Wenger: the red myths descend

[Makingtrax]

So we've had about 130 mistakes in 5 seasons. And United, on average on your chart, has done it 90 times.

So we've made 40 more mistakes in 5 years, or 198 games. So roughly, once every 5 games a defender makes a mistake by giving the ball away for a shot more than United.

And this means what? This is typical of what happens on this forum. I publish figures from league tables. Nobody comments on them and someone just throws in some propaganda chart that doesn't mean much, to muddy the water. And then people say, yeah, told you we were sh*t at defending.

 

[Toast]

So we've had about 130 mistakes in 5 seasons. And United, an average on your chart, has done it 90 times.

So we've done it 40 more times in 5 years, or 198 games. So roughly, once every 5 games a defender makes a mistake by giving the ball away for a shot more than United.

And this means what?

It means we're defensively brilliant.

 

[Makingtrax]

If Sheikh Veryrichmansour took us over in 2016 and said "here you go old chap, here's 250 million, go out and spend it, I insist, no I know you don't need it, yes I know you have trust in the team spirit, but take it please, it's a gift, go out and sign who you want, I'll even give you an extra 100 million for wages, just win the league" it would literally be the worst day of his life.

It's a very convenient and fortunate position he's been in the past 10 years.

250 million? He gave City £1.3bn, mostly converted into shares.

More propaganda drivel.

 

[Makingtrax]

It means we're defensively brilliant.

You've lost the plot bro. Comment on the league table figures I posted, and don't speak with forked tongue for once.

Can you do that?

 

[Makingtrax]

Bro WTF does being a better defensive manager than his spend mean..I mean honestly WTF does that mean. I've heard some mumbo jumbo but this takes the cake.

I know you want life to be simple bro, but sometimes it just isn't.

This is why we have the Paralympics. You don't judge a guy with one leg by the standards of a guy with two. Who knew?

But you're happy to just judge Arsenal against oil spending clubs without considering the context. I get it. But I'm trying to level the playing field in the analysis. You don't have to comment.

 

[pikey2000]

I read you analysis carefully and this is a pretty fair conclusion bro. Wenger's always been big on possession, that's how he likes to play.

This thread is addressing those people who have been saying for years that Wenger's defensive tactics are poor. The evidence shows he's far from poor.

Stats are a confirmation that we are not as bad as the media/people make out for sure, but you cant hide from the fact we could do better, tactically and with our personel

We've been playing LB's at CB for some time, our next Gen CB's have almost never materialised, and don't look like they will any time soon, we still continue to play a team without any DM against teams who can crucify us offensively, see Liverpool......

Stats are great but there are things we could do better, like setting up tactically different against better offensive teams, not taking so long to identify positions of weakness and react to them.

 

[rich 1990]

I don't understand the point of this thread. It's another thread for the same old arguments. Lock.

 

[Makingtrax]

Wenger's never ever been in a rush to do anything. Pep came in, saw what he needed and what he wanted and dealt with it in the summer because maybe he doesn't think he's going to be at City forever.

It's those little words, 'saw what needed to be done'. What you really mean is he spent a ****ing fortune doing what needed to be done.

Klopp came in saw what needed to be done with a lot less money and came 4th, eventually.

That's how football works today bro.

 

[Makingtrax]

I don't understand the point of this thread. It's another thread for the same old arguments. Lock.

You're absolutely right. It's pointless.

Not even sure this is a real football forum where people want to discuss the nuances around the game.

It's just a forum to say 'f*** off you old fart', in as many different ways as possible'.

 

[Tir Na Nog]

Looking at those defensive stats, it's clear to see that since Per has gone out the team and Koscielny has started to decline, our defence has gone from being 'good' to 'poor'.

Koscielny really has held us together, worrying.

The way we play definitely requires experienced CB's at the back, younger CB's and guys who're not top class will always struggle given how we play.

 

[Makingtrax]

Stats are a confirmation that we are not as bad as the media/people make out for sure,

Common sense is as rare as hens teeth. So I'm stopping your post right there as an example for everybody to see what It looks like.

 

[Toast]

You've lost the plot bro. Comment on the league table figures I posted, and don't speak with forked tongue for once.

Can you do that?

"As a defensive manager Wenger is still better than his spend, and much better than people give him credit for."

That's your claim. Now first, please define what 'being defensively better than his spend' means exactly. Secondly, you need to define what 'a good defensive performance' would look like. You can't have a discussion until you clarify what you are actually claiming. Thirdly, you need to explain why you think the two very simplistic measures you've chosen are a good way to measure defensive performance and how you account for the obvious flaws in your model.

E.g. according to your current model a side conceding 10 shots on target and two big chances, but not conceding a goal is defensively better than a side that concedes four shots on target, no big chances, but concedes two goals. Or, put in terms of xG: in your model a team conceding an xG of 3.57 but in conceding once in reality is performing better defensively than a team which concedes an xG of 1.49, but concedes two goals in reality.

There is actually some rather interesting discussion online about how one would measure defensive performance through statistics and the general conclusion is that a) it would in any case require advanced statistics such as big chances conceded, location of shots conceded, type of chance conceded, etc etc. and b) even with those stats there still isn't a single viable way to bear out and compare defensive performance accurately because there are various ways to defend and there's no clear concensus on what a 'good defense'should look like. @bingobob and @IslingtonBornandbred touched on this as well.

As it stands you've picked two very basic statistics that show what you want them to show and then claim they should override anything people see on the pitch, but you haven't addressed any of the nuances involved.

 

[freeglennhelder2]

Whoever is in charge of these things ....We, the Arsenal fans, deserve a better quality of sockpuppet than Makingtrax.

Please make it so.

 

[Makingtrax]

"As a defensive manager Wenger is still better than his spend, and much better than people give him credit for."

That's your claim. Now first, please define what 'being defensively better than his spend' means exactly. Secondly, you need to define what 'a good defensive performance' would look like. You can't have a discussion until you clarify what you are actually claiming. Thirdly, you need to explain why you think the two very simplistic measures you've chosen are a good way to measure defensive performance and how you account for the obvious flaws in your model.

E.g. according to your current model a side conceding 10 shots on target and two big chances, but not conceding a goal is defensively better than a side that concedes four shots on target, no big chances, but concedes two goals. Or, put in terms of xG: in your model a team conceding an xG of 3.57 but in conceding once in reality is performing better defensively than a team which concedes an xG of 1.49, but concedes two goals in reality.

There is actually some rather interesting discussion online about how one would measure defensive performance through statistics and the general conclusion is that a) it would in any case require advanced statistics such as big chances conceded, location of shots conceded, type of chance conceded, etc etc. and b) even with those stats there still isn't a single viable way to bear out and compare defensive performance accurately because there are various ways to defend and there's no clear concensus on what a 'good defense'should look like. @bingobob and @IslingtonBornandbred touched on this as well.

As it stands you've picked two very basic statistics that show what you want them to show and then claim they should override anything people see on the pitch, but you haven't addressed any of the nuances involved.

A football discussion at least.

The league is a rank order of clubs. On spend he's averaged around 5th.
He's averaged around 2.8th on clean sheets and 3.4th on goals against, for the last 5 years. His league position is 3.5th and 'goals for', 3.6th.

I'm not arguing he's a good defensive manager. This forum is full of posts saying that Wenger is tactically poor when it comes to defending. I just wanted to see evidence of that.

Hypothesis: Surely an attacking manager who leaves the door open would be ranked higher for 'goals for' and lower for 'goals against'. Like Liverpool in 2013 with Suarez . . 101 goals for, but a whopping 50 goals against. That tells a story.

Conclusion: Arsenal are ranked very slightly better for 'goals against' than 'goals for' and therefore it seems reasonable that Wenger is fairly balanced in his tactical approach at least. And furthermore 2.8th for clean sheets adds substance to that conclusion.

To be honest it surprised me, like the equal results against top teams surprised you.

 

[Makingtrax]

Whoever is in charge of these things ....We, the Arsenal fans, deserve a better quality of sockpuppet than Makingtrax.

Please make it so.

You p*ssed at this hour? The Tollington bouncers will sling you out on your ear.

 

[FinnGooner]

You're absolutely right. It's pointless.

Not even sure this is a real football forum where people want to discuss the nuances around the game.

It's just a forum to say 'f*** off you old fart', in as many different ways as possible'.

All those stats are good and dandy when demostrating correlations but your assumptions about causation are still not necessarily correct.

I have watched Arsenal a long time and I know Wenger is not the best coach tactically when it comes to organizing a defense. So, when you show stats that we are better defensively than our defensive spending it makes me think what are the possible causes other than us being tactically better than average. One explanation is that Wenger is very good in finding good players cheaply. Kosielny cost us £8,5 million while Liverpool bought Lovren for over £30m. I think we can all agree who is better. Bellerin was brought here for practically nothing and Mertesacker deal wasn't too shabby either. The list goes on.

Wenger is still one of the best at finding talent without busting the bank despite the fact it's getting more difficult each season. He is also still very good at developing players as well, despite the increasing, and imo undeserved, criticism on that front. Also, no player has ever said anything bad about Wenger whereas the likes of Conte and Mourinho are known to clash with players all the time. This means players want to play for Wenger, which also explains why he gets the most out of them very consistently.

So in my opinion we have, and have had for years, better player quality than what our squad cost implies, credit to Wenger for that. I still, however, believe Wenger's biggest weaknesses are tactical. And all those assumptions are in line with the squad cost argument

 

[Makingtrax]

@FinnGooner The richest clubs can afford tried and tested expensive players in all positions. As you go down the league, the more chances you have to take with cheaper players.

For every Kane, Henry, Alli, Kos, there's dozens of Sanogos, Chamakhs, and Denilsons. It's a gamble for all managers. That's why squad cost is so important. If you could buy a Kante every time, money would mean nothing.

So where are Holding and Chambers in this scenario. I suspect a long way below Lovren and VVD. But the then the former are 12mill and the latter 1o5mill. Wenger's spent his money up front.

I'm not sure Wenger's done that well at buying cheaper players and developing them. But I am sure his clean sheets stack up with the best, over a long period of time.

 

[FinnGooner]

@FinnGooner The richest clubs can afford tried and tested expensive players in all positions. As you go down the league, the more chances you have to take with cheaper players.

For every Kane, Henry, Alli, Kos, there's dozens of Sanogos, Chamakhs, and Denilsons. It's a gamble for all managers. That's why squad cost is so important. If you could buy a Kante every time, money would mean nothing.

So where are Holding and Chambers in this scenario. I suspect a long way below Loren and VVD. But the then the former are 12mill and the latter 1o5mill. Wenger's spent his money up front.

I'm not sure Wenger's done that well at buying cheaper players and developing them. But I am sure his clean sheets stack up with the best.

I'm glad you brought up Chamakh and Sanogo. Both free transfers. Compare them to Schneiderlin, Cuadrado, Markovic etc. Name one total bust Wenger has brought in with over £20m? I can't think of anybody. However, I can name countless of examples from ManU, City, Chelsea and especially Liverpool. Wenger has brought in busts but they've all been cheap and opportunistic buys which do not have massive effects on the squad cost. Wenger's spending has been remarkable in terms of cost-quality ratio. Whenever Wenger spends big, he buys top quality. And on top of that, he buys Kos for £8,5, Cazorla for £17m, Arteta for £10, Mertesacker for £10m. It's truly quite outstanding. However, with the hyper inflation going on, that sort of spending efficiency is getting very difficult which is why my prediction is also that Wenger will have a hard time keeping his average position above the squad cost as clearly as it has been in the past

 

[CurryFlavoured]

I'm glad you brought up Chamakh and Sanogo. Both free transfers. Compare them to Schneiderlin, Cuadrado, Markovic etc. Name one total bust Wenger has brought in with over £20m? I can't think of anybody. However, I can name countless of examples from ManU, City, Chelsea and especially Liverpool. Wenger has brought in busts but they've all been cheap and opportunistic buys which do not have massive effects on the squad cost. Wenger's spending has been remarkable in terms of cost-quality ratio. Whenever Wenger spends big, he buys top quality. And on top of that, he buys Kos for £8,5, Cazorla for £17m, Arteta for £10, Mertesacker for £10m. It's truly quite outstanding. However, with the hyper inflation going on, that sort of spending efficiency is getting very difficult which is why my prediction is also that Wenger will have a hard time keeping his average position above the squad cost as clearly as it has been in the past

Id argue that recently Wenger's big money buys haven't been good. I'm not happy with Mustafi or Xhaka who were 35-40 mil, lots of $ particularly for a CB. Chambers and Welbeck were in the 20 mil region. Perez was about 15-20 mil and an absolutely bizarre (and useless) addition. With Lacazette I'm hopeful but we will see how that pans out.

You could argue that our drop from the top 4 was largely influenced by poor performance in the transfer market.

 

[Makingtrax]

I'm glad you brought up Chamakh and Sanogo. Both free transfers. Compare them to Schneiderlin, Cuadrado, Markovic etc. Name one total bust Wenger has brought in with over £20m? I can't think of anybody. However, I can name countless of examples from ManU, City, Chelsea and especially Liverpool. Wenger has brought in busts but they've all been cheap and opportunistic buys which do not have massive effects on the squad cost. Wenger's spending has been remarkable in terms of cost-quality ratio. Whenever Wenger spends big, he buys top quality. And on top of that, he buys Kos for £8,5, Cazorla for £17m, Arteta for £10, Mertesacker for £10m. It's truly quite outstanding. However, with the hyper inflation going on, that sort of spending efficiency is getting very difficult which is why my prediction is also that Wenger will have a hard time keeping his average position above the squad cost as clearly as it has been in the past

I agree. The new manager will have to spend a lot more to keep up. **** Kroenke.