Thread by @nonewthing

People just don't get it. Granit Xhaka is one of the best progressive midfielders in the game but his replacement doesn't have to be exactly the same profile. It is one of the poorer things in analytics to always look at 'similar' player replacements.

GRANIT XHAKA THREAD.

Granit Xhaka is hugely responsible for Arsenal's 1st and 2nd phase of progression when building play and consolidating it. He is a pretty good midfielder regardless. People go on about his 'mobility' but all players have limitations that they adjust their football to.

Outside of possession, he was seen as rubbish when Wenger used him as a lone 6 or 8. He could be a little rash (which young midfielder isn't?) and didn't have enough athleticism to keep up with EPL PnP monsters running past him. Wenger didn't figure him out early.

The pivot midfield is a good staple in football because most midfielders are not particularly suited to play the midfield roles of a 3-man midfield. By playing with two 6s, you can 'buff up' a progression monster with an athletic monster and get a spare man to run into the box.

Since most midfielders have limits and are not really suited to the progression/retention 'lonely' roles of a 3-man midfield, a double pivot is the common sense. Of course, the better skillsets/profiles you have, the better your pivot is. France's pivot is an excellent example.

Players who excel in a 3-man midfield like Gundogan, Rice, Mount can also excel in a double pivot. The double pivot is like a midfield cheat for poorer teams. But top teams love it, too.

Now, here is the thing, all the top coaches like a complete midfielder. Same for Arteta.

Completeness is a spectrum, too. For example, Ilkay Gundogan is a complete midfielder but he lacks serious athletic qualities. Mason Mount is also complete, but his brain leans towards the attack. Leanings matter, too. You lean towards attack or defend. It's rarely balanced.

That's why Sarri played Kante as a 10. To develop his attacking leanings and increase his familiarity with offensive zones. Now Kante is close to being complete.

Some players like Gerrard and Viera were exceptional in this sense. They were pretty much completely complete.

Partey has all the progressive qualities to be an 8 but his brain leans towards defence. He is also a bit unfamiliar with playing as a lone 6. Has complete qualities but doesn't have the leanings or familiarity. In this sense, he was being held back by Simone and said as much.

However, he is older now and has come to a team where the coach does not have the full luxury of 'developing' his instincts as a lone 6 or 8. If Arteta has a stable team+job security, I assure you that Partey would almost never play in the pivot he's most familiar to.

The best coaches in the game love a 3-man midfield because it allows you extreme dominance, flexibility and fluidity. Of course, a good 3-man midfield needs a complete 6, possession-wise, brain-wise and athletically. Not many of those in the game. The EPL has maybe six 6s.

Notice that both Rodri and Partey left Atletico for princely money. And every other complete 6 profile is ultra expensive or impossible to get. Guess who the only 'cheap' and available complete 6 in the EPL is?

Yves Bissouma. Let me make a list of others so you see.

Rodri, Scott McTominay, Partey, Rice, Bissouma, Fernandinho and Fabinho. McTominay is very inexperienced there (needs about 25 games as a lone 6). So is Rodri (explains his struggles) and to a lesser extent, Partey. Bissouma has also only spent a full season there. Barely.

That is why EPL clubs are so strongly linked to other 6 profiles in Europe. Tchouameni, Soumare, etc.

(Hopefully no one will mention Ndidi in the replies. He is too poor with the ball).

The best coaches, like I already said, love the 3-man midfield and players that fit it.

Mikel Arteta is one of such coaches. He can use the double pivot with high effectiveness but even in a burn-out season, he still found a big brain excuse to play with a lone 6. And you can judge the quality of it from the second half of the West Ham game. Absolute dominance.

As a result, Granit Xhaka, a double pivot monster, will never be replaced by another potential double pivot player like Ruben Neves or Teen Koopmeiners. Take that to the bank. Neves is actually not a bad signing for a double pivot. But we are not going to stay with one.

Arteta likely wants

1. A complete, lone 6.
2. A complete 6 who can play as an 8, too.
3. An 8 that can play in a double pivot.

It's just a matter of ticking the box from here.

Neves ticks 2 boxes.
Loccatelli ticks 2 boxes.
Lokonga barely ticks 3 boxes.
Bissouma ticks all.

I assure you that Bissouma high on Arsenal's transfer list. Forget the news report that he is not the 'first' option.

Of course, he can't be when a once-in-a-century talent like Camavinga is possibly available.

But in terms of price and availability, Bissouma is No. 1.

Camavinga ticks all the boxes in a way no other midfielder in the European game does. He is the true super talent, one on the level of Neymar in terms of rarity.

He can play as a lone 6, in the double pivot, and as an 8 against all of the best teams in the world. Who else can?

We are not looking necessarily for a Xhaka replacement. Rather, Arteta is looking to remake the Arsenal midfield in his image. He already has the double pivot template. Now is the time to slightly change the possibilities with a signing like Yves Bissouma.

Yves Bissouma allows us to continue with the template as well as switch it up, along with providing quality depth in case Partey is not available.

Ticks too many boxes.

The other reported options are similar, too, in Berge and Lokonga. Their presence allows us to switch it up.

You don't need an early-phase progression specialist to replace Granit Xhaka. Football doesn't necessarily work that way.

But how do we now progress the ball without a specialist?

Simple. You rejig things, make the entire team one huge progression machine.

That's how.