Shutting up shop and Mikel, and statistics and Willian

December 29, 201411 yr

As we have often seen, Jose brings Mikel on when we are 2-0 up and and tries to close things up. This actually works to our detriment (or so it seems) and we look more prone to conceding after the tactical change. This doesn't make any sense, correct? This is also used as a platform to criticize Mikel. We can only make sense of this seemingly nonsensical behaviour on Jose's part by really understanding why we shut up shop. Is it really so that we reduce the probability of conceding?

In my opinion, the only reason we sit back after some point in certain games is so that the team in general (and especially the attackers) can conserve energy. It is not so that we do not concede. Even if every player runs exactly the same amount after we sit back to defend and counter (when compared to before the tactical switch), creativity and intelligent movement will have its toll on players. This burden is negated after the tactical switch. We are also less likely to make mistakes given that players are already tired and will not be at their best with the ball at their feet. I think that it is in no way implicit that Jose thinks we are less likely to concede after the tactical switch than before.

Why does Jose then bring Mikel on? I believe (and I think Jose believes) that if we sit back and defend, we are less likely to concede with Mikel on the pitch than without. This is after deciding to make the tactical switch for reasons completely unrelated to either conceding goals (not entirely actually; we may otherwise make costly mistakes brought about by fatigue) or to Mikel. Therefore, when people say that we look more likely to concede after Mikel's introduction (and after the tactical switch), maybe that is just how it is supposed to be. Maybe Mikel's presence ensures that we rarely concede. Maybe statistics showing that we concede more when Mikel is present are inherently flawed.

It is all about conserving energy (another reason why Jose's players remain so fit?).

On to Willian now.

I'm pretty certain Willian's not the the best in the world in his position and I do not want to get into the Schurrle vs. Willian debate. I just want to say that the contribution of an attacking player just cannot be broken down into attacking statistics. Willian's biggest contribution to our team (which several others have mentioned earlier) is that he allows Hazard, Oscar, Fabregas and Costa many more touches than they would have otherwise. Jose looks to them to make the telling breakthroughs, and not Willian. Wiilian's primary role is to retain possession. I can think of several excellent midfielders who do not rack up the goal and assist statistics (Iniesta, Ribery, etc.) but are still vital to their teams. Willian is unfortunately not at their level but he does his primary job very well. I don't think he is played because of his defensive contribution or tackling ability. Although he seems to win some tackles, I have no idea how this compares with other players. His primary role is not that of a defensive workhorse.

Why do people bring up Willian's price tag whenever they talk about him? His apparent contribution to the team is completely independent of his cost. Whether he is worth 30m or not is another debate (mostly relevant to the club management but even to those interested among us). Given that he is already present (along with some other options in his position) in our squad, our interest is in whether he is a good fit in the first team. Why can so many posters not make a statement about him without mentioning his price tag? No one says that he is worth 30m when they make arguments supporting his contribution. Please refrain from saying he is not worth 30m when you make arguments criticizing his contributions.

I think he should avoid taking set pieces and should make incisive passes and shoot more but that's another matter. He performs his primary role just fine.