Unpopular (and unexpected) opinion, but our stats make Frank De Boer an okay coach. Here's % confidence in positive effects given his squads:
Crystal Palace
xGF 69%
xGA 57%
Atlanta United
xGF 39%
xGA 95%
Explanation of what's behind these numbers:
smarterscout.com/articles/premi…
1/3
So De Boer probably has little effect on attacking either way but may improve a club's defending. It's notable that he was unlucky at Palace, where his squad created close to 5 xGF and didn't score. These metrics gauging just one aspect of his coaching ability, though.
2/3
We haven't heard great things about the other aspects of De Boer's coaching ability, but it seems like (a) he's not as bad as advertised, (b) expectations for him may be too high because of his playing career, and (c) the KNVB could still do much better than an average dude.
3/3
P.S. Clarence Seedorf appears in the article linked above. He did a power of good for Deportivo La Coruña's attacking, but their defending may have suffered a bit. On balance, though, he had a positive effect. Pretty much the opposite of De Boer.
P.P.S. The pick of the bunch in that article happens to be Henk Fraser, who had six caps for the Dutch national team. Goodness knows why he doesn't get a look for the job. He's a fantastic coach in our numbers. Not a big enough reputation? More known for working with youngsters?
P.P.P.S. When Diego Maradona became coach of Argentina, people said it was a "deuda pendiente" – a pending debt that had to be repaid. They knew they had to get it over with. Do the Dutch feel the same about De Boer?
Share this Scrolly Tale with your friends.
A Scrolly Tale is a new way to read Twitter threads with a more visually immersive experience.
Discover more beautiful Scrolly Tales like this.