Ten Things: A Football Nerd’s Guide to the 2021 Crewe Alexandra Team
A deep dive into Crewe's 2020/21 season, and a look forward to the next one
Come in, make yourself at home. Crewe Alexandra certainly did this season in League One. After promotion from League Two last term, The Alex strolled in, kicked off their shoes and parked themselves in front of the TV. It wasn’t always spectacular, but it was a comfortable visit back to the third tier, that looks set to become a longer stay.
The 2020/21 football season imitated life in the past year. It took forever but it also went by in a flash. From a Crewe perspective, there were certainly some great moments. Owen Dale’s overhead kick in the final minutes at Burton; the spectacular team goal against Wigan; the whispers of a promotion push in January.
Still, the lack of crowds, the slog of the schedule, and the relative security of a mid-table finish, combined to make this season one to build on rather than cherish for The Railwaymen. There are certainly strong foundations for manager David Artell to develop.
With some time to reflect on a top half finish and look forward to next season, here is the guide to the 2021 Crewe Alexandra team. Data is from Opta/The Analyst, FBRef, Statsbomb, Whoscored, Transfermarkt, Experimental 361, and Wyscout. Here we go!
1. Stay Homegrown, Stay Safe: Crewe’s young core were the heart of the team’s success
Some things never change. It was reassuring to see Crewe use a successful core of first team players in their early 20s, who have mostly been with the club since their primary school days:
The age plot above shows the minutes played (in all competitions) by Crewe players who were still on their books at the end of the 2020/2021 season. Key January departure Perry Ng isn’t included, though our former captain’s absence was clear the second he went to Cardiff. I wrote about Ng in detail in January, and it’s been great to see him succeed so far in South Wales.
Crewe gave the most limelight to three big talents: Harry Pickering, Ryan Wintle and Charlie Kirk, who played the most minutes for the team in the 20/21 season and arguably had the biggest impact overall. All three could leave this summer.
The continued emergence of Owen Dale, Luke Offord and Oli Finney was hugely pleasing, and these breakout stars are likely to form the new core of the side going forward. As explored later, Offord has become a key player in the defensive third, with both Finney and Dale becoming vital aspects of Alex’s attack.
Crewe’s squad was one of the youngest in the league. No team in League One gave more minutes to players 23 or under. The average age of the squad was 5th lowest in the league, with the average skewed higher by a small core of older players (and Chris Porter who I’m scientifically counting as ‘really old’).
Overall, Crewe’s squad make-up is ideal for a lower league team. They have several young players who are sellable assets, supplemented by a few wise heads. This Experimental361 chart shows this well:
2. Some players were out of their depth, but now the squad is out of depth too
2020/2021 was a slog for the players, with a congested schedule further compounded by COVID cancellations. Crewe sensibly relied on a bigger playing squad than in previous seasons, using 27 players. This was still on the low end for League One clubs (only 2 teams used fewer players) but was an increase on 24 from Crewe’s previous campaign.
Despite using a bigger squad, Artell clearly didn’t trust a lot of his fringe players. Some young players weren’t deemed ready, while more experienced players were used sparingly. Anthony Evans and Daniel Powell struggled for game time, while Offrande Zanzala and Billy Jones were shown the door pretty much as soon as they’d arrived.
The club announced that Eddie Nolan, Olly Lancashire and Daniel Powell were all released at the end of the 2020/21 season. While I have no issue with each decision, their exits along with a few loanees means the squad is looking thin:
Daniel Powell was a victim of both Owen Dale’s emergence, and his own inconsistency. Ideally he might have stayed to back up Dale, but his wages were too high to justify, and it was the right time to move on for both parties.
Nolan and Lancashire exiting leaves Crewe short at centre back, especially as Omar Beckles’ future is uncertain. Nolan was a fantastic servant for Crewe in League Two but injuries caught up with him. Lancashire played well at times, but never fully convinced.
3. A young team was given some tactical wrinkles
Dave Artell’s fortunes as a manager, and Crewe’s fortunes as a side, have been tied to their move to playing 433 since January 2019. Since then, few teams in English football have had more success.
While the core principles of the team stayed the same, Artell started to (semi-successfully) play around with the team’s shape this season.
The Railwaymen still relied upon either a 433 or 4231 in around 90% of their games. The 4231 shape had been used occasionally before this season, but became a more pronounced alternative for Crewe at the start of this season. Here’s how it looked:
Later in the season, Artell chopped and changed shape more frequently. He used a back 3 in a couple of games, for the first time. He also flirted with 442, using a ‘big man, big man’ striker pairing of Mika Mandron and Chris Porter. It didn’t always work, but it sure was fun.
Despite the tweaking of shape, Crewe still looked and played like we’d expect. They focused on keeping the ball; the Railwaymen had the 4th highest average for possession in League One (53.6%). In keeping with this, their build-up play was mostly slow and intricate, as shown by this brilliant Opta/The Analyst graph:
While League One’s kings of slow and intricate MK Dons played like a footballing version of 2001: A Space Odyssey, Crewe were also happy to keep opponents waiting before bearing down on their goal. They focused on patient attacks with plenty of passes.
This patience extended to Crewe’s play when their opponent had the ball. You can show this through measuring their Passes Per Defensive Action (PPDA). This stat shows how many passes opponents made in their own half and the middle of the pitch before a Crewe player stopped the possession through a tackle, interception, header, foul etc. Crewe’s PPDA was 13.1, which was 4th highest in League One.
While other teams who struggled to pressure their opponents tended to be bottom dwelling teams, Crewe continued to be deliberately passive of the ball. They mostly focused on retreating into shape and retaining their energy. As shown below in another superb Opta/The Analyst graph, Crewe did create some chances from pressing high up the pitch. However in League One, only Northampton created less shots from high turnovers than Crewe:
Though I would like to see Artell’s side ‘turn up’ their press in certain situations, Crewe’s patience continues to broadly treat them well both on and off the ball. While personnel changes up top (Mandron and Dale), in midfield (Murphy) and at the back (Offord and Beckles) gave them a more aggressive core off the ball, the team continued to pick and choose their moments. As fellow Guinness drinkers will know, sometimes good things come to those who wait.
4. It went under the radar, but The Railwaymen’s attack was the real deal
In open play, Crewe created 1.25 Expected Goals (xG) per game, which ranked 2nd best in League One.
Crewe’s mantra in attack, for as long as any fan can remember, is that they want “3 and a half goalscorers”. This season, for the first time in as long as any fan can remember, they actually had that. The 3 and a half goalscorers in question were: Mika Mandron, Owen Dale, Oliver Finney, and Charlie Kirk.
By design, the ‘half goalscorer’ is Charlie Kirk, who is more of a creator but chips in with goals. Unfortunately, the true half man was Oli Finney, who had his season cut short by injury:
This graph shows how each of Crewe’s main goal threats accumulated Expected Goals (the lines) and Goals (the ball symbols) through the season.
After a slow start, Crewe’s attack really kicked into gear in December. Mandron and Finney were the key goal threats, while the emergence of Owen Dale added a huge extra dimension in the final third. At the start of 2021, between the Rochdale and Wimbledon games (games 21 to 25 above), the Railwaymen’s front 4 looked frightening.
Cruelly, Oli Finney broke his leg in February, and the attack never quite hit the same heights. Finney proved difficult to replace. Others like striker Chris Porter could fill in for the goalscoring, midfielder Callum Ainley could replicate his link up play with Crewe’s left side of Pickering and Kirk, but no-one could do both.
Injury put a sour note on a big breakout season for Finney. He isn’t super quick and he can be caught out of position defensively. He misses a lot of chances. But critically, he always finds a way to get in goal scoring positions. He is Crewe’s best hope of a 15+ goal a season player.
According to Opta, Finney was the second biggest goal-threat from attacking midfield in League One, with only Peterborough’s Sammy Szmodics putting up a higher xG per 90 (Finney’s was 0.45 per 90 while Szmodics’ was 0.46 per 90). Finney’s shot map is filled with shots inside the box:
Finney’s continued emergence was eclipsed by a brilliant break-out year from Owen Dale. Dale achieved a clean sweep at the end of year awards, bringing home Club, Player, and Fan’s Player of the Season. The 22-year old’s potential is sky high, though he needs to refine a lot of aspects of his game.
Dale is lightening quick and a nightmare for opposing fullbacks in the final third. He is very direct and willing to take risks. A naturally right footed winger playing on the right, he can stretch the opposition defensive with width and is also a threat in behind. He was Crewe’s joint top scorer in 20/21 and can score a variety of goals – he had 0.6 shots per game with both his right and left foot, and 0.3 per game with his head.
Far from just a goal threat, Dale was also a decent creator in 20/21 season. Dale only contributed two assists during the campaign, however his xA output (0.15 per 90) suggests the quality of his passing into attacking areas could have resulted in more goals. He is also a determined player off the ball, running all day defensively.
While he may not have Dale’s sky-high potential, Charlie Kirk proved himself as one of the best creators in League One and looks ready for a move to The Championship. Kirk had the highest Expected Assists (xA) in League One, and the 3rd highest per 90 minutes (0.25). 30 of the chances Kirk created were directly after he’d dribbled past an opponent, which was 2nd highest in League One. A map of the chances he created, again from Opta/The Analyst, is below:
Kirk and his partner in crime on the left Harry Pickering were key to Crewe’s attack. The team skewed towards the left both in terms of entering the opponents final third (39% of entries) and shots (23% came from left, 2nd highest in League One). Their partnership was the most consistent aspect of Crewe’s attacking play, particularly in the first half of the season. The GIF below is from January:
I wrote about Pickering in detail when his transfer to Blackburn was confirmed in the winter transfer window. He stayed with Crewe on loan until the end of the season and leaves this summer. The team, the fanbase, and most importantly me, will all miss him.
A final individual to highlight is Mika Mandron. Mandron is a smart player, who carved out a key role as a goal threat, creator, and most critically a hold-up player when Crewe went longer. He has surprising mobility for his size, and unselfishly creates space for teammates. Mika certainly proved popular; I polled fans of The Alex on Twitter about their favourite signing from last term, and almost 85% voted for the French frontman.
When I said Mandron was the last attacker I wanted to highlight just now…I lied. A quick word for Chris Porter here; I’m really glad he’s staying. According to Opta, Chris Porter lead League One in Expected Goals (xG) per shot with 0.29. Basically, if Porter was shooting, you’d expect it to go in 1 in 3 times. Finding yourself with shots in front of goal is probably the most valuable single skill a player can have. Knowing when not to shoot is also critical. Porter has mastered both skills – no player in League One was better at selecting when to shoot based on the pressure they were under. He shouldn’t be taken for granted and remains a great option from the bench.
Lastly, I should say that Crewe’s build-up play at the back was an important foundation for their attack. Ball progression from deep was more difficult for Crewe this season, but they still broadly did it well. League One teams were more active and smarter with their pressing of Crewe’s backline than League Two opponents were in 19/20. They regularly set pressing traps to isolate Crewe centre backs on the ball, forcing them into key mistakes.
The Alex need to find a way of avoiding this happening even more without Ryan Wintle. Wintle is leaving this summer, having been a mainstay at the base of Crewe’s midfield. Typically Wintle, and the ever-superb Tommy Lowery, had to support the defence by receiving the ball in difficult areas. Lowery was one of Crewe’s best players this season, expertly linking defence and attack. At least in possession, he will have to help the defence even more next season.
With Wintle’s departure, Crewe’s centre backs should also carry the ball forward themselves more frequently. It’ll solve more problems than it creates (I promise), as The Alex will more easily avoid the opposition press.
5. The team’s defensive structure was good but individual errors let them down
Crewe conceded 0.74 xG per game from open play, which was the 7th best defensive record in League One.
Often the defence looked solid, typically conceding low quality chances. Crewe’s defensive phase emphasised retreating into shape and using a fairly low defensive line. Opponents often resorted to shooting from distance; 41% of the shots Crewe conceded were from outside the box, the 4th highest rate in League One. In Open Play, Crewe’s average xG per shot conceded was 0.09, which was 5th best in League One.
The Alex generally did a good job of getting players in the way of shooters, though they could be better at blocking shots (more on that in a second). This Statsbomb graph from March shows how teams across the Premier League/Football League block shots. Crewe show up well:
Despite these positives, Crewe often struggled to string together 90 minutes of quality defending. Lapses in concentration often let them down. The Alex kept clean sheets in 26.1% of their League One games, which was the 13th best record in the division.
The key issue issues defensively were:
· Errors leading to opponent’s goals
· Conceding from long distance shots
· Capitulating in a few games (Oxford, Burton, Gillingham)
The Alex regularly conceded from defensive errors. As the team is (rightly) so committed to playing out from the back, this will happen sometimes. The trade-off is worth it, considering how much the attack benefit. However, there were too many errors this season. Whether it was tiredness, lack of concentration, or just a lack of quality, I’m not sure. But it was certainly frustrating to watch.
Crewe often conceded from distance this season, which was probably down to bad luck rather than any clear pattern. I do think they have some small issues with blocking technique. Blocking shots as a defender is very similar to blocking shots with your feet as a goalkeeper. If you face the shot head on (easier said than done) and let the ball hit you, rather than turn your body or fling out a leg, it’s easier to block shots. Crewe defenders might need to work on this. Will Jaaskelainen, Crewe’s first choice goalkeeper, was also sometimes slow to react to long distance shots.
Crewe conceded 3 or more goals in 6 league games. In a few games, particularly Oxford and Gillingham away and Burton at home, this seemed to be a product of heads dropping and a void of leadership. I can chalk some of it up to a lack of experience, and potentially a lack of motivation in the final couple of months. But another leader at the back wouldn’t hurt.
Crewe looked their most solid when the centre back pairing was Omar Beckles and Luke Offord. Their skills combine nicely. Both could step up as the more aggressive centre back (the dog), or step back and sweep up from flick-ons and defend the box (the cat). When paired together, they switched between cat and dog like ermm…the film Cats & Dogs?
Omar Beckles was a key player for most of the season, before dropping off in the final months. He won over 72% of his defensive duels and over 65% of his aerial duels, while putting up solid numbers for interceptions and passing. Beckles is a composed and well-rounded defender who often makes you wonder why he is only playing at League One level. Then his concentration levels slip, and you remember why.
Luke Offord, despite his short stature for a centre back, has continued to grow at the heart of the defence. While he was less effective than Beckles in defensive duels (winning around 70%) and aerials (winning around 58%), he was the more effective passer from deep. His mix of short and long passing could be a real asset for Crewe going forward. While I hope Offord stays at centre back, there will be a temptation for him to replace Wintle in midfield.
Ryan Wintle will be missed defensively, particularly his reading of the game. He was third among all League One players for ‘second balls won’. As mentioned earlier, he will be a key miss in possession. His defensive ability to sweep up in front of the defence will be equally hard to replace.
6. Crewe need to improve at dead ball situations
Crewe created just 0.25 xG per 90 from set pieces (corners and free kicks) in 2020/21, which was the 4th worst record in League One.
A massive 82% of their Expected Goals came from open play – only Peterborough had a higher rate in League One (83%). Set Pieces could create 5-10 extra goals for the side, enough to put them in the play-off mix. The Alex created just 8 goals from set plays, the joint worst in the division.
The exit of Harry Pickering isn’t helpful in this department. His left footed dead ball deliveries were normally good. It was the lack of varied routines or convincing aerial threats that did for Crewe’s attacking set pieces.
While attacking set pieces are a big concern, things could be even worse from defensive set pieces. Crewe conceded the 2nd highest amount of xG per 90 from Set Pieces, amounting to 0.43 per 90.
In some ways, Crewe got away with their patchy defending from set plays. The total set piece xG conceded was 19.1 but the team conceded 16 goals in these situations. 7 League One teams ended up conceding more from set pieces.
Against Rochdale and Bristol Rovers, The Alex conceded easy goals conceded from corners, with a free man taking shots at the back post. Crewe mostly use man marking from corners (which has benefits) but leaving strikers (Mandron/Porter) to mark at the back stick, who got caught ball watching, meant runs around the back created easy tap-ins. If I was an opposition coach, I’d be focusing on this weakness – teams could have exploited it more.
I know training was heavily impacted by the congested schedule, and it seems likely that Crewe’s set piece work was affected. With a normal pre-season and schedule next year, Artell and his staff need to emphasise set piece training and routines to give themselves an extra edge.
7. Crewe played a game of hot potato with their goalkeepers
Crewe’s goalkeepers were a hot topic among the fanbase this year, with both Will Jaaskelainen and Dave Richards seeing significant game time between the sticks.
As I discussed in an article in February, they both have different strengths – Jaaskelainen as a ‘first point of attack’ in the team’s passing from the back, and Richards through his ability to claim crosses and command his area.
According to Opta, both keepers performed at around an average level as shot stoppers in the 2020/21 season. Firstly, lets looks at Jaaskelainen:
Will J struggled in the early part of the season, both stopping shots, and preventing them through claiming crosses.
After a spell out of the team, he looked refreshed upon returning. Overall, Jaaskelainen had an okay season as a shot stopper. He is particularly strong making point blank saves close to his body.
When using Opta’s ‘goals prevented rate’ metric, which can account for different keepers facing a different number of shots throughout the season, Jaaskelainen performed slightly below the average expected keeper (his goals prevented rate was 0.97 when the average keeper’s is 1). Of the 39 League One keepers covered by this measure, Jaaskelainen was 10th best, though I would temper this by saying a lot of them played a small number of games.
Overall, it was a season of treading water for the young Finnish goalkeeper (he’s not finished, he’s only 22 hahahahaha). Still, his ability with the ball at his feet will only become more important, as teams find new ways to build from the back.
Dave Richards should also feel okay about his work saving shots in 2020/21:
He had fewer games (and shots faced) to work with. Using Opta’s ‘goals prevented rate’ metric, Richards’s goals prevented rate was 0.94. This ranked 15th best among the 39 League One keepers Opta assessed.
Richards, a career back-up at Crewe, benefitted from his first extended run of league games this season. While he couldn’t dislodge Jaaskelainen as Crewe’s number 1, Richards enhanced his reputation as a solid back up.
Lastly, Crewe’s keeper maintain a good record of saving penalties. The team conceded 7 this season but saved 3. The keepers consistently dive the right way, which bodes well for their opposition analysis.
8. The Alex did well with injuries but were slightly unlucky on the pitch
It’s difficult to analyse the 2020/21 season without talking about the schedule. Crewe’s players and staff dealt with it fantastically.
The team looked superbly prepared and conditioned at the start of the season in September. They were at a big disadvantage considering that early opponents Charlton and Hull had both played as recently as July, while Crewe hadn’t played a league game since March. Pre-season training had obviously been intense and set the squad up well. Some of the best performances came early on, even if results were patchy at first.
The schedule was at its peak during the first half of the season, with the team regularly playing Saturday-Tuesday-Saturday. In November and December alone, Crewe played 15 games (including an FA Cup game that went to extra time) which is an insane schedule. While opponents were keener to rotate, Crewe relied on a small core group of players. In this stretch, the following players started at least 12 games:
· Will Jaaskelainen – Goalkeeper: 13/15 games
· Harry Pickering – Left Back: 13/15 games
· Luke Offord – Centre Back: 13/15 games
· Ryan Wintle – Defensive Midfielder: 13/15 games
· Charlie Kirk – Winger: 12/15 games
Perry Ng, Omar Beckles, Tommy Lowery, Luke Murphy, Oli Finney, Mika Mandron and Owen Dale all also had huge stretches of the season without a break. Dave Artell consistently called upon these dozen players, and they consistently performed. Of them, only Offord and Finney suffered meaningful injuries – a remarkable record.
Coaches, backroom staff and most importantly the players themselves, must take a huge amount of credit for the effort they put into games, as well as recovery. It was tiring enough to keep up as a fan.
Luck also plays a part in this injury record. The Alex counted on good luck on the injury front, but they had some bad luck in terms of results.
While things did even up a little in the second half of the season, in mid-January, betting expert Mark O’Haire showed Crewe were the ‘unluckiest’ team in League One:
At the turn of the year, Crewe’s underlying performances and data looked like a solid play-off team, but they were sat in mid-table. While it was reasonable to hope that the team’s results would improve to meet their level of performances, in truth it was closer to the opposite. A slight slump in the second half of the season meant the team shouldn’t feel too hard done by the final table.
At the end of the season, Crewe had scored 56 league goals, when their overall xG figure was around 63.4. While some of this discrepancy is probably down to dodgy finishing (I won’t name names), they were certainly unlucky in front of goal.
Meanwhile, Crewe conceded 55 goals, when their overall xG against figure was around 58.8. This gap, due in part because of Crewe’s keepers good penalty saving record, may have also shown some good fortune in their defensive record. This was particularly the case in their defending of free-kicks and corners.
Overall, by most measures Crewe were a strong mid-table team, who looked much more likely to compete for a play-off place than fight off relegation. This is a promising sign when considering their chances for next season.
9. Artell continues to grow as a manager, but could calm down on the ‘little old Crewe’ line
Crewe manager David Artell marshalled a difficult season with great effect. His stock as a manager has never been higher. While last season finished in promotion, this season asked more from him as a tactician and organiser. He passed the test.
Artell continues to blood young players effectively. When the time is right, he isn’t afraid to cast aside a higher paid veteran to maximise the playing time of a homegrown young player. The team and the club continue to reap the benefits of this long-sighted management. He articulated how ‘Return on Investment’ on the academy is his main objective in a wide-ranging interview in February, and he puts these words into action regularly.
His in-game management also improved. He was quicker to make changes when the game was drifting and was more willing to change the shape to freshen things up.
Crewe’s summer recruitment in 2020 was another big success for Artell. Omar Beckles, Mika Mandron and Luke Murphy were all shrewd signings, who brought League One experience, and combined both steeliness and quality through the team’s spine. In summer windows, the club has done a good job of complimenting their existing crop of young talent rather than stifling it.
In contrast, Artell and his staff seemed to slightly panic in the January window. Compared to the considered and careful additions in the summer, the additions of Billy Jones, Steven Walker, Anthony Evans and Nathan Wood in January felt like overkill, considering how little time they had to bed in. While I admire Artell’s ambition to push for a play-off place while the opportunity presented itself, the bulked-out squad looked like more of a hindrance than a help.
Finally, while Artell is correct to highlight Crewe’s low budget compared to League One opponents like Sunderland, his continual hammering home of this point started to grate at the end of the season. Every Crewe fan I know understands we are a selling club. We all know Sunderland are a bigger club. We also know that Crewe can beat any team in the division.
10. Next season hinges on building a better squad, rather than directly replacing stars.
With all this in mind, Dave Artell faces his biggest challenge yet this summer. Crewe are losing Harry Pickering and Ryan Wintle, having lost Perry Ng in January, all high-quality players at their position. The club also needs to restock their competition for places.
Here are the players who logged over 1,000 League One minutes last year for The Alex. Highlighted players are leaving:
19 year-old Rio Adebesi emerged in the second half of the season. The homegrown left-footed full back played consistently at right-back, tucking inside when Crewe had the ball, similarly to Man City’s fullbacks. He did his job well, particularly defensively, showing good tenacity and excellent speed.
Adebesi has mentioned that he is likely to play at left back next season. He has big shoes to fill, replacing Harry Pickering. While he won’t be able to replace his ability in possession, Rio has the energy to get ‘up and down’ the touchline and should slot in nicely.
Artell will certainly need to turn to the free agent market to bring in another defender or two. Billy Sass-Davies, who has been a success on loan to Yeovil, should compete for minutes at centre back.
In central midfield, Wintle is likely to be replaced by Luke Murphy moving backwards, with more attacking midfielders like Oli Finney and Callum Ainley hoping to play more often because of this. Another homegrown youngster, Josh Lundstram, is waiting in the wings and should compete for game time.
In wide areas, Crewe will be desperate to hold onto Charlie Kirk and Owen Dale. Kirk reportedly has a release clause of around £600,000, and Championship clubs are circling him looking hungrier than a shark who’s given up meat for lent. The depth behind Kirk and Dale in wide areas has been bolstered by new arrival Chris Long, who’ll bring versatility and goal threat with him from Motherwell, but also an inconsistent track record.
Artell and his staff have an opportunity, with 3-4 well thought out signings this summer, to turn this side into a League One play-off contender. While Crewe have no chance of bringing in players of the quality of Ng, Pickering or Wintle, they have a meaningful opportunity to improve the balance of the squad. This more flexible approach should make the squad more resilient to key players leaving or getting injured.
While another mid table finish would represent progress and solidify Crewe as a League One club, if Kirk and Dale stay this summer, The Railwaymen probably have a one season ‘window’ where they can push for greater success.
Thanks for reading. If you liked this article and want to support me financially, you can here:
Buying me a coffee or a beer would be hugely appreciated. I don’t get paid for my writing but any kind of support helps me write more, and pay for better data. Cheers!
If you’d rather not spend any money, it’s no problem. I would also really appreciate you sharing this article online using the ‘share’ button below. You can also subscribe below, to receive my articles straight into your email inbox.
A few points to disagree on here. The attack was the real deal? Don't agree at all. Was poor in the first and final thirds of the season with a decent stretch in the middle against mostly weaker opponents. They were in the bottom half for goals and shots in total. Their variety was also lacking, can't remember any from the edge of the box or further away. I thought their attack was bang average in a poor league.
Second, Kirk's XG plot shows he moved from 4 XG to 6 XG between games 22-42. A 20 game stretch and you're only worth 2 goals? That's awful, from one of the most experienced and talented members of the team, not to mention an ever present pretty much. The fact that both Finney and Dale surpassed him for expected goals in far less starts is not a great look for him.
You mention Porter's opta stats. But do they factor in penalties? And do they factor in that his 4 open play goals were all tap ins from a few yards out? Sure, we can praise his positioning to get 4 tap ins, but praising him for his shot selection seems odd when all he basically had to do was tap it into an empty net. Not like he had any other option. And he's a great option from the bench? He scored 1 goal this season from 21 bench appearances and I think 1 assist. He also managed just 5 shots in those bench appearances. I'd say his impact is questionable and I hope Long can do the business to keep him out of the squad as much as possible.
I disagree that Artell switched things up quicker and more often. I found he rarely veered away from the formation he started the game with, unless you have data to show otherwise? Most of his changes were like for like, with only a few instances of him changing things to go more attack or defence minded.
You say the Alex did well with injuries? They did? They had Daniels out most of the season, Ainley missed most of the 2nd half, Finney missed the final 20 games, Offord had 2 serious hamstring injuries, Lundstram was out most of the season, most of the other players were missing here and there with knocks and niggles. Jones got injured 3 games into his loan spell. Lowery only started 30 games. Powell was absent for weeks at a time. I don't blame them for suffering, given the condensed schedule and disruption of Covid, but I think this season was awful for injuries, especially long term ones. Ainley, Finney, Offord, Lundstram all missed big chunks. Praying things are better next season.
I also disagree their summer business was a success. Mandron, sure. Beckles, meh. Good first half of the season, atrocious 2nd half. The fact he's leaving after 1 year and nobody seems that bothered is telling. Hardly a home run signing. Murphy? Do you have any data to show what impact he actually had this season, because I can't think of anything he did, bar a couple of decent passes for assists. I felt he was mostly invisible and should Lowery and Finney stay fit next season, I don't see him starting many games. Daniels was injured all season and you didn't even mention the total flop that was Zanzala. I'd say Artell's summer 2020 window was mixed, at best. One very useful player, one partially useful player, one player who's use was questionable, one that spent most of the season on the treatment table and one that was released 6 months in. Need a far better hit rate than that this summer.
I disagree with your assertation that the January loans were panic buying. Most were brought in to cover for injured/departed players. Jones was Ng's replacement. Walker was brought in to compete for a winger spot given Powell's effectiveness had dropped to zero by that stage. Ok, Wood was perhaps unnecessary, but Evans was probably to cope with the lack of Ainley. And that one, whilst he didn't work out, proved even more useful when Finney went down. Without Evans, the midfield might have really struggled given Lowery and Murphy missed a few games with niggles and Wintle's form dropped off. Not sure who else would have started sans those players had Evans not been there. But I don't see how bulking out the squad was a panic move, it felt more like improving the depth for a play off run, as you mentioned seemed to be the intention.
Overall I liked the analysis and you did a great job of showing a lot of different things. I would just question some of your takeaways as mentioned above.