Some dirty, lying statistics

[The Artist]

We all know statistics don't mean a lot in this game and can be used to prove most anything. But here are some interesting ones nonetheless.

2000-2002
DC with Richie Williams on the field:
1.12 goals scored per game (56gls/50gms)
1.72 goals allowed per game (86gls/50gms)

DC without Richie Williams on the field:
1.42 goals scored per game (51gls/36gms)
1.61 goals allowed per game (58gls/36gms)

(DC has only played 80 matches in that time, but six times Williams has been subbed in or out. I counted those games twice, once with Williams on the field and once when he wasn't on the field with the appropriate number of goals for each)

DC when Williams plays an entire game:
44 games, 41 pts

DC when Williams plays less than 90 minutes or not at all:
36 games, 38 pts

Richie Williams: 50 gp 0 gls 5 asts 1 own goal

I'm sure no one is surprised that we're quite a bit more potent on offense w/out ABMOD but perhaps it bears some discussion that we're also better on defense w/out him. Of course he's not the only defender, right? Well the majority of the games w/ Richie on the field have occured with either a defense of Agoos, Pope, and Llamosa or Pope, Prideaux, Reyes behind him. The majority of the games w/out Richie have included such names as Ziadie, Vermillion, and Denton with Nelsen or Namoff or Lisi taking Williams spot.

My opinion throughout this season is that Williams is a huge liability on offense and little help on defense. I think he tackles far less than people give him credit for and his lack of size and pace is detrimental to the defense. And even if he is stellar on defense (which the statistics say is otherwise) his hugely negative effect on the offense makes DC a worse team.

[ursula]

Interesting stats and normally I like stats. But I'd say there a huge factor missing here: Thomas Rongen. The guy couldn't organize a defense for United to save his life (or his job). So I'd think twice about lumping what happened in 00 with what's happening today. BTW what if you just take the 02 season? What is the breakdown there so far?

[Lanky134]

What this also doesn't take into consideration is that, about midway through the 1999 season, Marco began spending less time in the center of the field and more time on the left. Now, while Marco might not play a lot of defense, having him out of position meant that Richie was left all alone to handle counterattacks, especially as our slower players (Goose, Aunger, Carlos) aged and our faster players (Pope and Ben) got hurt. We gave up a lot of goals on counters in 2000 largely because of that.

Dave

[DCU]

I think it was apparent the league had passed Richie by in 1999. That season Arena switched to a 3-5-2 with Harkes, Williams, and Etch in the middle in order to cover for Richie's lack of speed. We played most of the season that way and won lots of games. Then, for the playoffs, Arena decided it'd be a good idea to switch to a 4-4-2 with Sanneh at right back. Woops. Chicago overruns our midfield in the final. But Bruce learns from his mistake. For the interamerican cup, he switches back to the 3-5-2. Voila! DC beats Vasco.

All that's just a way of saying that, as of 3 years ago, Richie needed help in the middle. Now, we've probably reached the point where not even help is enough. We need someone who can run (at a decent pace), pass, and tackle at DMid. I'm not sure Richie does any of those competently anymore.

A quick comparison of Richie to the rest of the DMid's in the league paints a pretty sad picture. I'm sure not everyone will agree, but I've tried to rank the league's dmids from best to worst. I've even included guys who're starting because of injuries. Richie compared to:

1. Armas (Chi): Ha.
2. Mastroeni (Colo): No contest.
3. Maisseneuve (Cowl): Way better
4. Mulrooney (SJ): Out of position at the moment.
5. Ekelund (SJ): Starts counter the way we only dream Richie could.
6. Rooney (Revs): Rooney please.
7. Vagenas (Gals): Better even after his back injury.
8. McKeon (Kansas): I hate him, but he's more competent than the Wee man.
8. Deering (Dallas): Same as McKeon.
10. Palacios (Colo): I'd definitely take Colorado's backup over Richie.
10. Marsh (Chi): I'd take Chicago's backup over Richie.
12. Moore (Donkeys): This is a close one. I'm not sure whether I'd take Moore or Richie.
12. Williams (DC): That leaves Richie tied for 12th.

Of course, there're only 9 other teams in the league. Ouch. On the other hand, it's not certain whether Ivan's better. So that means our 2 best dmids are probably the 13th and 14th best in the league at their position.

[Lanky134]

I always looked at Bruce playing a 3-5-2 in 1998 as being the result of injuries to our back line, Eddie and Goose at the World Cup, and trying to find room in the midfield for Sanneh, Olsen and Harkes. I remember a game in the Swamp in May where Carlos went off injured early and our defense consisted of Aunger, Onalfo and Gori. Talley, then a rookie, also got a few looks at right back during this spell. I even think Danny Care got in a game or two around this point.

Then Sanneh went down with a hernia or appendectomy just as Goose and Eddie got back, and we moved to a 4-4-2, with Slavo coming in to provide some late midfield sparks. Sanneh came back for Game 1 of the Eastern Conference Finals against Columbus and, by this time Ben had earned the starting right-mid job, so Bruce put him at right back.

Dave

[erikfootland]

Richie needs to go. I thought that Richie was good for about 2 seasons, which were the first 2, and that was when Etch was incredible, which I'm sure helped him out a lot. I have nothing against a small player. Armas is a small guy, and he does incredible things. But not only is Armas a great D-mid, he also gets into the attack, and helps Chicage transition much more. Richie does not score, he does not assist, he only telegraphs the hell out of his passes and gives the ball away in crucial spots. His fouling is also pathetic. I realize that being a D-mid you will most likely be committing a lot of fouls, and will probably have to give up the professional foul (yellow card foul) at least once every 2 or 3 games, but you should also be known for your tenacious defense, and your hard hitting, bone crunching tackles. I can't recall any fouls he's given up where he has slid and taken somebody's legs out. ALL of his fouls are jersey pulls, and when he is actually playing good defense where he is basically right on your back, he doesn't know when to stop. He hangs on your back like a damn monkey until the foul is called. Then he does that damn throw his hands a the ref BS. I think that if you are going to be a D-mid anywhere, and you are not expected to score goals, then you better be pretty damn good at it, cause taking your team down to 9 field players, just so you can defend for Etch is a big deal. Personally, I think we would be much better off with an athletic, college grad who can stay with his mark, and maybe throw in a goal or 2 a season. D-mid is not a demanding position, and I think that Ivan should be playing it for the rest of the season, or at least until he screws up. He is known for his hard tackles, and yes, he does receive a lot of cards, but you get hit once in the middle of the field like that and you start thinking about it the next time. Richie has to go. We don't need a superstar in the middle, we just need somebody who will let you know he's there, somebody who can help transition the defense to offense a little better, and maybe somebody who will get an assist every once in a while.

[SpamIAm]

Love the savvy analysis.

It was up to Rongen to set the defense? I guess Pope, Llamosa and Agoos are all lost without specific instructions.

D-mid is not a demanding position?

Williams, for all his faults, organizes United and is the link between offense and defense. He is an accurate and reliable passer and a motivator who leads by his own tireless example.

His job is to be an outlet for defenders, to hold the ball, to switch the direction of play, and to feed our playmaker. He does this better than almost anyone else in the league.

He fouls to foil counter-attacks and odd-man breaks and -- if you ever played the game for five seconds -- it is much more professional to hold or grab a shirt than to take out an opponent's legs.

It is not his fault that coaches, for the most part, have allowed Etch to roam in a 4-4-2 and leave the middle horribly exposed.

Williams has been a champion at every level and is an above-average MLS player. He is not to blame for our slide.

[DCU]

Originally posted by SpamIAm
His job is to be an outlet for defenders, to hold the ball, to switch the direction of play, and to feed our playmaker. He does this better than almost anyone else in the league.
I totally agree with the first part of that statement and totally disagree with the second.

Richie does the job of dmid worse than every other dmid except Jeff Moore (a late drafted rookie). 1st, he's too slow to catch anyone and stop a counter. 2nd, he's a terrible passer, meaning that when he does show for the ball he either sends it back to the defense or gives it away. That is NOT what I call linking defense to offense. And of course, 3rd, he's nonexistent in the air.

Richie has always played his best against Cien and El Pibe. Why? Because they're slow as snails and hanging onto their shirts works. He's totally ineffective against a Donovan or Nowak because they just blow by him.

You complain that the coaches put too much pressure on Richie by letting Etch roam. The thing is, it wouldn't be too much pressure if Williams were better. Your complaints just highlight his limitations. Didier Deschamps never complained about letting Zidane roam when they played together at Juventus and for France. In addition, that complaint doesn't address why Richie hinders the team in a 3-5-2. And he does, though I gather you think otherwise.

For the record, I think DMid is a very demanding position (physically and mentally). That's where my analysis is coming from. To be a competent Dmid in MLS, you need the talent of a Mais, Mulrooney, or Rooney. The time when I guy with Richie Williams's ability could thrive as a Dmid has simply passed. The same happened with RDA and Lassiter at forward, etc.

[Lanky134]

It was up to Rongen to set the defense? I guess Pope, Llamosa and Agoos are all lost without specific instructions.

Here's an example of where our defense went wrong in 2000-01. When you attack from the wing, the defense is supposed to rotate with the opposite (weak side) winger dropping back. Instead the opposite winger stayed up, causing both flanks to be exposed. A quick team could intercept a weak Marco pass, get it to the playmaker who could get past Richie trying to cover the whole center, then play the ball into the space where the weak side winger should be, and let a quick forward beat the slower defense to the ball. Quick counter.

I don't know whether Rongen tried to fix to fix it and was ignored, or he simply couldn't figure out why we kept getting beat on counterattacks. But this seemed like something that every defender and winger should already have known.

Dave

[The Artist]

Originally posted by ursula
Interesting stats and normally I like stats. But I'd say there a huge factor missing here: Thomas Rongen. The guy couldn't organize a defense for United to save his life (or his job). So I'd think twice about lumping what happened in 00 with what's happening today. BTW what if you just take the 02 season? What is the breakdown there so far?

I don't really see how Rongen's influence matters. In 2000 we had Richie and Rongen. In 2001 just Rongen. In 2002 just Richie. If anything, Rongen's influence should skew the stats in Richie's favor since Richie has only failed to play 90 minutes three times this year under Hudson.

Almost everyone on these boards says we were an absolutely horrible defense in 2001 without Williams. One of the worst ever. Almost everyone on these boards says we have a great defense this year with Williams. Yet, the stats say that when Williams is not on the field we allow less goals plus we score a lot more.

As far as the excuse that Marco has gotten worse or changed the way he plays, that doesn't matter either since I'm not comparing 96 DC with 2002 DC. Marco's been pretty consistently average from 2000-02. His inability to hold the ball for whole minutes by himself is definitely part of the reason why DC has allowed so many goals, but it doesn't explain why DC allows less goals when Williams is not in the lineup than when he is.

And if you are a person who doesn't care how many goals are scored as long as DC wins, well DC averages more than a point per game when Williams sits or is subbed and less than a point per game when Williams plays the whole 90. So, in sum, DC allows fewer goals, scores more goals, and is more likely to draw or win when Williams is on the bench. And just for fun I thought I'd point out that Williams has scored more goals for the Crew in his past two years with DC than he has for DC.

I didn't just look at this year's stats because Williams has only missed time in three games. I thought a larger sample would give a more accurate picture.
If you want to know, though, DC has allowed three goals in three games while Richie was on the bench and 26 goals in 21 games when he is on the field.

As far as I can tell there are only two responses to these numbers.
1. Richie Williams makes DC a worse team.
or
2. It's all just a coincidence

As far as I can tell there is no other explanation for these numbers. We had better players on defense in 2000 and 2002 (the years Richie played for DC) than in 2001 (the year he didn't play at all for DC). If anything the other players on the pitch should have helped Richie's goals against numbers. But they don't (or at least not enough to overcome Richie's negative contribution). Sometimes numbers lie. Sometimes our eyes lie. Which is it in this case?

[Lanky134]

Originally posted by The Artist


Sometimes numbers lie. Sometimes our eyes lie. Which is it in this case?

Continuing the Marx Brothers jag I've been on tonight, I'll leave the answer to Chico.

"Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"

You hit the nail on the head with your second paragraph.

Almost everyone on these boards says we were an absolutely horrible defense in 2001 without Williams. One of the worst ever. Almost everyone on these boards says we have a great defense this year with Williams. Yet, the stats say that when Williams is not on the field we allow less goals plus we score a lot more.

Because the overall performance of the defense in 2001 and 2002 contradict the notion of Richie's inefficiency, that proves that numbers don't mean diddly. It just goes to show that you can't single out one person in this equation. The amount of goals given up in 2000 were as much the result of Presthus' suckiness, Pope's injuries, and the inability of Talley to adapt to the right back position as Richie's problems.

And lost in this discussion of defense is the importance of Prideaux. The guy has played every minute of every game, doesn't make too many stupid fouls, is a good man-marker, tackles well, and, most importantly, reads the passing lane better than any other defender in the league. Watch how many times he steps into the lane to intercept the ball. It's a risky play to make because, if he misses, the attacker is free on goal. As much credit as Nelsen has been getting for organizing the defense, Prideaux has been every bit as important. Those years under Gansler's uber-defensive system has helped us big time.

Dave

[DigitalTron]

As tempting as it is to look at this as if it were in a vacuum, we shouldn't. Two years ago Richie played very poorly and we traded him away. Last season he played very well for the MetroStars, and seemed to get his act together. This season he has also played very well. The real test is to look at our complete defense WITH and WITHOUT Richie, but it is so seldom entirely healthy that this is hard to do.

Without him at Spartan we allowed 2 goals, neither of which was really the Dmid's fault, but both of which were the result of allowing the Quakes possession down the center in or just outside of our box. Richie closes that stuff out and deflects it wide very very well. It took a while for me to figure this out, but the fact is that those penalty plays should have been stopped well before the penalty ever was called. It's the "Two-Step Offense" as Jack Edwards called it at WC'02. The question wasn't really about McKinley causing the foul, but rather McKinley allowing the Quakes to get into position to draw the foul (and DeRosario's acting lessons paying off).

We need to determine whether Richie's lack of offense is compensated for by his good defense. Let's not compare him to 1998, 1999 or 2000, but rather let's compare him to today. In 2002 I can assure you that he's done a great job of covering for our young midfield and make-shift back line. Now that the first team is jelling, we only allowed something like 2 goals in 6 games. That's defensive dominance. With McKinley in but Richie out, we allowed 2 goals in 1 game. While it isn't enough games to really compare yet, those are the sorts of things we should be looking at.

Frankly, I kinda like the 352 with both Richie and Ivan in midfield together. Ivan is a pretty decent and savvy defender in a small confined area, so it works. It gives Williams another short square option that doesn't hamper our quick attacking very much as well. With Convey, Olsen and Mapp, we have 3 guys who can help out with the flank defense, so we should be OK defensively. Mapp isn't a good defender yet, but clearly he's trying, and that's the first step. Villegas is like 10 years older and he hasn't started trying to defend yet. ;)

I would like to have a guy like Simon Elliott, Richard Mulrooney (seriously underrated IMHO) or Pablo Mastroeni, but let's face it, those type of guys just aren't available. Richie gives you the defensive part of that, and he's a total team-player. He'll stand up to the other team or a ref whenever he feels United is doing poorly, and people take fewer cheap shots at Moreno, Santino, Convey, Olsen, etc. when we have Richie and/or Ivan around.

-Tron

[Lanky134]

Good points, Tron. Being in Jersey last year helped Richie a lot. Before that, when he won the ball his first thought was always to give it to Goose or Marco, our two best passers, and never too far away. By 2000, with Marco nowhere near him, he was often swarmed by an opponent shortly after receiving the ball, forcing him to turn his back on the play and be stripped.

Freed from the "Goose Backpass Safety Valve," and nobody in the back who could distribute particularly well, he got much better at making the transition to attack because he had guys in front of him (Chung, Ramos, Mathis) who knew what to do with the ball. If Zambrano has done anything positive as coach, it's that. Now, with McKinley right there, he's got someone who can pass the ball and start the attack again.

You could see this improvement in his call-ups, especially that game against Brazil where he started a number of good counters in the first half, freeing Bobby on the left.

Richie's strengths are his competitive spirit, and that knows his limitations, and works within them to contribute. But does Richie play an important role to the team? Very much so, and I'm pretty satisifed with his performance this year.

And I don't care what anybody says, Richie Williams was the MVP of MLS Cup 1999.

But it's still stupid to be a grown man and still be called "Richie."

Dave

[SpamIAm]

DCU:

United's strength has always been its possession-oriented offense. The main job of a d-mid is to make sure we hold possession by organizing.

I would be willing to bet that Williams has the highest touch-to-completed pass ratio on the team over seven years.

He's not supposed to make the game-breaking pass, he's supposed to make the safe pass and the correct situational pass to put Etch, Convey or Olsen in the position to work magic. He does, every week.

He will not score goals. He will not win headballs. He will not beat people on the dribble. But he has six trophies for a team that relies on possession -- his job -- to win.

He would be better in a 3-5-2 and, he's probably at the end of his career, but he is in no way our weakest link.

[DCU]

I'm surprised you guys are just ignoring a comparison of Richie to other Dmids in the league. The fact is, he's just about the worst Dmid in the league. He only looks good in comparison to McKinley because Ivan's even worse. Who cares about statistics when you can see with your own eyes that every other team in the league has a better Dmid? And, wait...a better record too.

Spam, if you put any MLS midfielder on the field and asked them to pass the ball back to unmarked defenders every touch, they'd complete a lot of passes too. Richie rarely ever passes to another midfielder these days. That line from Lanky about his time with the scum having improved Richie's passing is laughable. His passing is terrible. He makes McKinley look like Zidane for god's sake!

[erikfootland]

Originally posted by DCU
I'm surprised you guys are just ignoring a comparison of Richie to other Dmids in the league. The fact is, he's just about the worst Dmid in the league. He only looks good in comparison to McKinley because Ivan's even worse. Who cares about statistics when you can see with your own eyes that every other team in the league has a better Dmid? And, wait...a better record too.

Spam, if you put any MLS midfielder on the field and asked them to pass the ball back to unmarked defenders every touch, they'd complete a lot of passes too. Richie rarely ever passes to another midfielder these days. That line from Lanky about his time with the scum having improved Richie's passing is laughable. His passing is terrible. He makes McKinley look like Zidane for god's sake!

My goodness, did it really take that long for another person to see Richie for what he is? Thank you DCU for actually seeing what Richie does out there. NOTHING

[SpamIAm]

I was going to let this go, but since you boys have dedicated two threads to dissing Williams, I won't.

Either you don't understand the role of d-mid in a possession game or you do and you have something personal against Williams.

Easy passes to open players, including back passes to defenders, is what possession soccer is all about. I urge you to count Williams pass-to-completed pass ratio Sunday against the Scum, it should be about 95 percent and the 5 percent of misses will likely be in the offensive third under pressure.

I'm not sure I even understand your beef. Is it that Williams is past his prime and should be replaced next year, which is a fair question? Or is it that Williams sucks and that every coach, at every level, has made a mistake in starting him in one of the most important positions on the field?

Ask yourself why Arena kept calling Williams into camp despite the fact that other players had more athletic skill. Or why Williams started for MetroScum even though there was no Etch to coddle.

He may be on the tail end of his career, but it's unfair to single him out as United's main problem.

[erikfootland]

Originally posted by SpamIAm
Ask yourself why Arena kept calling Williams into camp despite the fact that other players had more athletic skill. Or why Williams started for MetroScum even though there was no Etch to coddle.

He may be on the tail end of his career, but it's unfair to single him out as United's main problem.

I definately don't think he is United's main problem. I think that injury and lack of form is United's main problem. As for Arena calling Williams into camp, Albright was called into camp, and actually scored a goal against Jamaica I believe (I should check the stats, but I thought that was his only cap with the senior national team, and he scored a goal). Now I think we should at least all be able to agree that Albright sucks. Arena has also called in players such as Talley, Kamler, and many others who aren't top notch. Arena did this a whole lot early on, and I think it's because he felt he owed his United players a favor or something, but he called in a lot of guys who were not deserving. I will stop bashing Williams for now, and if he performs well during the United V Metrodonkey's game, then I will be the first to give him props, but watch the way he plays very closely (if he does play) and you will see how he telegraphs everything, and the only offensive passes he makes are the one's to Etch, who is basically standing on top of Richie at this point he's so close to him. Watch the defense he plays and see if he should really be in there. Now Andy Williams is doing great with the Metro's, and has had a number of assists this year, but he is another one of those center midfielders who is easy to cover if all you have to do is worry about marking out that one person (i.e. El Pibe, Etch, etc). Richie should not have too much of a problem with Andy Williams (hopefully), but I don't consider this that much of a test, considering that Andy Williams doesn't move very much. Anyways, let's all just watch Richie carefully and see how much of a liability he is to have out there. If he plays well, then I eat my words and say "yummmm, may I have some more", but if he sucks, then hopefully you will all see what I am talking about.

[DCU]

Originally posted by SpamIAm
I was going to let this go, but since you boys have dedicated two threads to dissing Williams, I won't.

Either you don't understand the role of d-mid in a possession game or you do and you have something personal against Williams.

Easy passes to open players, including back passes to defenders, is what possession soccer is all about. I understand perfectly and have nothing personal against Richie Williams. But this isn't the playground or MLS circa 1996. Not every pass can be an "easy" one. MLS teams apply a lot of pressure nowadays. Williams doesn't have the speed, size, or skill to distribute competently in the face of the pressure MLS squads apply. His physical limitations are also a defensive liability. He can't keep up with most amids in the league. MLS has improved!

Ask yourself why Arena kept calling Williams into camp despite the fact that other players had more athletic skill. Or why Williams started for MetroScum even though there was no Etch to coddle.?First, Arena's reasons are a mystery. Second, if you'd read my posts you'd never have brought up the Metroscum. You'd have seen that I wrote that the Scum currently start the only Dmid in the league worse than Williams.

I'm not sure I even understand your beef. Is it that Williams is past his prime and should be replaced next year, which is a fair question? Or is it that Williams sucks and that every coach, at every level, has made a mistake in starting him in one of the most important positions on the field? I'm closer to the 1st. I'm saying that THE LEAGUE HAS PASSED RICHIE BY. He therefore needs to be replaced ASAP. I sincerely wonder whether you bothered to read any of my posts, seeing as I'm repeating myself again here.

[ursula]

Originally posted by The Artist


I don't really see how Rongen's influence matters. In 2000 we had Richie and Rongen. In 2001 just Rongen. In 2002 just Richie. If anything, Rongen's influence should skew the stats in Richie's favor since Richie has only failed to play 90 minutes three times this year under Hudson.

Almost everyone on these boards says we were an absolutely horrible defense in 2001 without Williams. One of the worst ever. Almost everyone on these boards says we have a great defense this year with Williams. Yet, the stats say that when Williams is not on the field we allow less goals plus we score a lot more.

As far as the excuse that Marco has gotten worse or changed the way he plays, that doesn't matter either since I'm not comparing 96 DC with 2002 DC. Marco's been pretty consistently average from 2000-02. His inability to hold the ball for whole minutes by himself is definitely part of the reason why DC has allowed so many goals, but it doesn't explain why DC allows less goals when Williams is not in the lineup than when he is.

And if you are a person who doesn't care how many goals are scored as long as DC wins, well DC averages more than a point per game when Williams sits or is subbed and less than a point per game when Williams plays the whole 90. So, in sum, DC allows fewer goals, scores more goals, and is more likely to draw or win when Williams is on the bench. And just for fun I thought I'd point out that Williams has scored more goals for the Crew in his past two years with DC than he has for DC.

I didn't just look at this year's stats because Williams has only missed time in three games. I thought a larger sample would give a more accurate picture.
If you want to know, though, DC has allowed three goals in three games while Richie was on the bench and 26 goals in 21 games when he is on the field.

As far as I can tell there are only two responses to these numbers.
1. Richie Williams makes DC a worse team.
or
2. It's all just a coincidence

As far as I can tell there is no other explanation for these numbers. We had better players on defense in 2000 and 2002 (the years Richie played for DC) than in 2001 (the year he didn't play at all for DC). If anything the other players on the pitch should have helped Richie's goals against numbers. But they don't (or at least not enough to overcome Richie's negative contribution). Sometimes numbers lie. Sometimes our eyes lie. Which is it in this case?


Buddy- take some valium or something. I mean it's great that you did some preliminary stat work but be careful to lay this all at Williams' feet. Afterall there are loads of factors in each game that I don't hear you accounting for and then in your commentary/defense you use generalities that aren't backed up with numbers. It's wierd too that you get all knotted up too as I tend to agree with you.


Maybe it would be good to just look at Williams' MLS career:

YEAR TEAM GP GS MIN G A PTS SHT SOG GW GA PG PA SG SA BK FC FS OF CK C E CP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996 D.C. United 30 30 2,570 1 5 7 29 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 49 38 5 8 5 1 8
1997 D.C. United 30 29 2,606 2 9 13 22 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 39 3 2 3 0 4
1998 D.C. United 31 30 2,673 3 4 10 27 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 66 32 2 3 5 0 23
1999 D.C. United 23 23 1,996 2 6 10 12 6 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 56 22 0 0 4 1 17
2000 D.C. United 29 27 2,445 0 2 2 11 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 68 37 2 0 9 0 36
2001 MetroStars 21 21 1,868 0 2 2 4 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 48 33 0 0 6 0 24
Six-year totals 164160 14,158 8 28 44 105 38 1 6 0 0 0 0 2 343 201 12 13 32 2 112

To me this is a portrait of an aging d-mid. (I apoligise that I can't make the table work out right.) What stands out to me is that after his first three years his shots decline by more than 50%, then decline again in 01. I see his fouls committed per minute going up slightly. To me this says that as he ages he's concentrating on being a d-mid at the expense of his offense, probably because he's slowing down and because that's his inclination.


HOWEVER- It's also true that once Arena was no longer his coach, his offense declin ed. I don't think that this is a coincidence. I think, Artist, a review of the 98, 99, and 00 seasons would go far into seeing how Williams has changed and it woul;d be also interesting to see you include all of Williams' MLS seasons- from 96 on- in your initial stats. When I have time later I'll try to work on this too.