I feel that paints a very distorted picture since we only really found form for 5 league games starting with the Chelsea game, and then reverted back to mid table results. Even Fulham went on a run of 4 games where they averaged 2 points per game, and then reverted to the mean. If we had maintained 68 points per season form from Dec 26th until now, with the results coming more consistently over the months instead of clustered in a 4 week period, I'd put more weight on the table since Christmas.
For the season as a whole we sit 9th and that's kinda all I need to know. But if someone wants to look at it over different rolling windows (last 12 mos, season to date, Boxing Day to date, last 3 months, whatever) that's fine. But it just seems to increase the chance of it showing us where we really are (mid-table) rather than where we think we *should* be (solidly top 4). Obviously shorter windows, especially if cherry-picked, increase the chance of us being placed higher. Only if we fans really felt that the team had truly turned a corner and we had confidence in their ability to keep that up, on a consistent basis, then a shorter, more recent window might have some relevance. But we don't really, so it doesn't really.
Cherry picks are allowable if: The change in trend is statistically significant There is a change in the physical world that matches the change in data. One thing to be careful of is this cherry pick matches liverpools worst data but includes Chelseas best data for example. Those things are not explained by anything happening at arsenal
So I went back and poked around understat (I'm not creating an excel chart again, once is enough) and looked at previous season's data compared to this season. A few things jump out: Understat has an xPts metric that is based on xGD. Here's what I'm seeing: 2017/2018: 65.90 xPts, 72.27 xG, 48.75 xGD 2018/2019: 58.97 xPts, 64.80 xG, 57.30 xGD 2019/2020: 50.15 xPts, 50.82 xG, 57.25 xGD 2020/2021: 54.14 xPts, 48.99 xG, 40.47 xGD Extrapolated to a full 38 game season, 2021 comes out to 58.7 xPts, 53.19 xG, and 43.93 xGD. Not good enough, but given COVID and a screwed up squad, I'm willing to take a wait and see approach.
We’ve had this argument before. If you look at the best teams Arsenal played, other members of the “Big 6” plus Leicester and West Ham, before Christmas Arsenal had 6 points from 6 games against these opponents, an early season win against West Ham and a win against United before they found their form. Arsenal lost the other 4 games against this group. Since Christmas Arsenal have picked up 11 points in 7 games against the same group, losing only to City and Liverpool. Considering Arsenal’s recent history against the top teams in the league, this represents a significant turn around.
Arteta has now reached the throwing players under the bus phase of management. Clearly signs of a manager who feels safe in his position and confident in his abilities.
It's been a while since I looked at this stuff and maybe some of the anoraks can do some analysis In some respects the seasons themselves are cherrypicks which is why the rolling average are great I would guess that the defensive improvement is statistically significant - but the collapse in attack we know is a long term trend which probably has just reached rock bottom. I'd be interested if anyone has made the case that there is any statistically significant improvement in the data since xmas, based on the ESR version of the team.
I have to dig for it, but the improvement in attack is roughly .3 xG/90 (I think it was 1.2 to 1.5, so still lots of room for improvement), which amounts to roughly 11 goals a season. That's enormous. Smaller improvement in xGA (think .15ish?), but that's nothing to sneeze at. Basically, the arrival of ESR coincided with an improvement that amounts to a 15 goal improvement over the course of a season. That's a lot. Those who point to the schedule being favorable do have a point (since some of the data is because of games against the likes of Newcastle and West Brom), but Arsenal weren't paddling those teams before ESR started playing: we lost at home to Burnley FFS.
Possibly, but more that he's had it with right backs and Ceballos, I think. I expect us to buy right backs and midfielders this summer, and nothing else.
Ugh, I hope not. What are you referring to? Could you provide a video link? I watched his presser from yesterday and didn't notice anything. I heard that he said something about ESR that could've been taken either pro or con, but I haven't heard/seen it for myself.
That's what I was thinking when I wrote my last post about the length of rolling windows. But I stopped myself from saying that the seasons themselves are arbitrary definitions of windows. It's a slippery slope from there to "almost everything we do in life is based on arbitrary definitions". Including the bloody tax returns I'm supposed to be working on right now.
The long run rolling averages are quite good because they often show the impact of changes in the summer (transfers, preseason training etc)
I mean I have the feeling it's a real thing. I wish one one the anoraks would run the data. The schedule effects definitely need to be factored in.
The post seems to have got taken down on r/gunners, but it was a video of him answering questions and saying that the majority of players gave their all this season, then the journalist followed up and said "the majority, not all?" and he responded "not all of them". Between that and the remark about how some players are at their limits and can't develop further, he does seem to be well on the way to losing his only saving grace - of still having the players on his side.
I saw this too. The effort thing seems like a shot at Auba. Developing players further is more interesting. I suspect that's a reference to Bellerin, Nketiah, and Nelson. And perhaps Willock.
OK. If true, I suspect we'll know for sure if/when things start to get truly ugly with our performance. < he says after our worst season in decades > At least thankfully he's got a long way to go before he's in the league of Maestro Mourinho.
There's been lots of little things, but the problem with "running the data" is that sample size is somewhat limited. I'm dithering on whether to be optimistic or not, but the thing that jumps out at me is that we've been much, much better away from home than we've been at home against the non-good teams. Being better away from home suggests that a team hasn't really hit its ceiling? Unless, of course, Arteta can't coach an attack at all. Also, let's not forget that Arteta took over a team in mid-season, had to deal with a huge COVID related interruption, and then had a really limited preseason because of COVID. Which is to say that, sure, the results haven't been good enough, but the circumstances are such that drawing any definitive conclusion from what we've seen so far is a fool's errand. We've only seen a bunch of maybes. Past decisions, like firing Wenger and Emery, were much clearer.
Yeah, it's debatable. But I think it's down to how you feel versus how the points, placement & trophies come out in the end. p.s. The fact that we got to the semis of Europa doesn't really make me feel any much better. It felt like imposter syndrome to me. p.p.s. Home vs away form in this lockdown season is basically irrelevant IMHO.
I think you have to throw out all home/away numbers from this season due to the lack of fans. Aren't away sides doing much better this season across the board?
I tend to agree there probably is something there, but it is a small data size. I also agree the stupidity was the decisions made in the summer by dumping Ozil and bringing in Willian - that could have cost Arteta his job.