even be preferable to big chances created, and we know of course the pitfalls of the possession stat):

Big chances created is a really bad stat to use to predict goals scored in all honesty. So bad that Opta, the company behind most revelations when it comes to stats in sports has decided to remove it from their range of stats.

Big chance is as @Trilly points out a chance where the player is reasonably expected to score because their not under a lot of pressure from defenders and there's a clear path to shoot for goal. Your archetype big chances is one on one with keeper or close to goal without a lot of traffic in between. So basically big chances are high xG chances. Saka missed what was probably a big chance vs Soton. ESR's half hit (and deflected?) shot that was saved by Forster wouldn't count as a big chance, I believe. Both probably had pretty high xG though with Saka's ofc higher.

xG nowadays take in 35 different contextual factors such as position where the finish is taken, whether it's a header or shot, gk position etc. So xG in the end is the end all be all stat to be used when judging a team's or player's goal scoring ability. Then it's also based on averages from tons of data as @AbouCuéllar points out so you should expect world class (attacking) players to outscore their xG on a pretty regular basis.

So what big chances is lacking is that it's a very subjective stat, but also that it doesn't take into account lower quality chances, which will still end up producing goals. To give an example it's probably fairly accurate to say that 10 big chances results in 7 goals whereas 30 half chances (wide player cut in and fires a bit into the penalty area) should reasonably results in 10 goals. So from that perspective you'd rather take the 30 half chances if it came down to picking either or.

So xG becomes a good stat to use to judge the complete picture of what a team should be scoring.

What xG and shots taken tells you is that we take lots of shots that aren't of the best quality. Big chances has really nothing to do with that though. What we could probably derive from big chances is that we're quite bad on the break and use a slow build, which is also supported by the eye test. We simply let opponents get in good defensive shape and then try to find ways to get off shots through combination play. And if you don't have the quality of Man City then you won't get a lot of qualitative chances this way. Case in hand Liverpool who are really good and transitioning play when they conquer the ball and also are running away with big chances. It's no coincidence Sp**s are second here either.

Mikel Arteta: Top Of The Klopps

We have further context now, with almost a full season played. Currently we are on 52.71 xPTS through 31 matches, on a 1.70 xPTS/g pace, similar to the pace the team was at when Em*ry picked it up from Wenger and brought it down to a 1.54 xPTS/g performance level, a level we have never seen...

arsenal-mania.com

You can see before that and in the discussion following in the post linked above which precedes Sebastes' fine explanation, more discussion about why xG tells us a lot more than these stats, and why it strikes me as pretty obvious that people are just using big chances created because it's the stat that makes Mikel look bad, when it's not a stat that has been proven to have any real interesting link to results and success, and a weird one to make such a big fuss about, really.



*(2) Since people seem to have a selective memory here, let's remember the actual state of the team when Arteta picked it up, in the most objective manner possible:

-Arteta picked up the team on 26 December, 2019, in 11th place, on 24 pts in 19 matches, on a 1.31 xPTS/g pace.
-Em*ry left the team on 26 November, 2019, marginally in 8th place (1 pt from 10th and 3 pts from 14th), on 18 pts in 13 matches, on a 1.23 xPTS/g pace.

Here are the 13 games Em*ry managed in 19-20:

Newcastle vs. Arsenal:
Shots: 9-8
On target: 2-2
Possession: 38-62
xG: 0.38-1.13

Arsenal vs. Burnley
Shots: 15-18
On target: 9-5
Possession: 68-32
xG: 1.16-1.39

Liverpool vs. Arsenal
Shots: 25-9
On target: 5-3
Possession: 52-48
xG: 2.79-0.99

Arsenal vs. Tottenham
Shots: 26-13
On target: 8-9
Possession: 55-45
xG: 1.93-1.96

Watford vs. Arsenal
Shots: 31-7
On target: 10-4
Possession: 52-48
xG: 2.83-1.01

Arsenal vs. Aston Villa
Shots: 21-14
On target: 6-9
Possession: 58-42
xG: 2.53-1.72

Manchester United vs. Arsenal
Shots: 16-10
On target: 4-5
Possession: 55-45
xG: 1.13-1.70

Arsenal vs. Bournemouth
Shots: 12-10
On target: 2-2
Possession: 52-48
xG: 1.24-0.68

Sheffield United vs. Arsenal
Shots: 8-9
On target: 2-3
Possession: 31-69
xG: 0.90-0.95

Arsenal vs. Crystal Palace
Shots: 15-10
On target: 6-4
Possession: 56-44
xG: 1.54-1.78

Arsenal vs. Wolves
Shots: 10-24
On target: 4-8
Possession: 58-42
xG: 1.03-1.51

Leicester City vs. Arsenal
Shots: 19-8
On target: 7-1
Possession: 50-50
xG: 1.37-0.96

Arsenal vs. Southampton
Shots: 12-21
On target: 5-6
Possession: 61-39
xG: 1.61-2.60

-----------------------------------------------------

So, to sum up:

--In 13 fixtures, composed of: (A) 13 , (H) 10, (A) 1, (H) 6, (A) 19, (H) 17, (A) 3, (H) 18, (A) 9, (H) 14, (H) 7, (A) 5, (H) 11 (----average position of fixture list: 10.23, 7 H, 6 A----)

we had:

GF: 18
GA: 19

Shots F: 162
Shots A: 218

Shots on target F: 58
Shots on target A: 73

Possession: 56.15%

xGF: 17.78
xGA: 21.04

Pts pace: 52.61 (11th)
xPTS pace: 46.7 (14th)

Spoiler: OPEN WITH CAUTION

----------------------------------------------------

So yeah, let's remind: this is the actual level Arteta picked the team up at. He didn't pick up the team at the beginning of 19-20 after a full pre-season, as Em*ry did in 18-19* (1), and that level that the team was at when Arteta took charge isn't just some vacuum in the space time continuum as most of you pushing this agenda seem to make us want to believe. That was the performance level of the team, that was the way the team was going, that was how it was faring compared to competition in the same league in the same season that Arteta would pick it up, so that, for those very reasons, is one of the most interesting samples we have in comparing Arteta and Em*ry, and obviously not to be completely excluded from the question as it routinely (laughably) is here.

*(1) So, what performance level did Em*ry pick the team up at?

17-18:
PTS: 63 (5th)
xPTS: 65.90 / 1.73 pg (5th)
GF: 74 (4th)
xGF: 72.27 (3rd)
GA: 51 (8th)
xGA: 48.75 (7th)

Shots F: 590 (5th)
Shots A: 419 (6th)
Shots on target F: 227 (3rd)
Shots on target A: 142 (5th)
Possession: 61.5% (3rd)

What performance level did Em*ry take the team to, in the following season?

18-19:
PTS: 70 (5th)
xPTS: 58.97 / 1.551 pg (7th)
GF: 73 (3rd)
xGF: 64.80 (4th)
GA: 51 (9th)
xGA: 57.30 (11th)

Shots F: 467 (11th)
Shot A: 488 (10th)
Shots on target F: 159 (8th)
Shots on target A: 173 (15th)
Possession: 58.0 (5th)


What performance level did Em*ry leave the club at?

GF: 18 (10th)
GA: 19 (12th)

Shots F: 162
Shots A: 218

Shots on target F: 58
Shots on target A: 73

Possession: 56.15%

xGF: 17.78 (11th)
xGA: 21.04 (12th)

Pts pace: 52.61 / 1.38pg (11th)
xPTS pace: 46.7 / 1.23pg (14th)


What was Arteta's performance level in the 20 games he managed, having picked up 5 games later?

GF: 32 (5th)
GA: 21 (5th)

Shots F: ---- (I would have to go sum up the shots for and against for the shots categories and possession in the Ljungberg games, and subtract them and the Em*ry totals from the final season totals, and I'm already putting enough work in as it is )
Shots A: ----

Shots on target F: ----
Shots on target A: ----

Possession: -----

xGF: 27.16 (11th)
xGA: 31.16 (14th)

Pts pace: 62.7 / 1.65pg (6th)
xPTS pace: 50.1 / 1.32pg (9th)



What was Arteta's performance level in his first full season, having brought standards up marginally from where Em*ry left them? (to the levels above)

PTS: 61 / 1.60pg (8th)
xPTS: 58.72 / 1.545 pg (8th)
GF: 55 (9th)
xGF: 52.25 (11th)
GA: 39 (3rd)
xGA: 43.23 (5th)

Shots F: 455 (11th)
Shot A: 419 (6th)
Shots on target F: 141 (13th)
Shots on target A: 128 (4th)
Possession: 53.8 (7th)



What performance level has Arteta taken the team to in his second full season (first without COVID pandemic and full pre-season)?

PTS: 69 / 1.82pg (5th)
xPTS: 64.76 / 1.70pg (5th)
GF: 61 (6th)
xGF: 63.39 (5th)
GA: 48 (8th)
xGA: 48.39 (7th)

Shots F: 555 (4th)
Shots A: 412 (4th)
Shots on target F: 177 (4th)
Shots on target A: 139 (6th)
Possession: 52.6% (6th)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

***TAKE-AWAYS:

1. The major decline from Wenger's last season to Em*ry's first is undeniable, and only the daftest person would point to his superior pts total (thanks to outperforming his xPTS by a whopping 11.03) to suggest otherwise. In the span of one summer, with decent reinforcements, no important losses to the squad, and a full season of a world-class striker at his disposal (which--my opinion here--makes the Em*ry team better on paper than the Wenger one), we saw these shifts:

PTS: 63 (5th) ----- 70 (5th)
xPTS: 65.90 /1.73pg (5th) ----- 58.97 / 1.551pg (7th)
GF: 74 (4th) ---- 73 (3rd)
xGF: 72.27 (3rd) ---- 64.80 (4th)
GA: 51 (8th) ---- 51 (9th)
xGA: 48.75 (7th) ---- 57.30 (11th)

Shots F: 590 (5th) ---- 467 (11th)
Shots A: 419 (6th) ---- 488 (10th)
Shots on target F: 227 (3rd) ---- 159 (8th)
Shots on target A: 142 (5th) ---- 173 (15th)
Possession: 61.5% (3rd) ---- 58.0 % (5th)


(Truly amazing when you look at these stats, and if I've learned anything from this exercise, is that the massive change in fortunes from Wenger to Em*ry was even greater than I perceived. We got worse, in absolutely every category minus PTS--which has an asterisk because the league position is the same and league climate is relevant. We got significantly worse in every category minus GF. We got alarmingly worse in most categories, from xG data to going from being a team that had 170 more shots than opponents and 85 on target more to a team that was outshout and outshout on target

In short, you'd have to be daft to argue that there was not a massive, direct decline from Wenger to Em*ry, as literally the only thing you can say he was better at was being lucky, and the statistics are overwhelming, as we can see)


2. The decline continues then to rather stunning mid to lower-mid table depths in the following season in all categories. Arteta's incoming marks a positive turn in fortunes in most all categories, especially the most indicative ones (xPTS), but perhaps a lesser one than one might've hoped, given how poor the performance levels really were (this is where I'd really love to see more discussion: that performance improved from Em*ry to Arteta is really irrefutable, but it'd be great if the forum was interested in more debatable questions like: ex. What was happening in the league / the league climate to allow our performance levels to drop so much? Is there more to the story than Em*ry is just far worse than Wenger, and Arteta just a bit better than Em*ry that season? Is Em*ry perhaps a bit better than he seems from the raw stats, Wenger a bit worse, and Arteta, well, more or less the same but perhaps there are some lessons to glean about his working conditions here...¿?)

3. An analysis of where Arteta took the team to in his first season and where Em*ry took the season to in his first season, despite picking up from such radically different starting points (to use an example I'll often use, as radically different as those Simeone picked Atléti up in to where his predecessor will, or as different as Hughes picked up City at to where Mancini picked City up at...the difference between 1.73 xPTS/g and 1.23 xPTS/g is the difference between a 5th place and 14th place performance level...), reveals a quite similar performance level in Arteta's first full season and Em*ry's first, despite this amazing difference.

4. Our performance in Arteta's second full season is the closest we have gotten to Wenger's level of performance, and is really quite close, and while I am massively disappointed with the way this season has ended, the missed chance (mostly that of no European football to contend with, as in the end 71 PTS is a decent bar for 4th), and have serious doubts about Arteta as a manager and do feel like he hasn't lived up to my (perhaps overly-optimistic) expectations for him, to put a long story short, using xPTS as the best indicator to sum up all of this data:

17-18: 1.73 ---- 18-19: 1.55 ---- 19-20 (Em*ry): 1.23 --- 19-20 (Arteta): 1.32 --- 20/21: 1.545 --- 21/22: 1.70 is really interesting progress, and while perhaps not as dramatic as we like, the trends are undeniable*, and Arteta deserves credit from taking the team from a 1.23/g level (14th) to a 1.70 (5th) level in the span of 2 1/2 seasons.

*To finally end this essay, this takes me back to why I think it is really hard to refute the comment I made that started off this whole debate, @Mrs Bergkamp:

On what basis do you disagree? The decline during late-era Wenger into Em*ry is very well documented and easy to demonstrate statistically, and a reverse in that decline since Arteta arrived is also easy to document.

Re: this statement, I actually think the most ambiguous part would be the late-era Wenger decline, but I assume that is rather easy to demonstrate too, and anyways we all more or less agree on it.

Like I said, all we saw from Wenger to Em*ry was decline, and all we have seen since is a reversal in that decline and steady progress.* It is also undeniable that decline was already occurring from year to year under Wenger himself.

Whether that progress is rapid enough is the big question. I have big questions about that myself, and that is where all the debate should really be occurring, IMO, if this thread were a bit more reasonable and interesting place to be in.

In short...I come back to this, and the fact that I really don't understand how there can be so much debate over a topic that seems so overwhelmingly clear and easy to demonstrate, and why we must waste so much time on it (and why there seem to be so many people with hate fuelled agendas--rabid dogs as I call them--that want to make this a debate in the first place). But I take that perhaps my tone will always be grating, but I also must say that I believe in intellectual honesty and scientific integrity, and I believe, in short, in calling a spade a spade in debate, and if you believe in all of those things I think it's hard to have a different tone than I do, re: this debate, and I hope going to all the effort I have to put these statistics together will demonstrate why it seems so clear to me that this is a matter of calling a spade a spade, and will show that I am willing to humbly back up my position in full. If not, well, I will always be able to cite this post instead of getting dragged into this tiresome and rather stupid (IMHO) argument, in hopes that we can discuss some of the more interesting things I suggest above.

 

[2Smokeyy]

No.

I like it, because I am an Arsenal fan...though I guess that's the difference, tbh.

Back to the “people want us to lose” and “you’re not an Arsenal fan” stuff.

Classy.

 

[Riou]

Reminds me he's human after all his f*ckeries.

Yes, murderous robots are never nice to kids to get what they want...

 

[Riou]

Back to the “people want us to lose” and “you’re not an Arsenal fan” stuff.

Classy.

Calm down, Smokey...it was a joke.

So you can joke about me enjoying Arsenal winning a minor cup, but can't take a bit of banter yourself, fam?

 

[2Smokeyy]

Calm down, Smokey...it was a joke.

So you can joke about me enjoying Arsenal winning a minor cup, but can't take a bit of banter yourself, fam?

No, I can’t joke about mediocrity after this disastrous season. Don’t have the energy for it when we’ve gifted a place in the CL to Sp**s.

Full smoke from this point onwards.

 

[shoot for the top]

I mean in general. Mikels 3 years into his managerial career. He’s a baby.

Why do we have a "baby" managing Arsenal?

 

[Riou]

Why do we have a "baby" managing Arsenal?

Because Gazidis got our greatest ever manager sacked , then ****ed off to Milan immediately after, leaving a massive power vacuum.

A power vacuum that Arteta has been able to seize, both annoyingly and impressively.

 

[shoot for the top]

Because Gazidis got our greatest ever manager sacked , then ****ed off to Milan immediately after, leaving a massive power vacuum.

A power vacuum that Arteta has been able to seize, both annoyingly and impressively.

Impressive? How so?

 

[Tree Points]

You might be the most uninspiring troll I have ever seen, just repeating the same joke a million times.
Stop embarrassing other United fans who post here.

I couldn’t care less about the other Utd fans on here. I just tell it how it is and the fact is - I was wrong about Arteta. He’s doing a good job at Arsenal.

 

[Riou]

Impressive? How so?

Because he had the experience of an intern, before becoming our head coach in 2020...but somehow in a few years, he's now one of the most un-sackable managers in the league (with the decision making abilities, to give Auba away for free and face no actions from anyone)

That's a pretty impressive and swift, collection of power

 

[Rattata]

Within 15 years this club went from the 2nd biggest club in England to a club that will maybe win the title every 50 years and reach CL maybe 1-2 times a decade. No wonder the fans in the stadium are happy when those are the standards. Arsenal has pretty much become what was laughed at for so many years during Wenger's reign: Tottenham Hotspur.

 

[2Smokeyy]

Arsenal fans comments before AND after losing to Newcastle United - VERY different

Very different - Arsenal fans comments before AND after losing to Newcastle United.

www.themag.co.uk

A-M in the mud

Opposition fans looking at this place like AFTV.

 

[Baki]

Indeed, but I'm not the one who posts data in isolation, I actually do the opposite of that.

Singling out random stats like big chances created *(1) or omitting completely the actual state of the team that Em*ry picked up *(2) or that Em*ry left *(3) is what people do when trying to distort the narrative and make it seem like Em*ry is better than he was and Arteta worse than he actually is (a narrative which is the party line and political ideology of Arteta haters)

*(3) you do here:



*(1): @Sebastes elegantly points out here why metrics like xG (xPTS) are far preferred to selectively picking out statistics like big chances created, which really don't have any necessary correlation to success or results (even if we were to go into statistics used in a specious way, possession would even be preferable to big chances created, and we know of course the pitfalls of the possession stat):

Mikel Arteta: Top Of The Klopps

We have further context now, with almost a full season played. Currently we are on 52.71 xPTS through 31 matches, on a 1.70 xPTS/g pace, similar to the pace the team was at when Em*ry picked it up from Wenger and brought it down to a 1.54 xPTS/g performance level, a level we have never seen...

arsenal-mania.com

You can see before that and in the discussion following in the post linked above which precedes Sebastes' fine explanation, more discussion about why xG tells us a lot more than these stats, and why it strikes me as pretty obvious that people are just using big chances created because it's the stat that makes Mikel look bad, when it's not a stat that has been proven to have any real interesting link to results and success, and a weird one to make such a big fuss about, really.



*(2) Since people seem to have a selective memory here, let's remember the actual state of the team when Arteta picked it up, in the most objective manner possible:

-Arteta picked up the team on 26 December, 2019, in 11th place, on 24 pts in 19 matches, on a 1.31 xPTS/g pace.
-Em*ry left the team on 26 November, 2019, marginally in 8th place (1 pt from 10th and 3 pts from 14th), on 18 pts in 13 matches, on a 1.23 xPTS/g pace.

Here are the 13 games Em*ry managed in 19-20:

Newcastle vs. Arsenal:
Shots: 9-8
On target: 2-2
Possession: 38-62
xG: 0.38-1.13

Arsenal vs. Burnley
Shots: 15-18
On target: 9-5
Possession: 68-32
xG: 1.16-1.39

Liverpool vs. Arsenal
Shots: 25-9
On target: 5-3
Possession: 52-48
xG: 2.79-0.99

Arsenal vs. Tottenham
Shots: 26-13
On target: 8-9
Possession: 55-45
xG: 1.93-1.96

Watford vs. Arsenal
Shots: 31-7
On target: 10-4
Possession: 52-48
xG: 2.83-1.01

Arsenal vs. Aston Villa
Shots: 21-14
On target: 6-9
Possession: 58-42
xG: 2.53-1.72

Manchester United vs. Arsenal
Shots: 16-10
On target: 4-5
Possession: 55-45
xG: 1.13-1.70

Arsenal vs. Bournemouth
Shots: 12-10
On target: 2-2
Possession: 52-48
xG: 1.24-0.68

Sheffield United vs. Arsenal
Shots: 8-9
On target: 2-3
Possession: 31-69
xG: 0.90-0.95

Arsenal vs. Crystal Palace
Shots: 15-10
On target: 6-4
Possession: 56-44
xG: 1.54-1.78

Arsenal vs. Wolves
Shots: 10-24
On target: 4-8
Possession: 58-42
xG: 1.03-1.51

Leicester City vs. Arsenal
Shots: 19-8
On target: 7-1
Possession: 50-50
xG: 1.37-0.96

Arsenal vs. Southampton
Shots: 12-21
On target: 5-6
Possession: 61-39
xG: 1.61-2.60

-----------------------------------------------------

So, to sum up:

--In 13 fixtures, composed of: (A) 13 , (H) 10, (A) 1, (H) 6, (A) 19, (H) 17, (A) 3, (H) 18, (A) 9, (H) 14, (H) 7, (A) 5, (H) 11 (----average position of fixture list: 10.23, 7 H, 6 A----)

we had:

GF: 18
GA: 19

Shots F: 162
Shots A: 218

Shots on target F: 58
Shots on target A: 73

Possession: 56.15%

xGF: 17.78
xGA: 21.04

Pts pace: 52.61 (11th)
xPTS pace: 46.7 (14th)

Spoiler: OPEN WITH CAUTION

----------------------------------------------------

So yeah, let's remind: this is the actual level Arteta picked the team up at. He didn't pick up the team at the beginning of 19-20 after a full pre-season, as Em*ry did in 18-19* (1), and that level that the team was at when Arteta took charge isn't just some vacuum in the space time continuum as most of you pushing this agenda seem to make us want to believe. That was the performance level of the team, that was the way the team was going, that was how it was faring compared to competition in the same league in the same season that Arteta would pick it up, so that, for those very reasons, is one of the most interesting samples we have in comparing Arteta and Em*ry, and obviously not to be completely excluded from the question as it routinely (laughably) is here.

*(1) So, what performance level did Em*ry pick the team up at?

17-18:
PTS: 63 (5th)
xPTS: 65.90 / 1.73 pg (5th)
GF: 74 (4th)
xGF: 72.27 (3rd)
GA: 51 (8th)
xGA: 48.75 (7th)

Shots F: 590 (5th)
Shots A: 419 (6th)
Shots on target F: 227 (3rd)
Shots on target A: 142 (5th)
Possession: 61.5% (3rd)

What performance level did Em*ry take the team to, in the following season?

18-19:
PTS: 70 (5th)
xPTS: 58.97 / 1.551 pg (7th)
GF: 73 (3rd)
xGF: 64.80 (4th)
GA: 51 (9th)
xGA: 57.30 (11th)

Shots F: 467 (11th)
Shot A: 488 (10th)
Shots on target F: 159 (8th)
Shots on target A: 173 (15th)
Possession: 58.0 (5th)


What performance level did Em*ry leave the club at?

GF: 18 (10th)
GA: 19 (12th)

Shots F: 162
Shots A: 218

Shots on target F: 58
Shots on target A: 73

Possession: 56.15%

xGF: 17.78 (11th)
xGA: 21.04 (12th)

Pts pace: 52.61 / 1.38pg (11th)
xPTS pace: 46.7 / 1.23pg (14th)


What was Arteta's performance level in the 20 games he managed, having picked up 5 games later?

GF: 32 (5th)
GA: 21 (5th)

Shots F: ---- (I would have to go sum up the shots for and against for the shots categories and possession in the Ljungberg games, and subtract them and the Em*ry totals from the final season totals, and I'm already putting enough work in as it is )
Shots A: ----

Shots on target F: ----
Shots on target A: ----

Possession: -----

xGF: 27.16 (11th)
xGA: 31.16 (14th)

Pts pace: 62.7 / 1.65pg (6th)
xPTS pace: 50.1 / 1.32pg (9th)



What was Arteta's performance level in his first full season, having brought standards up marginally from where Em*ry left them? (to the levels above)

PTS: 61 / 1.60pg (8th)
xPTS: 58.72 / 1.545 pg (8th)
GF: 55 (9th)
xGF: 52.25 (11th)
GA: 39 (3rd)
xGA: 43.23 (5th)

Shots F: 455 (11th)
Shot A: 419 (6th)
Shots on target F: 141 (13th)
Shots on target A: 128 (4th)
Possession: 53.8 (7th)



What performance level has Arteta taken the team to in his second full season (first without COVID pandemic and full pre-season)?

PTS: 69 / 1.82pg (5th)
xPTS: 64.76 / 1.70pg (5th)
GF: 61 (6th)
xGF: 63.39 (5th)
GA: 48 (8th)
xGA: 48.39 (7th)

Shots F: 555 (4th)
Shots A: 412 (4th)
Shots on target F: 177 (4th)
Shots on target A: 139 (6th)
Possession: 52.6% (6th)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

***TAKE-AWAYS:

1. The major decline from Wenger's last season to Em*ry's first is undeniable, and only the daftest person would point to his superior pts total (thanks to outperforming his xPTS by a whopping 11.03) to suggest otherwise. In the span of one summer, with decent reinforcements, no important losses to the squad, and a full season of a world-class striker at his disposal (which--my opinion here--makes the Em*ry team better on paper than the Wenger one), we saw these shifts:

PTS: 63 (5th) ----- 70 (5th)
xPTS: 65.90 /1.73pg (5th) ----- 58.97 / 1.551pg (7th)
GF: 74 (4th) ---- 73 (3rd)
xGF: 72.27 (3rd) ---- 64.80 (4th)
GA: 51 (8th) ---- 51 (9th)
xGA: 48.75 (7th) ---- 57.30 (11th)

Shots F: 590 (5th) ---- 467 (11th)
Shots A: 419 (6th) ---- 488 (10th)
Shots on target F: 227 (3rd) ---- 159 (8th)
Shots on target A: 142 (5th) ---- 173 (15th)
Possession: 61.5% (3rd) ---- 58.0 % (5th)


(Truly amazing when you look at these stats, and if I've learned anything from this exercise, is that the massive change in fortunes from Wenger to Em*ry was even greater than I perceived. We got worse, in absolutely every category minus PTS--which has an asterisk because the league position is the same and league climate is relevant. We got significantly worse in every category minus GF. We got alarmingly worse in most categories, from xG data to going from being a team that had 170 more shots than opponents and 85 on target more to a team that was outshout and outshout on target

In short, you'd have to be daft to argue that there was not a massive, direct decline from Wenger to Em*ry, as literally the only thing you can say he was better at was being lucky, and the statistics are overwhelming, as we can see)


2. The decline continues then to rather stunning mid to lower-mid table depths in the following season in all categories. Arteta's incoming marks a positive turn in fortunes in most all categories, especially the most indicative ones (xPTS), but perhaps a lesser one than one might've hoped, given how poor the performance levels really were (this is where I'd really love to see more discussion: that performance improved from Em*ry to Arteta is really irrefutable, but it'd be great if the forum was interested in more debatable questions like: ex. What was happening in the league / the league climate to allow our performance levels to drop so much? Is there more to the story than Em*ry is just far worse than Wenger, and Arteta just a bit better than Em*ry that season? Is Em*ry perhaps a bit better than he seems from the raw stats, Wenger a bit worse, and Arteta, well, more or less the same but perhaps there are some lessons to glean about his working conditions here...¿?)

3. An analysis of where Arteta took the team to in his first season and where Em*ry took the season to in his first season, despite picking up from such radically different starting points (to use an example I'll often use, as radically different as those Simeone picked Atléti up in to where his predecessor will, or as different as Hughes picked up City at to where Mancini picked City up at...the difference between 1.73 xPTS/g and 1.23 xPTS/g is the difference between a 5th place and 14th place performance level...), reveals a quite similar performance level in Arteta's first full season and Em*ry's first, despite this amazing difference.

4. Our performance in Arteta's second full season is the closest we have gotten to Wenger's level of performance, and is really quite close, and while I am massively disappointed with the way this season has ended, the missed chance (mostly that of no European football to contend with, as in the end 71 PTS is a decent bar for 4th), and have serious doubts about Arteta as a manager and do feel like he hasn't lived up to my (perhaps overly-optimistic) expectations for him, to put a long story short, using xPTS as the best indicator to sum up all of this data:

17-18: 1.73 ---- 18-19: 1.55 ---- 19-20 (Em*ry): 1.23 --- 19-20 (Arteta): 1.32 --- 20/21: 1.545 --- 21/22: 1.70 is really interesting progress, and while perhaps not as dramatic as we like, the trends are undeniable*, and Arteta deserves credit from taking the team from a 1.23/g level (14th) to a 1.70 (5th) level in the span of 2 1/2 seasons.

*To finally end this essay, this takes me back to why I think it is really hard to refute the comment I made that started off this whole debate, @Mrs Bergkamp:



Re: this statement, I actually think the most ambiguous part would be the late-era Wenger decline, but I assume that is rather easy to demonstrate too, and anyways we all more or less agree on it.


In short...I come back to this, and the fact that I really don't understand how there can be so much debate over a topic that seems so overwhelmingly clear and easy to demonstrate, and why we must waste so much time on it (and why there seem to be so many people with hate fuelled agendas--rabid dogs as I call them--that want to make this a debate in the first place). But I take that perhaps my tone will always be grating, but I also must say that I believe in intellectual honesty and scientific integrity, and I believe, in short, in calling a spade a spade in debate, and if you believe in all of those things I think it's hard to have a different tone than I do, re: this debate, and I hope going to all the effort I have to put these statistics together will demonstrate why it seems so clear to me that this is a matter of calling a spade a spade, and will show that I am willing to humbly back up my position in full. If not, well, I will always be able to cite this post instead of getting dragged into this tiresome and rather stupid (IMHO) argument, in hopes that we can discuss some of the more interesting things I suggest above.

Still clutching at straws even though real points will always be a much better metric to measure than all your hypothetical expected points bullshit. If the league was played on xpts, Brighton would’ve been in the CL this year.

 

[dka1]

Arsenal fans comments before AND after losing to Newcastle United - VERY different

Very different - Arsenal fans comments before AND after losing to Newcastle United.

www.themag.co.uk

A-M in the mud

Opposition fans looking at this place like AFTV.

Lol "The Mag", some p!ssface BTEC author trawling through an Arsenal forum of all places just to get comments to try to make Arsenal fans look stupid.

No sh!t........a forum isn't exactly the epicentre of reasoned conversation is it?

And their club that couldn't do jack sh!t, they did absolute nothing before the blood money came in is meant to be something to brag about?

Good grief I bet a few of their fans will probably sign up now and try and weigh in with their opinion like that those little Leicester b!tches did when their club tasted a trickle of success.

Those Leicester f*ck faces are nowhere to be seen now though, funny that.

 

[yorch44]

I liked the pic with his kids ngl. Reminds me he's human after all his f*ckeries.

He is using them only with that purpose. He is that machiavelic

 

[Garrincha]

Indeed, but I'm not the one who posts data in isolation, I actually do the opposite of that.

Singling out random stats like big chances created *(1) or omitting completely the actual state of the team that Em*ry picked up *(2) or that Em*ry left *(3) is what people do when trying to distort the narrative and make it seem like Em*ry is better than he was and Arteta worse than he actually is (a narrative which is the party line and political ideology of Arteta haters)

*(3) you do here:



*(1): @Sebastes elegantly points out here why metrics like xG (xPTS) are far preferred to selectively picking out statistics like big chances created, which really don't have any necessary correlation to success or results (even if we were to go into statistics used in a specious way, possession would even be preferable to big chances created, and we know of course the pitfalls of the possession stat):

Mikel Arteta: Top Of The Klopps

We have further context now, with almost a full season played. Currently we are on 52.71 xPTS through 31 matches, on a 1.70 xPTS/g pace, similar to the pace the team was at when Em*ry picked it up from Wenger and brought it down to a 1.54 xPTS/g performance level, a level we have never seen...

arsenal-mania.com

You can see before that and in the discussion following in the post linked above which precedes Sebastes' fine explanation, more discussion about why xG tells us a lot more than these stats, and why it strikes me as pretty obvious that people are just using big chances created because it's the stat that makes Mikel look bad, when it's not a stat that has been proven to have any real interesting link to results and success, and a weird one to make such a big fuss about, really.



*(2) Since people seem to have a selective memory here, let's remember the actual state of the team when Arteta picked it up, in the most objective manner possible:

-Arteta picked up the team on 26 December, 2019, in 11th place, on 24 pts in 19 matches, on a 1.31 xPTS/g pace.
-Em*ry left the team on 26 November, 2019, marginally in 8th place (1 pt from 10th and 3 pts from 14th), on 18 pts in 13 matches, on a 1.23 xPTS/g pace.

Here are the 13 games Em*ry managed in 19-20:

Newcastle vs. Arsenal:
Shots: 9-8
On target: 2-2
Possession: 38-62
xG: 0.38-1.13

Arsenal vs. Burnley
Shots: 15-18
On target: 9-5
Possession: 68-32
xG: 1.16-1.39

Liverpool vs. Arsenal
Shots: 25-9
On target: 5-3
Possession: 52-48
xG: 2.79-0.99

Arsenal vs. Tottenham
Shots: 26-13
On target: 8-9
Possession: 55-45
xG: 1.93-1.96

Watford vs. Arsenal
Shots: 31-7
On target: 10-4
Possession: 52-48
xG: 2.83-1.01

Arsenal vs. Aston Villa
Shots: 21-14
On target: 6-9
Possession: 58-42
xG: 2.53-1.72

Manchester United vs. Arsenal
Shots: 16-10
On target: 4-5
Possession: 55-45
xG: 1.13-1.70

Arsenal vs. Bournemouth
Shots: 12-10
On target: 2-2
Possession: 52-48
xG: 1.24-0.68

Sheffield United vs. Arsenal
Shots: 8-9
On target: 2-3
Possession: 31-69
xG: 0.90-0.95

Arsenal vs. Crystal Palace
Shots: 15-10
On target: 6-4
Possession: 56-44
xG: 1.54-1.78

Arsenal vs. Wolves
Shots: 10-24
On target: 4-8
Possession: 58-42
xG: 1.03-1.51

Leicester City vs. Arsenal
Shots: 19-8
On target: 7-1
Possession: 50-50
xG: 1.37-0.96

Arsenal vs. Southampton
Shots: 12-21
On target: 5-6
Possession: 61-39
xG: 1.61-2.60

-----------------------------------------------------

So, to sum up:

--In 13 fixtures, composed of: (A) 13 , (H) 10, (A) 1, (H) 6, (A) 19, (H) 17, (A) 3, (H) 18, (A) 9, (H) 14, (H) 7, (A) 5, (H) 11 (----average position of fixture list: 10.23, 7 H, 6 A----)

we had:

GF: 18
GA: 19

Shots F: 162
Shots A: 218

Shots on target F: 58
Shots on target A: 73

Possession: 56.15%

xGF: 17.78
xGA: 21.04

Pts pace: 52.61 (11th)
xPTS pace: 46.7 (14th)

Spoiler: OPEN WITH CAUTION

----------------------------------------------------

So yeah, let's remind: this is the actual level Arteta picked the team up at. He didn't pick up the team at the beginning of 19-20 after a full pre-season, as Em*ry did in 18-19* (1), and that level that the team was at when Arteta took charge isn't just some vacuum in the space time continuum as most of you pushing this agenda seem to make us want to believe. That was the performance level of the team, that was the way the team was going, that was how it was faring compared to competition in the same league in the same season that Arteta would pick it up, so that, for those very reasons, is one of the most interesting samples we have in comparing Arteta and Em*ry, and obviously not to be completely excluded from the question as it routinely (laughably) is here.

*(1) So, what performance level did Em*ry pick the team up at?

17-18:
PTS: 63 (5th)
xPTS: 65.90 / 1.73 pg (5th)
GF: 74 (4th)
xGF: 72.27 (3rd)
GA: 51 (8th)
xGA: 48.75 (7th)

Shots F: 590 (5th)
Shots A: 419 (6th)
Shots on target F: 227 (3rd)
Shots on target A: 142 (5th)
Possession: 61.5% (3rd)

What performance level did Em*ry take the team to, in the following season?

18-19:
PTS: 70 (5th)
xPTS: 58.97 / 1.551 pg (7th)
GF: 73 (3rd)
xGF: 64.80 (4th)
GA: 51 (9th)
xGA: 57.30 (11th)

Shots F: 467 (11th)
Shot A: 488 (10th)
Shots on target F: 159 (8th)
Shots on target A: 173 (15th)
Possession: 58.0 (5th)


What performance level did Em*ry leave the club at?

GF: 18 (10th)
GA: 19 (12th)

Shots F: 162
Shots A: 218

Shots on target F: 58
Shots on target A: 73

Possession: 56.15%

xGF: 17.78 (11th)
xGA: 21.04 (12th)

Pts pace: 52.61 / 1.38pg (11th)
xPTS pace: 46.7 / 1.23pg (14th)


What was Arteta's performance level in the 20 games he managed, having picked up 5 games later?

GF: 32 (5th)
GA: 21 (5th)

Shots F: ---- (I would have to go sum up the shots for and against for the shots categories and possession in the Ljungberg games, and subtract them and the Em*ry totals from the final season totals, and I'm already putting enough work in as it is )
Shots A: ----

Shots on target F: ----
Shots on target A: ----

Possession: -----

xGF: 27.16 (11th)
xGA: 31.16 (14th)

Pts pace: 62.7 / 1.65pg (6th)
xPTS pace: 50.1 / 1.32pg (9th)



What was Arteta's performance level in his first full season, having brought standards up marginally from where Em*ry left them? (to the levels above)

PTS: 61 / 1.60pg (8th)
xPTS: 58.72 / 1.545 pg (8th)
GF: 55 (9th)
xGF: 52.25 (11th)
GA: 39 (3rd)
xGA: 43.23 (5th)

Shots F: 455 (11th)
Shot A: 419 (6th)
Shots on target F: 141 (13th)
Shots on target A: 128 (4th)
Possession: 53.8 (7th)



What performance level has Arteta taken the team to in his second full season (first without COVID pandemic and full pre-season)?

PTS: 69 / 1.82pg (5th)
xPTS: 64.76 / 1.70pg (5th)
GF: 61 (6th)
xGF: 63.39 (5th)
GA: 48 (8th)
xGA: 48.39 (7th)

Shots F: 555 (4th)
Shots A: 412 (4th)
Shots on target F: 177 (4th)
Shots on target A: 139 (6th)
Possession: 52.6% (6th)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

***TAKE-AWAYS:

1. The major decline from Wenger's last season to Em*ry's first is undeniable, and only the daftest person would point to his superior pts total (thanks to outperforming his xPTS by a whopping 11.03) to suggest otherwise. In the span of one summer, with decent reinforcements, no important losses to the squad, and a full season of a world-class striker at his disposal (which--my opinion here--makes the Em*ry team better on paper than the Wenger one), we saw these shifts:

PTS: 63 (5th) ----- 70 (5th)
xPTS: 65.90 /1.73pg (5th) ----- 58.97 / 1.551pg (7th)
GF: 74 (4th) ---- 73 (3rd)
xGF: 72.27 (3rd) ---- 64.80 (4th)
GA: 51 (8th) ---- 51 (9th)
xGA: 48.75 (7th) ---- 57.30 (11th)

Shots F: 590 (5th) ---- 467 (11th)
Shots A: 419 (6th) ---- 488 (10th)
Shots on target F: 227 (3rd) ---- 159 (8th)
Shots on target A: 142 (5th) ---- 173 (15th)
Possession: 61.5% (3rd) ---- 58.0 % (5th)


(Truly amazing when you look at these stats, and if I've learned anything from this exercise, is that the massive change in fortunes from Wenger to Em*ry was even greater than I perceived. We got worse, in absolutely every category minus PTS--which has an asterisk because the league position is the same and league climate is relevant. We got significantly worse in every category minus GF. We got alarmingly worse in most categories, from xG data to going from being a team that had 170 more shots than opponents and 85 on target more to a team that was outshout and outshout on target

In short, you'd have to be daft to argue that there was not a massive, direct decline from Wenger to Em*ry, as literally the only thing you can say he was better at was being lucky, and the statistics are overwhelming, as we can see)


2. The decline continues then to rather stunning mid to lower-mid table depths in the following season in all categories. Arteta's incoming marks a positive turn in fortunes in most all categories, especially the most indicative ones (xPTS), but perhaps a lesser one than one might've hoped, given how poor the performance levels really were (this is where I'd really love to see more discussion: that performance improved from Em*ry to Arteta is really irrefutable, but it'd be great if the forum was interested in more debatable questions like: ex. What was happening in the league / the league climate to allow our performance levels to drop so much? Is there more to the story than Em*ry is just far worse than Wenger, and Arteta just a bit better than Em*ry that season? Is Em*ry perhaps a bit better than he seems from the raw stats, Wenger a bit worse, and Arteta, well, more or less the same but perhaps there are some lessons to glean about his working conditions here...¿?)

3. An analysis of where Arteta took the team to in his first season and where Em*ry took the season to in his first season, despite picking up from such radically different starting points (to use an example I'll often use, as radically different as those Simeone picked Atléti up in to where his predecessor will, or as different as Hughes picked up City at to where Mancini picked City up at...the difference between 1.73 xPTS/g and 1.23 xPTS/g is the difference between a 5th place and 14th place performance level...), reveals a quite similar performance level in Arteta's first full season and Em*ry's first, despite this amazing difference.

4. Our performance in Arteta's second full season is the closest we have gotten to Wenger's level of performance, and is really quite close, and while I am massively disappointed with the way this season has ended, the missed chance (mostly that of no European football to contend with, as in the end 71 PTS is a decent bar for 4th), and have serious doubts about Arteta as a manager and do feel like he hasn't lived up to my (perhaps overly-optimistic) expectations for him, to put a long story short, using xPTS as the best indicator to sum up all of this data:

17-18: 1.73 ---- 18-19: 1.55 ---- 19-20 (Em*ry): 1.23 --- 19-20 (Arteta): 1.32 --- 20/21: 1.545 --- 21/22: 1.70 is really interesting progress, and while perhaps not as dramatic as we like, the trends are undeniable*, and Arteta deserves credit from taking the team from a 1.23/g level (14th) to a 1.70 (5th) level in the span of 2 1/2 seasons.

*To finally end this essay, this takes me back to why I think it is really hard to refute the comment I made that started off this whole debate, @Mrs Bergkamp:



Re: this statement, I actually think the most ambiguous part would be the late-era Wenger decline, but I assume that is rather easy to demonstrate too, and anyways we all more or less agree on it.


In short...I come back to this, and the fact that I really don't understand how there can be so much debate over a topic that seems so overwhelmingly clear and easy to demonstrate, and why we must waste so much time on it (and why there seem to be so many people with hate fuelled agendas--rabid dogs as I call them--that want to make this a debate in the first place). But I take that perhaps my tone will always be grating, but I also must say that I believe in intellectual honesty and scientific integrity, and I believe, in short, in calling a spade a spade in debate, and if you believe in all of those things I think it's hard to have a different tone than I do, re: this debate, and I hope going to all the effort I have to put these statistics together will demonstrate why it seems so clear to me that this is a matter of calling a spade a spade, and will show that I am willing to humbly back up my position in full. If not, well, I will always be able to cite this post instead of getting dragged into this tiresome and rather stupid (IMHO) argument, in hopes that we can discuss some of the more interesting things I suggest above.

do you have the audiobook?

 

[dka1]

do you have the audiobook?

"Out now on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts".

 

[DUFFMAN]

Better than Arteta yes. Took the team at mid season an did surpass the supposed excellent manager. Arteta got 8th in the same situation.
He won the important game against Arteta. All of these with a new stadium, like Arsène used to do after the Emirates debt. So instead of getting rid off half his players he actually used them wisely, managed the egos and integrated them. Then in winter he got some cheap players that helped him to get the final push.

I clearly see a better manager here. And that's not mentioning all the trophies he has.

But remember we were told that if Arteta gets 4th it’s only because Sp**s and united are worst and it doesn’t mean Arteta or Arsenal deserved it??

Why has it changed that Sp**s and conte are winners when the truth is Arsenal are poor and bottled it?