It's kind of surprising they didn't spend £100M on a back up player, which is what you'd expect them to do.
Mikel Arteta | Lego Pep watch
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
It's kind of surprising they didn't spend £100M on a back up player, which is what you'd expect them to do.
We should have gone for him, instead of Mount.
Rice is not a problem...The lack of proper striker is!
Anyone think he’ll be sacked if he fails to get top 4?
Ye that is their main problem. However, city won the league playing with Jesus up front and a false 9 all season.
I actually don't think so. Him and Bruno together wouldn't work. We don't control games the way Arsenal do for it to work for us.
By financially doping to the point where they could afford two world class players across every other forward position. Not really comparable to Saka and Martinelli, however much AFTV overrate both.
Happy new year !!
How many full 90s have you watched from Rice this or last season?
Rice costing over £100m is a problem I feel. As is £65m on Havertz.
They simply emptied the budget.
I don't think Rice suits Arsenal that well but he'd actually be perfect for us. There's not many midfielders you'd back to be the single holding mid in Ten Hag's system but he could probably do it.
I understand Pep is a cheat is the best defence but anyone actually believing that is a fool.
Pep did it with Barca probably the best club team to ever play.
While his tenure at Bayern can be stated as underwhelming because he didn't win CL but he is a one hell of a League coach.
And its easy to just disregard his time as ManCity but even with all the spending ManUtd/Chelsea have done they are no where close to what he achieved in the past decade. You can mock ManCitys revenues but purely in spending terms they are not far ahead of others in last 8-10 yrs (or even 15yrs) while giving academy players chances.
Nothing done at City has been above the board. It's all tainted.
Considering the allegations against Barça, his time there might be too.
So what's left is his underwhelming stint at Bayern.
Financial backing or not, it is obvious that Guardiola is the best coach around by seeing his teams play. The organization and patterns of play they display is unrivalled. And that has to be down to coaching and can't be bought by money. Players don't automatically harmonize like that.
And you can see those things to a lesser extent in Arteta's Arsenal as well.
Arteta has done a fantastic job at Arsenal. I was, like most people laughing at him for the first year or more but he has come good. Yes he has spent a lot of money but so has everyone else doing well (and plenty that aren't doing so well). Pointing at this years freak success story like Villa doesn't change that.
No I don't think he is in the same realms as Pep and Klopp but I would suggest those 2 are the best 2 managers in the world who both have much more experience than Arteta and have both been at their clubs for far longer with the ability to do whatever they need to do.
The fact people are laying into Arteta because Arsenal aren't running away with the league is frankly a compliment to him.
I do think that Arsenal are going to perhaps run into the same issues all the top teams do. Egos will come into it. Players will need to be managed in a different way but thats a future problem. For now hes doing a cracking job. A top quality striker would have Arsenal flying again. They aren't struggling to create.
No I don't think he is in the same realms as Pep and Klopp but I would suggest those 2 are the best 2 managers in the world who both have much more experience than Arteta and have both been at their clubs for far longer with the ability to do whatever they need to do.
The fact people are laying into Arteta because Arsenal aren't running away with the league is frankly a compliment to him.
I do think that Arsenal are going to perhaps run into the same issues all the top teams do. Egos will come into it. Players will need to be managed in a different way but thats a future problem. For now hes doing a cracking job. A top quality striker would have Arsenal flying again. They aren't struggling to create.
I really feel they’ll end up like Wenger’s Arsenal at the end of his reign, that is playing somewhat nice football, a cup here and there, but a stepping stone for young players
A sensible post with added context.
Rare on a forum where you're either the best in the world or the worst with no in between.
Arteta certainly is, in his fourth year as a manager he's won a domestic cup and has definitively challenged for the league with his team playing some of the best football. United have had a plethora of experienced managers who have failed to do so even with resources being invested.
Arteta has demonstrated that he has a very high ceiling as a manager, if he wins another competition and keeps Arsenal around a title challenge he will have established himself as one of the best in Europe factoring in his inexperience and level of management. If Carrick, McKenna or Rooney were doing what he's doing the forum would desire them manage the club.
That would depend on how they miss out. If they finish just outside top 4, because Aston Villa continue to have a monster season, and Arsenal are just edged out by Spurs, Newcastle or Man Utd, it would be insanity to sack him. If they somehow totally collapse and finish 8th or something, who knows, but that's also pretty far fetched.
I think the problem some people have with comparison is that they ignore the context. Ferguson is undoubtably one of the best managers every but he never managed United at a time when there was this much competition in the league. I think the parameters for success as a manager of even the top sides has changed a little.
City are obviously an outlier for **cough** obvious reasons but Liverpool were absolutely sublime for a few years and have very little to show for it. In any other time they would have dominated for years with that output and quality. When you have a golden era of quality, even the exceptional are relegated to the had runs.
It's coaching or world class players - it absolutely is down to money. There's a reason he's taken the gigs he has so far. He's an exceptional coach, and it's tainted. Those 2 things are not mutually exclusive.
As for Arteta, despite your hard-on for him... Nah.
I agree with this. I don't think Rice is a world class lone 6 in the City/Barca/Arsenal style of play. In fact I don't think he's better than Partey in that aspect. He lacks the ability to play forward passes through the lines like a Partey/Rodri/Busquets.
However, he is definitely a world class (or very close to world class) box to box midfielder, especially on the defensive side of things.
I think if Partey was available and they had a midfield of Partey-Rice-Odegaard they'd look a lot better and fluid. The fact that Arsenal are still in the title race with Rice starting most games in his second position (and an important one at that) is testament to his ability.
I think he's a very good all round CM/DM without being world class. I do think he could do more offensively but then Arteta clearly has a set role for him.
The big question for me re Arsenal is not what the pundits are saying about the attack (last season Martinelli got 15, Saka got 14, Odegaard got 15 and Jesus got 11) they scored 88 goals. It's just lazy punditry, all teams could do with a world class CF apart from City. The question is about the change from a profile like Xhaka to Rice and how that impacts the team as a whole. It was evident to me Arteta was shifting to a more risk adverse strategy and it will be interesting to see if it pays off for them.
I agree with everything here, except we didn’t go from Xhaka to Rice. We went from Xhaka to Havertz. Now he’s settled, he chipped in with a few goals, as would be expected. And he’s been very good defensively, some of his stats are actually better than Xhaka’s from last season.
But Partey is better progressive passer than Rice and Xhaka is a better progressive passer than Havertz. Seeing as Partey is so injury prone, I really don’t think we should have sold Xhaka. We moved on from something that was working way too fast.
You don't need to "believe". It's a facht, Pep has either cheated, had the best player the galaxy has ever seen (+ some doping sparkled on top) or went to the most dominant team of the Bundesliga. Of course he is a great coach but everything has always been heavily stacked on his side. You'd be a fool to attribute his success only to his coaching talent.
And Alonso while showing a lot of promises has not won anything yet. Maybe he will win the league this year and if he does, well done.
If the Kroenke keep investing as much the next 2 years and we still can't sustain a full league campaign, Arteta might get booted but circumstances matters.
I always thought Partey was a bit more forward roaming than Rice is, maybe I am wrong there. Yes, the Havertz role is an interesting one - Xhaka for me is a well rounded CM, not elite but not really weak at anything (good passer, can play one touch, chips in with goals, good in contact situations, good aerially,, runs a lot etc) whereas Havertz is clearly a more attacking profile but as you say he's done well defensively .
I posted this in a different thread but it shows the change from last season, most of the big changes are from new managers coming in with new methods (Ange, Dyche etc.) or struggling teams like United but Arsenal's is the most interesting for me. You are the only team to move in the direction you have and it's quite a big defensive shift. That for me shows, at least in part, the impact (both positive and negative) of Rice and his role in your team.
I think you lost Xhaka the seasons before, he seems to have taken the treatment by the fans very personal. Moreover, Xhaka was a bit of a positional misfit for what Arteta wanted to play, IMO. Over here, he plays a more central and less direct role. You can see it at some passing statistics. His passing accuracy went up from 84% last season to 92% this season, his passes completed from 42 to 95 and his passes into the final third from 4.45 to 11. Especially the last two statistics are incredible. His heatmaps on sofascore are also very telling - he played in the left half spaces for you guys, very similar to Havertz, and is now playing deeper and more central. Xhaka himself said that he wanted to move to Leverkusen because of the role Xabi described to him.
So on paper, Havertz is a better fit for what Arteta wanted to play. More of a natural #8 than a #6 like Xhaka. Whether or not that is the correct decision is another topic but in general, Arteta "shoehorned" Xhaka into the role of a AM/CM hybrid last season while he's now playing somebody in this position who actually grew up playing this role. Which is quite ironic as most people seem to think he's playing Havertz out of position when that was rather the case with Xhaka.
I think the question is more to do with the change from Rice to Partey since Rice is playing in the lone 6 position and not as an 8. The problems of Arsenals potency in attack imo is the difference in the ability of forward passes and of breaking the lines. Partey would always look to play the ball forward to Odegaard and the attackers and is much better at it than Rice. The problem with Arsenal now is getting the ball to Odegaard/attackers before the opposition have a set defence. The ball gets to dangerous areas far later than it used to and when the opposition have a comfortable defensive structure which makes them much harder to break down.
I think when Partey was fit he was played as in inverted right back to try and counter this problem by making use of his forward passing but Arteta still hasn't found the balance and is struggling to since Partey has pretty much missed the whole season.
From what I've seen of both players, I'd say that Xhaka is a less risky player than Rice. Moreover, isn't Havertz the Xhaka replacement and Rice replaces Partey? Overall that makes them more attacking oriented and less riskaverse, IMO
@Zehner and @the_cliff
Go up a couple of posts, this was pointed out by daydreamer correctly - mixing up players.
I did see that Partey's injury is apparently really bad though so don't expect him back any time soon.
Arsenal's midfield is interesting from a heatmap perspective as well.
Partey 22/23 versus Rice 23/24
https://www.sofascore.com/player/thomas-partey/316148
https://www.sofascore.com/player/declan-rice/856714
Xhaka versus Havertz
https://www.sofascore.com/player/granit-xhaka/117777
https://www.sofascore.com/player/kai-havertz/836705
Odegaard versus himself
https://www.sofascore.com/player/martin-odegaard/547410
https://www.sofascore.com/player/martin-odegaard/547410
The clear difference, for me, is how underrated Xhaka appears to have been on that left hand side - interestingly that heatmap is very similar to someone like Maddison's but with a little more defensive work.
Rice Partey are quite similar - Rice is covering more ground but both are very consistent with their coverage and take on a huge amount of work. Reminiscent of Casemiro last season for us but wider ranging.
Go up a couple of posts, this was pointed out by daydreamer correctly - mixing up players.
I did see that Partey's injury is apparently really bad though so don't expect him back any time soon.
Arsenal's midfield is interesting from a heatmap perspective as well.
Partey 22/23 versus Rice 23/24
https://www.sofascore.com/player/thomas-partey/316148
https://www.sofascore.com/player/declan-rice/856714
Xhaka versus Havertz
https://www.sofascore.com/player/granit-xhaka/117777
https://www.sofascore.com/player/kai-havertz/836705
Odegaard versus himself
https://www.sofascore.com/player/martin-odegaard/547410
https://www.sofascore.com/player/martin-odegaard/547410
The clear difference, for me, is how underrated Xhaka appears to have been on that left hand side - interestingly that heatmap is very similar to someone like Maddison's but with a little more defensive work.
Rice Partey are quite similar - Rice is covering more ground but both are very consistent with their coverage and take on a huge amount of work. Reminiscent of Casemiro last season for us but wider ranging.
I think it shows how Havertz is still struggling a bit to get involved as much as required. While he has added some scorers, he's not as integrated into their game as Xhaka has been (though I think Xhaka fits much better in a deeper role than in the LC(A)M one he played for Arsenal, see his statistics this season as a DLP).
But in general, I think Havertz could contribute very well in this role and provide what Xhaka did plus additional goal threat. See his heatmap from 16 to 20 in the Bundesliga which sort of mirror Xhaka's from last season (and basically debunk the myth that he played as a striker for us):
https://www.sofascore.com/player/kai-havertz/836705#tab:statistics
Yeah, Xhaka was immense last season (and seems to be having another great season for Bayer). Replacing him with Havertz is a huge downgrade.
Very interesting to look at him in the BL. That's similar to how KBD played last season (I was just posting in another thread about this) but with more defensive responsibility, or maybe just being in a less dominant possession team. Makes me think he might actually be better on Odegaard's side but then he's not as good as him and so Arteta is trying to make it work on the left. Think they'd be better splashing the big money on Wirtz for that role now I see that.
Havertz time with us overlapped primarily with Bosz' stint as our coach and in that time we averaged probably around 60% possession or so. Maybe not as dominant as City but he still thrived in a possession system. But yeah, I would also have seen him on the RCM role but Odegaard is ahead of him and rightly so. But considering that Arteta played a left footed LCM in Xhaka and replaced him with another left footed player, I assume that is by design. I guess ödegaard is expected to drift inside a lot and the other player shall play more direct. Havertz was very versatile in that sense for us. Comfortable in tight space thanks to his shielding and good combination play but also very direct through his athleticism and a goal threat because of his ability to ghost into the box and finish with the head and both feet. So Arteta probably plans to capitalize on the latter more so than the former.
Wirtz would be terrific for them, yes, but I doubt they'll pay upwards of 100m for a position they just signed Havertz for. Plus he could be too similar to Ödegaard as both demand lots of the ball and occupy similar spaces. On the other hand, who knows how things look in 2025 which is apparently Wirtz' targeted window for his next step.
I've seen a stat recently that Rice had the most progressive passes out of all midfielders in the league but I think that's quite a misleading stat. Rice drops very deep in this Arsenal team, sometimes in between the 2 centre backs which I don't remember Partey doing as much last season. I also think Partey is a much better passer in transition and helps in the speed of playing the ball forward catching the opposition unaware, when they aren't defensively set and in shape.
I do agree with you though in the sense that they are both similar in the defensive aspect and take on a huge amount of work.
I also agree with your point on Xhaka being a very underrated player for Arsenal last season, I thought he was one of their best players and was quite surprised that they let him go.
progressive passes is a really misleading stat - it basically means any longer pass that moves a certain distance towards the opponents goal (I think it's 10m but can't remember off top of head) - so players who sit deeper and play a lot of passes will rank high i.e. Rodri, Bruno, Rice, Newcastle's Bruno, Enzo + all the longer ball full backs like TAA and Trippier. It's only when you combine progressive passes with % completion you start to get a bit of an idea.
For example in the entire PL:
Progressive passes top 3. Rice, Bruno, Rodri.
Rodri is #8 for completion (pretty mental when you think about it), Rice is #20 and Bruno is...let's just not post this one (#234th)
But Bruno doesn't sit deeper, he's our no 10.
Hence the issue with his passing/wastefulness
It’s not an issue when it’s comparable with other players in the same position (which it is) Comparing his pass completion with Rodri/Rice etc makes no sense at all. Players in their position should be 90%+. For attacking midfielders a much lower pass completion is absolutely fine (Bruno is on 78%, Maddison on 80%, De Bruyne 81% according to Infogoal).
The most interesting thing about the data you mention is how a player who plays in an advanced position like Bruno is able to make so many progressive passes, with much less distance of pitch to pass into.
Last edited:
More an issue with how we play then, in which Bruno is the main man
Yes. That’s an issue. He consistently has the most touches/passes out of all of our midfielders. That definitely shouldn’t be happening. Although that says much more about the (lack of) quality in central midfields than anything to do with Bruno. Hard not to wonder how much we would improve with Rice at the base of our midfield?
Watching us vs all other big teams the one thing most obviously missing is the consistent passing triangles between defenders and deep lying midfielders. That would represent the most frequent pass for most other successful teams. Yet it’s almost a rarity for us.