A few graphs to balance the narrative.

[Upo 91]

Here's a graph* I did. I wanted to know how the form of the team has developed through the season 2019/2020 in PL. In particular I was hoping to discover a trend that would help make a prediction for the rest of the season. I did discover a few things just by looking at it visually. As I punched in the data, there were also a few things that made me question some of my previous assumptions.

What do you think?

 

My findings:

• Norwich had an absolutely blowout offensive start to the season! No wonder the rest of the season has been "disappointing". Norwich's offensive form has been quite consistent since Everton.
• Everton was the turning point. You can divide the season into two: pre-Zimmerman recovery and post-Zimmerman recovery. (Everton is match week 13). We needed TWO centre-backs. Essentially Hanley and Zimmerman being injured likely did us in if we go down.
• Insurance in the form of a slightly over-the-hill CB with serious PL experience would've been affordable before the season started.

 

* I used data from understat.com. Some data I cross-checked with fbref.com (StatsBomb data). I tried to avoid errors. I won't guarantee it's 100%, but the big picture is clear enough.

*The reason for using a 4 week moving average is to smooth down fluctuations to focus on the trend. When considering the "form" of the team, I think 4 weeks is a nice compromise. The bad thing is it hides details.

Edited February 17, 2020 by Upo
added a graph

[Nuff Said 5,088]

6 minutes ago, Upo said:

Insurance in the form of a slightly over-the-hill CB with serious PL experience would've been affordable before the season started.

Like Klose?

[Upo 91]

2 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Like Klose?

Norwich got really unlucky. I don't want to criticize the management too much. Still, Klose had enough of an injury history to come up with a scenario where 1 CB position is unfulfilled for some time and put odds and price to that scenario. Maybe the "insurance" cost was deemed too high... I understand that at some point you just have to toss the dice. You never go to war expecting to be fully prepared for what you're going to face. I think the management has done an outstanding job.

[Molly Windley 76]

I was looking at our form earlier today..

We have played 16 games since the awful performance against Watford and with the exception of Man Utd away have not lost by more than 1 goal.

Too many close but no prize results

 

[Nuff Said 5,088]

30 minutes ago, Upo said:

Norwich got really unlucky. I don't want to criticize the management too much. Still, Klose had enough of an injury history to come up with a scenario where 1 CB position is unfulfilled for some time and put odds and price to that scenario. Maybe the "insurance" cost was deemed too high... I understand that at some point you just have to toss the dice. You never go to war expecting to be fully prepared for what you're going to face. I think the management has done an outstanding job.

Yeah, but what I think you’re saying is we should have recruited a fifth CB? Sorry, but that isn’t realistic.

 

There are those who would have dropped Hanley and replaced him but the last few games have proved them wrong IMHO.

[paddycanary 538]

There have only been a handful of games where we weren't competitive, perhaps:

Burnley (a) 0-2

Villa (h) 1-5

Man U (h) 1-3

Man U (a) 0-4

 

You could throw in large sections of:

Liverpool (a)

West Ham (a) (post Zimm injury)

Palace (a)

Southampton (a) (nearly nicked a draw at the end)

 

That's 8 games out of 26 where we perhaps looked out of our depth. Which leaves 16 games where we were deservedly in the mix for points, successfully in 10 games having beaten:

Newcastle (h)

Man City (h)

Everton (a)

Bournemouth (h)

 

and drawn with:

Bournemouth (a)

Arsenal (h)

Leicester (a)

Spurs (h)

Palace (h)

Newcastle (a)

 

Farke himself & pretty much every squad member have been on a steep learning curve since going 0-4 down at Anfield. The period between losing to Crawley and the win at Goodison was very damaging, the Man City win being the aberration there. You didn't need hindsight to foresee the risk of going into the season with two young prospects at full back and then Klose, Godfrey, Zimmermann & Hanley with the untried Amadou as emergency back-up in the centre. I believed that goals would be shipped but that there'd be enough control around midfield and threat up top to draw & win more games, probably about 10 points better off than where we are now, i.e. firmly in the relegation mix but with a strong chance of being safe with a game or two to spare. I visualised an Amadou/Leitner deep midfield with Tettey, Vrancic & Trybull also seeing plenty of pitch-time over the season.

I think it's fair to say that we had a disproportionate share of defensive injuries before Christmas which weakened the whole team & limited options & flexibility. Amadou turned out to be a disappointment, Roberts offered nothing, Vrancic also got injured, Leitner faded away, Stiepermann (fundamental last year) & Trybull don't look up to the task, & Pukki has lost his edge & looks jaded since his foot injury. Beyond early season Pukki and occasionally Cantwell, there's very little serious goal threat. Drmic hasn't been given much of a chance when fit, Buendia (while important & effective) hasn't netted, ditto Onel, one for McLean I think & none from a defender.

The squad has admirably adapted & become more pragmatic as players have returned from injury and the season has progressed. However some of the weaknesses which were somewhat masked by results from last season, e.g. losing possession in the defensive third, defensive set-pieces, haven't been sufficiently improved upon (better recently). This, coupled with the inevitable reduction in "dangerous chance creation" on promotion to this division & the over-reliance on Teemu has played a large part in how the table stands.

We could all pine for "what might have been" or talk about "missed opportunities" and we're all entitled to our views of course. But I believe that if one was to "cast a cold eye" over Norwich City's overall performance (so far) this season, we've been generally competitive in the large majority of games, we've held our own, we've provided entertainment, we've frustrated, we've created memories, we've shown we belong here, we've stuck to our footballing principles and the players are still giving it everything which is all we can ask. 

We're surely going back down now, yet strangely there is still a level of optimism due to realism, canny financial management and a welcome attitude towards youth & clever recruitment. It remains to be seen if this risky strategy results in 'bouncing back' better prepared but I'm still on board with the Farke/Webber philosophy. I'm looking forward to seeing how the lads compete over these last 12 games, hoping for a outing at Wembley, how the player trading is managed over the summer and how next season is attacked. OTBC!

 

Apologies - unintentionally long post! Too much thinking

 

Edited February 16, 2020 by paddycanary

[Canary Wundaboy 1,358]

I understand appreciate the argument that we’ve shipped too many goals and that we cannot expect to stay in this league shipping 2 goals a game. I get that.

And yet, had the midfield been more clinical, had we scored a few more goals from set pieces, had we played Drmic more often to give Pukki a break and avoid him becoming burnt out, basically if the rest of the team had put the ball in the bloody net more often to take the burden off Pukki then we’d have more points on the board. Cantwell excluded.
 

We’ve managed to tighten up the defence but a lack of clinical finishing has meant we can’t win games. But we can’t mix up the team to create more chances (playing more luxury players like Vrancic) because then it all goes wrong at the back. Overall we’re just not quite good enough.

[Upo 91]

2 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Yeah, but what I think you’re saying is we should have recruited a fifth CB? Sorry, but that isn’t realistic.

There are those who would have dropped Hanley and replaced him but the last few games have proved them wrong IMHO.

I agree 5th sounds like a lot! But...yes? I think the CB position is especially vulnerable for a team like Norwich, which basically relies on technical, fast fullbacks. And creative, technical midfield... There's something about the very special qualities that are required from centrebacks, that make centrebacks not that good elsewhere, but also that make the centreback position basically unplayable by most other players. I think you can take a guess some of the qualities when you look at Hanley and Zimmerman...

And yeah, Grant's performance is an egg to the face of anyone who thinks while selecting for a centreback you can sacrifice bench press max to get more creativity with the ball. 

[Kanadyan Kanary 121]

3 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Yeah, but what I think you’re saying is we should have recruited a fifth CB? Sorry, but that isn’t realistic.

 

There are those who would have dropped Hanley and replaced him but the last few games have proved them wrong IMHO.

I don't get why a fifth CB is unrealistic, particularly since one has been prone to injury?   

We have 11 midfielders for 5 positions,  3 goalkeepers for 1 position and 3 strikers for 1 position.

 

 

[Upo 91]

I adjusted the original graph in the first post by reversing the VAR decision against Tottenham, on match week 20. (It was wrongly disallowed.) It does make quite a difference, doesn't it?! 😲

As I look at the adjusted graph, I see a powerful case to be made that if we count the Newcastle game as freakish for lack of scoring (it is probably the biggest what if this season) and remember Liverpool has only let in 15 goals (!) during the season, we are looking rather good.

And here's another graph I made before Liverpool game that shows that the Newcastle game (mw 25) was actually a really, really promising performance offensively. We're in better shape to avoid relegation than is thought! :

(Everton is mw 13. It supports the argument I made earlier that Christoph's return was game changing. Also that the game against Aston Villa on mw 8 wasn't that horrible by the numbers!)

 

Edited February 17, 2020 by Upo
some clarification added

[Nuff Said 5,088]

8 hours ago, Kanadyan Kanary said:

I don't get why a fifth CB is unrealistic, particularly since one has been prone to injury?   

We have 11 midfielders for 5 positions,  3 goalkeepers for 1 position and 3 strikers for 1 position.

 

 

Because:

 

1) There would be a good chance in a more normal season that 2, quite possibly 3 of them would never get a league game

2) The 5th CB would either be top or bottom of the pecking order. If at the bottom, they would have to be happy to be extremely unlikely to play, or in other words, not that bothered about their future career. Is that the sort of player we’d want?   If at the top, they’d have to be better thank our best, in other words, unaffordable.

3) We have a 5th CB, Raggett. We thought it better to send him out in loan than having about not playing.

 

If we were planning to have 3 at the back I could see a little more justification for it, but even then the arguments above still apply I think.

[Nuff Said 5,088]

Oh, and the goalkeeper comparison isn’t valid, no-one can realistically step in from another position in an emergency to play as goalie (before anyone says anything, I’m taking about starting a match, not when something freakish happens during a game). As we’ve seen, a CDM can be a reasonable makeshift CB.

[Badger 2,405]

Thanks OP some very interesting stats.

I disagree with you about a fifth centre back though. I think that you just have to acknowledge that losing 3 players to one position at the same time is highly unusual and cannot be properly prepared for. If not, you would have to have four goalkeepers; four strikers etc etc.

I'm sure we could have afforded someone, but would have thought that the risks were too low to risk damaging the balance of the squad. Manchester City could certainly have afforded it but again chose not to (with similar negative results). Overloading the squad with "spares" is, imo, a threat to squad dynamics.

[king canary 7,578]

12 hours ago, paddycanary said:

There have only been a handful of games where we weren't competitive, perhaps:

Burnley (a) 0-2

 Villa (h) 1-5

Man U (h) 1-3

Man U (a) 0-4

 

You could throw in large sections of:

Liverpool (a)

West Ham (a) (post Zimm injury)

Palace (a)

Southampton (a) (nearly nicked a draw at the end)

I'd also throw in Brighton away at Watford at home- I don't think we ever looked like getting something from those games.

[Upo 91]

Cheers Badger! I hear you. That's why I'm not 100% sure. My case rests on the uniqueness of the CB requirements (can't substituted properly with a fullback or defensive midfielder), Klose's injury history, the remarkable reversal of Norwich's performance both defensively and offensively after we had two CBs, the structure of Norwich's team, which leans towards the quick, technical and small making it even more difficult to substitute someone for a CB, the relative affordability of an extra CB and the fact that we already have multiple options for positions which can realistically switch between eachother. You could make the case that Pukki could play as a midfielder! Or Duda as a striker!

In any case this really is somewhat beside the point as Norwich now has even competition for the CB position! 

[Upo 91]

12 hours ago, paddycanary said:

...

Pukki has lost his edge & looks jaded since his foot injury. Beyond early season Pukki and occasionally Cantwell, there's very little serious goal threat.

...

Disagree with this respectfully. Good post by the way! I too thought that surely Pukki has lost some of his edge. Then I did the homework.

Adjust for the erroneously disallowed Tottenham goal and it's clear Pukki has been excellent throughout the season. Driving the point home, look at the Euro Qualifier performance. Holy moly! (This AGAIN strengthens the argument Everton was the turning point.)

For Pukki, it was never whether he scored from chances if he had them. It's just that he was feeding off absolute scraps with Norwich September-November period. With national team he scored 10 goals in 8 matches (since summer). That is insane!

 

Edited February 17, 2020 by Upo