The loss of perspective

Arsenal lost, and the takes came out. Are they going too far?

Maybe it’s just the nature of sports fandom in general. I don’t think it’s just Arsenal. But losses like Thursday’s shortfall against West Ham seem to nearly always raise the inevitable question:

What’s wrong with us?

The more stark corners of the internet will always be like that. But in the past 18 hours alone, here are some takes we’ve seen from some of the more reasonable (or at least not cataclysmically reactionary) voices surrounding the Arsenal fan experience:

• Arsenal have outgrown Gabriel Jesus and Oleksandr Zinchenko

• Gabriel Martinelli may not snap out of his poor form

• Arsenal’s 40 points in 19 games is both 1) 10 points off last season’s first 19 games and 2) “pathetic”

• Speaking of last season, Arsenal’s performance last season was all due to “xG overperformance.” Now that it’s gone, the wheels are off.

• Arsenal’s leading scorer having 5 goals after 19 league games is an embarrassment, and a massive problem

• Arsenal haven’t had a good attacking performance since Wolves on Dec. 2

• Arsenal have a “mid-bottom-table front 3”

• Arsenal have to move heaven and earth to add a top attacker in January or be “left behind”

• Arsenal are the only club you ever hear about FFP problems with

• Mikel Arteta needs to win a title by the end of next season or GTFO

Ok, the last one was pulled from a clueless, reactionary person. But this is a lot, isn’t it?

It would be pretty tough to for a complete outsider to believe Arsenal are second in the Premier League, two points off the lead. Crazier yet, you wouldn’t believe Arsenal have scored just three goals fewer than the mighty attacking Liverpool, or allowed three fewer than the immovable Manchester City. Let alone that they have the best underlying performance in the league.

There’s so much to address about what’s being said about Arsenal these days. This is going to be a little scattershot, but bear with me as I do a bit of a notebook dump on some of these points.

Is Arsenal’s attack sputtering because they have no striker?

This is probably the one I’ve seen kicking around the most in cyberspace. The line of thinking goes that Arsenal’s leading scorer (Edkayo Saketiah) has five goals because Arsenal do not have a bloodthirsty, dominant striker.

I’m gonna cut the bull and just go straight for the throat here: People realize that Nketiah and Jesus have each played around 900 minutes each so far this season, right? For either of them to be really challenging Salah or Solanke or Haaland at this point, they’d have to have put in an absolutely generational first half.

Nobody in the top 7 in the Premier League has played fewer than 1,293 minutes so far this season, a.k.a. nearly four full games more than either Arsenal striker. And the guy who’s played those few minutes? That would be Erling Haaland.

Nketiah is joint-20th in scoring right now, Jesus joint-46th. Having split the minutes. One goal for either changes those ranks dramatically.

If you could make them into one guy - I’m gonna mash names again and go for Edbriel Nketsus - they’d be tied for eighth in striker scoring. Is that stellar? No! Jesus in particular does need to ramp up his output a bit. But that’s not a catastrophe.

How about from a finishing perspective? Well, those 8 goals come from 8.6 xG. That would rank fifth in the Premier League as one player. A roughly “average” finishing performance by a Premier League forward right now is roughly even with xG, so the finishing has been slightly below average from the 9 role, overall.

Most of the gap is, of course, Gabriel Jesus, who’s finishing about 50% worse this season than for his career. So there’s hope for an uptick, in my opinion. Meanwhile, he continues to provide a ton of other on-ball value, like ranking in the 88th percentile for dribbles, 82nd for xA, 91st for key passes, 72nd in shots created via live passing, and 96th in tackles won.

Would Arsenal be better off with a system that funnels all chances to one striker, the way City do with Haaland? Maybe. But I think the credible links point to Arsenal giving that a shot soon. Speaking of which…

Are Arsenal really going to pass up this chance to sign an attacker?

Possibly! And guess what? That doesn’t make them a bad club.

Why does it feel like Arsenal are the only club you hear about FFP for? It’s pretty simple, honestly. Whether you’re talking about UEFA’s rules or the Premier League’s rules governing profit and loss, the assessment period is a three-year window. When you talk about Liverpool, Chelsea, Man City, Man United, Spurs and Arsenal, who’s been in the Champions League the least in that period? Easy answer!

Arsenal also have not had the benefit of many sales in that period. Guess who else hasn’t, while spending big? Manchester United, another club being reined by FFP right now!

Like it or not, Chelsea and Manchester City have made some big sales - Tammy Abraham, Marc Guehi, Fikayo Tomori, Mason Mount, Gabriel Jesus, Raheem Sterling, Shea Charles, James Trafford, the list goes on - while also booking more revenue from the Champions League and other sources. Chelsea, of course, are also facing potential trouble if they don’t sell some guys or make Europe, but stay tuned.

You may remember Arsenal intentionally made David Raya’s deal a loan with a (relatively obligatory) option to buy that would total £30m if or when activated. It’s also been reported that if Raya became a regular, the trigger would be reached pretty easily, and that the deal was structured this way due to FFP issues.

We’re still in the fiscal window where Arsenal had to do that deal to make things work. That means in order to buy anyone of significance (£30m) is probably a good benchmark, Arsenal are looking at either a loan with obligation for any incoming players, or needing to sell off some talent before signing anyone.

I struggle to understand why any club below Arsenal on the proverbial ladder would willingly loan one of their best players (he would have to be in order to make a splash at Arsenal) without either all the money they need to replace him now, or a guaranteed big number in a few months. So that seems tough.

What about sales? This is far more feasible. The thing I’ve noticed fans struggling to grasp, though, is how player sales really work. If there’s no market for a player, or only a market below an acceptable number, 9 times out of 10 it’s not going to be because of a lack of effort from the seller.

Could someone bid £20m for Eddie Nketiah or Emile Smith Rowe? Maybe! That would create a bit of wiggle room under FFP, potentially allowing for a big purchase under FFP if booked a certain way. But would anyone out there in January be worth 1) selling Nketiah or Smith Rowe for what’s not an especially intriguing bid, and 2) potentially disrupting more ambitious summer plans to somewhat help this season? I’m awfully split here.

I’ve been pretty clear with my thoughts on Ivan Toney (I’ll link the film study below) and whether he’s worth the purported £80m-100m Brentford want. I’d rather sign a striker who’s either better than Jesus right now (Toney isn’t, in my opnion) or could become better one day (at age 28 in March, Toney’s window is shutting fast).

Victor Osimhen, the other popular link, isn’t going anywhere in January. That was part of why he signed his extension. Now he’s got a defined price tag for summer. And if Arsenal sign a sub-Osimhen striker in January, how would signing him in summer work, anyway? If you ask me, it wouldn’t. There simply wouldn’t be room for Osimhen, the new guy, and Jesus. Someone would have to go…or not join in the first place.

So yes, it could be a very frustrating January. We could read about Arsenal turning down offers, but I don’t think that’s going to be out of stubbornness or poor leadership. It’s going to be about the club needing a certain number for these players and not getting that offer. Pay attention to who’s chasing Arsenal players, and what their usual spend is like.

And if someone won’t bend over to let their guy join Arsenal on a loan, that can’t really be blamed on Arsenal, either.

I get asked pretty frequently if there’s a list coming for potential defenders, and there’s not anything especially meaty in the works. That’s due to the difficulty of judging who’s available on loan, as well as my hatred of CB data in general. But you can rest assured some fullback content is coming, and I’ll keep studying credible links as they pop up. That’s my promise to you. 🫡

Was 2022-2023 a fluke?

I’ve seen last season framed by at least a couple of people as a total fluke of xG overperformance now. I don’t think that’s really grasping the whole concept of xG, to be honest.

Recap: Last season, Arsenal finished with 81 non-penalty goals on 69.1 npxG, an xG overperformance of about 17% (using FBref numbers here). Their npG-npxG ratio was tied with Manchester City for the best in the league, at +11.9.

But how flukey was that? Since the 2017-2018 season, which is the earliest FBref goes back with xG, seven clubs have bested that in a single season, or about 5.8% of the total sample. So yes, it’s a rare result that’s difficult to top.

We’ve certainly seen a regression to mean for Arsenal this season, with them now 1.2 goals below npxG according to FBRef (this is due to posting a -2.7 against West Ham).

But is that because finishing above xG at all is unsustainable? Absolutely not, for good teams with good finishers. More than 10% of clubs in FBRef’s sample have finished at least 10 goals above npxG the past six seasons, more than one a year. If I reduced the gap to, say, 10% of xG instead of a goal number, that would grow even more.

The point I’m trying to make here: Arsenal have a number of players currently finishing below established career conversion rates. To name a few: Ødegaard, Saka, Jesus, Martinelli. Those four have combined to take 45% (!) of Arsenal’s shots this season. Given their respective careers and current form, the smarter bet in my mind is on a better second half than the first, and that’s sure to impact some results.

(I think it’s worth pointing out that a “regressing” Saka in a stumbling

The other thing I think bodes well for the future: Arsenal’s attack is trending in the right direction.

No, they didn’t score against Aston Villa or Newcastle, they didn’t score against West Ham. But December alone accounted for four of Arsenal’s six best games this season, when rating by non-penalty expected goals. That’s also three of their top five performances ranked by number of shots on target. These are positive trends that work against the narratives out there.

Arsenal are now seventh in non-penalty xG and second in chances created from passes in live play. Those are the best ranks of the season. They’re third in total shots taken, and seventh in shots on target. I think the last stat does speak to the idling form they’ve gone through at times, in terms of shooting.

For what it’s worth, I’ve also found it a little shocking that relatively nobody has pointed out Arsenal’s last four opponents are in 3rd, 6th, 1st and 8th in the Premier League. That’s a pretty tough month. Not that it makes it any less disappointing.

The lesson: Keep attacking, goals are coming.

Is Arteta doing a bad job?

This feels like a good place to end: No.

Maybe he’s not doing everything perfectly, but it seems like a pretty entitled question to even ask at this point. Arsenal haven’t won a title in 20 years, but they also haven’t finished top-three back to back since 2016. Those are also the last back-to-back Champions League qualifying seasons. If you cut it down to consecutive top-two finishes, that hasn’t happened since 2005.

Go back to 2020 and offer this reality to Arsenal fans, and I bet you get a 75+% acceptance rate.

Why am I saying all this? I guess as a solid reminder to enjoy what we’ve got. We all want to win every game, decidedly, but remember where you’ve been as well. Because we can all agree it’s been much, much worse in recent history.