With all the noise on my timeline yesterday, I didn't have the chance to address the polarizing views of Xhaka that came in response to this viz. I wanted to do that today because it really sheds light on what I believe is a big issue in sports analytics: confirmation bias (1/6)
https://twitter.com/amonizfootball/status/1374431147984220168
The two widespread responses to this were either "see? Xhaka is one of the best PL midfielders" or "this proves stats don't belong in football". And the truth is... neither. This isn't meant to be a holistic view of Xhaka, and stats aren't only good when they agree with you (2/6)
This viz is meant to show that, broadly, Xhaka passes very progressively and accurately for Arsenal, and doesn't really dribble. Why that is the case is another debate- one point I mentioned was that this tends to be common among Arsenal midfielders (3/6):
https://twitter.com/amonizfootball/status/1374432948347236354?s=20
The numbers also show that Xhaka is Arsenal's *most* progressive midfielder, so even among a highly-involved group of midfielders in ball progression, Xhaka is the most involved. Which points to both influence and quality in possession for Arsenal this season (4/6)
However, this isn't a claim that he's one of the best midfielders in any way. There's many other valuable roles a midfielder can perform- broadly, attacking and defending- that can make them effective at a given role. I wasn't making any claims about Xhaka wrt either (5/6)
It's okay to admit that a player you don't like is good and useful in certain areas, or that a player you like is bad at others. Extremes tend to be wrong, and data doesn't always confirm your beliefs. So be sensible, skeptical, and as unbiased as possible when using it (6/6)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
