Özil or nÖzil that is the question

The Athletic published David Ornstein’s interview with Mesut Özil yesterday and one quote that caught my eye (as a stats guy) was Özil talking about criticism of his impact in big games:

“If we don’t do well in a ‘big’ game, it’s always my fault. If it’s true, how do we explain our results in the big games I wasn’t involved in? There’s no real difference.”

This is the kind of statement that I love to fact check. I just check his record in big games versus Arsenal’s record in big games without him and see if there a difference! Which we will do in just a minute, but first..

I had a laugh at the ‘big games’ bit because a few sentences after saying that he doesn’t matter in or out of these games he goes on to do that post-modernist thing that we all do now where we just question the nature of reality and ask “what is a big game” like some stoner who thinks he’s profound by asking “yeah man, but what if we are really all just computer generated? Like in the sims. Like part of a simulation.” Ozil even goes so far as to say that a match against Norwich is a big game now just because they beat Manchester City.

Uhh, no.

Money buys trophies. This is so hard wired into sport that it’s not debatable. The more you spend on a team, the more successful they will be. Will they win everything? No. But they will win a lot more than the clubs who don’t spend money. That’s exactly what makes Leicester winning the League so special and what makes clubs like City, Chelsea, Liverpool, Man U, Tottenham, and Arsenal bottling the league that season so funny.

So, what are the “big” games? Obviously, games against teams that spend a lot of money are big. But rivals and cup finals are also big games.

Defining big game matches then is pretty easy. Even though Tottenham haven’t won anything, matches between them and Arsenal will always be big games. Because of the money they spend Manchester City, Manchester United, Chelsea, and Liverpool are all big game matches. Then you have to also include cup finals as big game matches. And if you want to expand the pool, you have to put in big nights in Europe: Napoli, Bayern, Barcelona, Real Madrid, PSG, Atletico Madrid, and Borussia Dortmund.

It’s really easy to define big games. And Ozil even knows it, which is why he pointed out that the record in those big games hasn’t changed whether he plays or doesn’t.

And also, he’s right! During Unai Emery’s tenure, Arsenal have virtually the same points per game, goals per game, and goals against per game record with Özil as they do without.

The underlying stats also don’t change drastically. Overall the swing is from +0.1 xGD with Özil to -0.1xGD without him:

Just to reiterate: you are looking at data from seasons 2018/19 to 2019/20 covering all League matches between Arsenal and Man U, Tottenham, Liverpool, Chelsea, and Man City plus Europa League matches against Napoli and Chelsea and the FA Cup match against Man U and the EFL cup match against Tottenham.

Adding further evidence to Özil’s assertion that it just doesn’t matter whether he plays or not under Emery he also has zero goals or assists in any of the big games he’s played for Arsenal in the last 17 months.

I posted this info (minus the cup match information) on Twitter and people immediately wanted me to run a similar analysis of Ozil’s time under Wenger. That request makes sense but is actually not that straightforward.

I went back and looked at the last 31 of Wenger’s big games at Arsenal (two seasons) and Özil only missed 5. Unlike the Emery sample, where the split is pretty even (he’s played 8 big games and missed 10 under Emery), the Wenger split is far too heavily weighted in the “Ozil played” category (26-5). People go on about “small samples” but this kind of sampling makes me far more uncomfortable than small overall samples because it heavily biases the accuracy of one side and not the other.

But because you will want to know…
-From 2016/17 to 2017/18 when Wenger played Ozil in big games he averaged 1 point per game (same as Emery with Ozil) and 1.2 goals per game with 1.9 goals against per game. Expected goals were very close to actual goals, with Wenger’s Arsenal with Ozil earning just 1.3 xG and conceding 2.0 xGA.
-Without Ozil in the lineup (remember this is just counting the 5 big matches Ozil missed in those two seasons) Wenger averaged 0.4 points per game, 1.3 goals per game, 2.3 goals allowed per game, 1.1 xG, and 1.9 xGA.
-In all 26 of Ozil’s big game matches for the last two seasons under Wenger, Ozil scored 2 goals and provided just 3 assists.

I think Ozil is right to say that Emery’s system doesn’t improve against big teams whether Ozil is in the lineup or not. But I also think that the fans are right to be angry that Ozil doesn’t contribute nearly enough in big games. My man is sitting on 5 goal involvements in the last 34 big game appearances he’s made for either Emery or Wenger. I don’t care what your salary is, that’s not a good record.

Christian Eriksen has 11 goal involvements in his last 29 big games.

Also, Eriksen does have zero trophies. As we all know.

Qq

19 comments

  1. Great analysis! An obvious follow up, that you even more obviously don’t need to do: What about the other games?

    Points are points. Does Ozil help us be a flat track bully and get points and goal diff that way?

  2. Does your analysis support Ozil being characterized as a “luxury” player?

    For years under Wenger, Arsenal were flat-track bullies…perhaps Ozil’s performance level matches that “team” persona. Under Emery, I fear Arsenal are simply too reactionary.

    L’audace, l’audace, toujours l’audace.

  3. I support the treatment of Ozil.

    Your playing time is a function of application in training and performance on the field. If a superstar slacks in training but produces results, any decent manager will let the lack of application slide (so long as it doesn’t start setting an example for lesser talents).

    Ozil does not affect matches against “big” opponents. And supposedly he doesn’t train well. For me, it’s a no-brainer then that he sits and we constructively dismiss him. I can’t see him rating a regular spot in the line-up with the current young bucks.

    The whole Sanchez, Ozil, Ox, Wilshere debacle at the end of Wenger/Gazidis makes me cringe. He was given a ludicrously lucrative deal when there was no competition for his signature.

    1. “We’re talking about practice.” – Allen Iverson
      Sorry, this wasn’t meant as any specific comment, it just made me think of Iverson. He always delivered in the end.

  4. Can we apply some common sense to this “doing well in training” thing?

    One, what is that, exactly?

    Two, that was Emery’s assertion during the Öxile last year… before he brought Ozil back into the team and we played better. For a while, yes, but we did.

    A guy, who just turned 31 and burned his national bridges, and Arsenal is pretty much all he has. So he’s going to crater his own value in salary and transfers by not applying himself well enough to get picked? Even to the B matchday squads?

    Buying that is buying the argument that Özil is not one of Arsenal’s best TWENTY players. Come on, man. Think.

    The explanations from Emery do not pass the BS test. Worse, they’re cynical, because the CW has been that he is a diffident tackler and closer-downer in matches. Mesut’s treatment is reminiscent of cases of workplace bullying I’ve had to address asa manager. It is remarkably similar to those I’ve seen.

    1. Thanks mate, that’s the best argument in the Ozil vs Emery saga I’ve seen in quite some time.

      Ofc Ozil coming back after an abysmal WC and publicly denouncing das Manschaft wasn’t in balance. Who would be? But in what universe was it in his interest to pick a fight with the only outlet he had left, his only ally?

      Now he may have lost his mojo and being really hard to work with as well as indifferent. I don’t know., but seeing emery and Rauls comments there’s something that’s smells there.

      1. Maybe my 20+ years in media have made me overly suspicious of officialdom, but I know BS when I see it. The bull****tery emanating from Emery (especially) around Ozil is clear… to me at least. Im really amazed at how many folks accept everything the Arsenal establishment says at face value, then try to retro-fit arguments to suit/justify.

        No one has been a bigger critical of Ozil’s work rate than I have been when he was a regular pick, but his treatment by the club has been terrible, and the explanations risible.

        All that said, I would be hypocrite to argue in favour of stats in one of Tim’s posts and ignore it in another. The stats do show that he has not done as much as some of his competitors at other clubs in “big games.” And yet, no one is arguing that he should start our all key games. Gosh, he’s not even making the bench in B squad games, let alone A squad games.

        Btw, Tim, this kind of post is why 7am is the best football blog anywhere, and why I hang out here. This is an extremely well put together analysis.

        1. Yepp, pulling him off in the 70th minute vs Forrest was making. Point as well as the yanking in the abysmal Europa league final.

          And yes, you’ve been critical of Ozil before.

          Something here is crap and I’m not 100% sure it’s just Ozil or quite fair. In fact I think it’s more coming along the lines of pretty petty by Emery.

    2. “Buying that is buying the argument that Özil is not one of Arsenal’s best TWENTY players. Come on, man. Think.”

      But he is not competing with TWENTY players for a place in the team though, is he? I don’t know if that’s what you mean.
      He only has to convince beyond a reasonable doubt that he is one of the best -if not the best- central midfielder FOR the team . And that he hasn’t done in quite a while.

  5. Thanks, Tim, for this work. Really illuminating. As well, for those interested, I would put this post in conversation with the Arsenal Vision podcast released on this issue today.

    Also, Greg, I left a brief response to your comment in the last thread. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

  6. Mesut Ozil and big games. The easy point for Ozil detractors, but let me weigh in just a little here. Now many might disagree with me, but this is just what I have been seeing over Ozil’s time with Arsenal and how he is criticised.

    Mesut plays well in big games for me. Mesut was probably our biggest big game performer in big games during the Wenger era. His contributions might not match up to the other top playmakers in the Premier League in big games, but for Arsenal, I have not seen a single player do better.

    At his best, Mesut is a player that connects the midfield to the attack, creates overloads and combines well outwide, creates chances for teammates or creates the opportunity for others to create those chances. His movement behind the opposition is sublime and takes up uncomfortable spaces between the defensive lines of the opposition. Mesut allows us to bypass defenders and progress the ball by positioning himself very well, and being able to keep the ball in the congested areas around the opposition midfield. Mesut is able to give us greater possession in the final third, but more than that, he gives us greater quality in possession in the final third. Mesut is able to turn our transitions into a lethal weapon that most opponents have struggled to cope with. Most importantly though, his decision making on the pitch is close to perfection. He rarely misses a run or plays a pass for the sake of it, everything he does is done after the situation has been analysed.

    All of what I mentioned above, is what I have always used to judge Mesut’s performances and not once in a big home game during Arsene’s time at Arsenal have I been disappointed, not once at Old Trafford have I seen him not play amazingly, not once have I seen him disappoint at White Hart Lane. He has had games away to Chelsea, City and Liverpool where, as a team, we just couldn’t build any momentum and he has had to drop deeper to aide in a job that was not his in the first place. I cant blame him for that, just as I cant criticise Ainsley for not being great at rightback.

    During this whole period, we have had Santi Carzola (Best player I have ever seen at Arsenal) and Alexis being part of the very same losses as Ozil, and in some games, just play badly. But Ozil, whom many want to see carry the side was made synonymous with our big game losses, and since his work-rate could always be questioned because of his body language, it has stuck. I remember Tim once wrote a piece about how Mesut should have taken us to league glory during the Leicester season, just like how Adebayor should have taken us to it in 07/08, but the game that lost us the league at Old Trafford was probably Mesut’s best all round performance for Arsenal. It didnt matter though, we lost so Mesut is to blame.

    I was surprised at the assertion on the arsecast and arsenalvisionpodcast before our game at Old Trafford that the game wouldn’t suit Mesut, and that it was a fairly obvious and factual statement. In my head, I wondered how that could be when Mesut is our best performing player there for probably the last 10 years. He has always had very good performances there, so what could those statements be based on? Then I realised that his critics will always point to Erikson or Debruyne, and I get their point on that one. those two have done better in terms of numbers and have been in better sides to get the most out of them, BUT THEY ARE NOT ARSENAL PLAYERS! If they were, I would understand if they were chosen ahead of him, BUT THEY ARE NOT! If we used the logic that he shouldn’t play because Erikson is better, then why is Pepe playing when Salah has been better, why is Xhaka playing when Rodrigo has been better, why is Leno playing when Ederson has been better, why should we even bother with Lacazette if Firmino plays better.

    We have to be the best that Arsenal van be, and if it is without Ozil, then so be it. But we have to be better and this team doesn’t seem to be better without him, so why take him out? Why throw 300k out the window if his presence isn’t a deterrent on our results? Doesn’t that show that our issues are elsewhere, rather than at his feet?

    Mesut will never get credit for the change the club got when he arrived and led us to a trophy after so many years, the improvement of players like Santi, Giroud, Alexis and Ramsey. He will forever be synonymous with the negatives of that era because people put such high expectations of him that even Messi at his best couldn’t give Arsenal. I mean if Mesut matches the assist record, we finish second and people are still not satisfied, what does that mean for Aubameyang to finish as top scorer and we don’t even make top four? I doubt anyone will question him. The team has been pretty terrible in crunch games and Mesut has always been appointed as the savior of a definite failure, he was and is never going to win.

    Mesut may say whatever he wants, he may not be able to speak well or be as analytical off the pitch as he is on it, but his performances in big games pass the eye test and the numbers test against every other ARSENAL PLAYER in terms of what they are good at and what is required of them, because he has been that good for us in those games.

    Through the characteristics I have outlined of a good Mesut performance, I have seen Mesut have many bad games, its normal for any human being to not be perfect. But I have never been disappointed in what he has done in big games.

  7. Dig if you will, David Silva’s beauteous second for City against Palace. Oh man.

    See what City did, Unai? They scored the opener, then stepped on the gas to try to put the game out of sight.

    Raheem Sterling is playing a blinder, in offence and defence. Crown Liverpool prematurely at your peril. Arsenal were a point behind City before this game, but there’s a gulf in class between us.

    1. I find that it is rather odd/unfair and contradictory to expect that Arsenal replicates what City, Liverpool and the likes are doing while at the same time ignoring the fact that certain approaches have to be taken to achieve that goal. And those approaches might
      1. Take a bit of time to be perfected
      2. Require that unpopular decisions be made.

      For e.g Citing City’s style as a blueprint for Emery, saying “Raheem Sterling is playing a blinder, in offense AND DEFENCE” on the one hand, while at the same time calling BS on Emery for refusing to play a player who he believes can’t be relied upon to play this way.

      I wonder if you think Pep will have time for Mesut or any player if he is not playing his pressing game to the level that he requires of his players.

      1. Two things can be true simultaneously, Usmanov.

        One can admire a City counter-attacking goal as a good goal. As they might have done Auba’s against Leicester and Ramsey’s against Fulham last season.

        To Sterling’s tackle, can you can name me ANY attacking Arsenal player (not just THAT one) who you saw make a potentially goal-saving tackle in a game recently? I’ll wait. But, in the meantime. I saw THAT player tackle Eden Hazard in exactly that way in the FA Cup final (a big game we won), a few years ago, albeit on the touchline and not just outside the box. Yeah, I nearly dropped my beer, but still 🙂

        Your juxtaposed things seem mostly unrelated, cobbled together to reinforce a pre-existing. You cycle through a lot false equivalencies here in a short time.

        I really liked City’s goal, and how they hit Palace with 2nd in a minute. Arsenal? They’d have hut US a minute later.

  8. I would be comfortable with Emery’s treatment of Ozil were it not for the double standard in that he still plays Xhaka, who is equally incapable of playing defense – while actually being employed as a defensive midfielder. Maybe Xhaka trains better, but if he is training hard and is still not good enough then I give up.

    I no longer take Emery seriously as Arsenal manager. I think he might not actually know what he is doing.

    I would cut bait on this man and give the job to Freddie, who I think might actually know what he is doing.

    And that’s good enough for me.

  9. “I think Ozil is right to say that Emery’s system doesn’t improve against big teams whether Ozil is in the lineup or not. But I also think that the fans are right to be angry that Ozil doesn’t contribute nearly enough in big games. My man is sitting on 5 goal involvements in the last 34 big game appearances he’s made for either Emery or Wenger. I don’t care what your salary is, that’s not a good record.”

    This for me is the most balanced take on this issue I have read anywhere.

    It explains the situation as I suspect it to be.
    And that is: we have a player who is not at all bad or a below-average performer (as some might be led to believe) for that matter, but -for a while now- hasn’t been producing “star player” output to justify (the reported) 350k/w management is paying.

    So -because he is not “The star player”- the coach’s hand isn’t forced to play him EVERY GAME AHEAD OF OTHER PLAYERS competing for the same position. Because of this reality, management feels paying 350k/w is not a sound use of scarce funds NOW and is desperate to bail out of it. Hence the tactics to frustrate him out of his contract.

  10. Halftime observations aside, City should have hit palace with a cricket score. Jesus greedily went for goal from a difficult angle with deBruyne wide open.

    I might be looking at this though red goggles, but I think that our Brazilian forward has the potential to be much better than City’s, and isnt far off him in talent now.

  11. interesting VAR decisions again today..
    btw move in regarding ozil no player is bigger than the club..

Comments are closed.

Related articles