Chelsea are still struggling to find the final output from all their possession, passing and creativity. The team’s and some individual player’s supporting stats allow them to brush aside concerns about end product.
A Twitter wag committed the mortal sin of that infernal website earlier this week: he used a standard, easy-to-understand, position-specific stat about a popular player to refute a narrative. TweetChelseaUK pointed out that, in his 12-year career, Willian has not yet scored 50 league goals.
A popular genre of response was to point out everything Willian does to create and support offensive production, as demonstrated through his assists and key passes. Considering how often we’ve defended Alvaro Morata and Olivier Giroud for their non-scoring contributions to the team, we certainly had to consider this pro-Willian argument. However, drawing attention to Willian’s key pass stats do not do much for Chelsea as a whole this season, and may make a case against bringing Cesc Fabregas into the starting XI. Not because of anything Fabregas can or cannot do, but because his passes would find no purchase among Chelsea’s inchoate forward play.
Chelsea are second to Manchester City in the number of key passes and shots this season. The two shades of blue are the only clubs with over 100 key passes, defined by WhoScored as the final pass leading to a shot. If the shot goes in the net, it’s an assist. If it not, it’s a key pass.
While the linkage between the two stats is quite obvious, there is still a decent spread among teams in their ratio of shots to key passes. Chelsea have 1.27 shots per key pass, the lowest among the top five clubs. Tottenham have the highest ratio at 1.47.
Chelsea’s issue, though, is what happens after that key pass. After Willian or Eden Hazard thread the ball through, the player taking the shot tends to leave a lot to be desired. Arsenal have only 70% the amount of shots or key passes as the Blues. Yet 45% of the Gunners’ shots are on goal, compared to 33% for Chelsea. This makes them the best and the worst of the top five, respectively.
| Key passes | Shots | Shots on goal | Goals | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manchester City | 142 | 198 | 75 | 26 |
| Liverpool | 92 | 126 | 50 | 16 |
| Chelsea | 128 | 163 | 53 | 20 |
| Arsenal | 89 | 116 | 52 | 22 |
| Tottenham | 86 | 126 | 48 | 16 |
Source: whoscored.com
Arsenal have a correspondingly high ratio of goals-per-shot and goals-per-shot-on-goal. But while Chelsea are still fifth of five for goals per shot, they are second in goals per shot on goal. That is to say, Chelsea take a lot of really bad shots, but when the shots are good, they are quite good.
For as much stick as Alvaro Morata takes for his shooting, he is far from the only player at fault for these team stats. He is not even the least accurate among strikers. Morata has put seven of his 16 shots on target, while Giroud has only found the frame with three of 13. Overall, fourteen of the 17 outfield players Maurizio Sarri has used have taken a shot. Only nine have scored.
The key pass / shot / shot accuracy stats support the easily observable deficit in their current level of Sarrismo: they have yet to translate their passing into quality shooting, the kind of quality that leads to goals. If Chelsea could raise their percentage of shots that are on goal up to the level of Manchester City – who are fourth among the top five in this measure – then with all other relationships staying equal the Blues would have five more goals on the season.
In the games against parked buses, that is, teams who play a compact low block, Chelsea needed the incisive passing of Cesc Fabregas. Teams like Newcastle and Bournemouth would give him the amount of time he needs to scan, find and execute his trademark passes. He would serve the ball through or over the low block, getting the Blues where they struggled so hard to get: behind the defence. Even against less defensive teams, Chelsea could have used his vision and timing to break the hypnotic rhythm of amassing short passes through Jorginho to send a winger or striker into space with the ball perfectly at his head or foot.
However, Fabregas’ talents could be wasted given the state of Chelsea’s front line. The Blues are not lacking for passing that leads to shots. They need passing that leads to quality shots, which has at least as much to do with the decision-making and positioning of the recipient as the quality of the service. A better pass to Willian, Morata or Giroud will not necessarily have a better result.
The advantage of Fabregas is playing the ball to the right man in the right space at the right time. At his best, he’s perfect for someone like Alvaro Morata, who can’t be required nor even allowed to think about what to do with the ball. The best Fabregas passes are those that only require the recipient to head or kick the ball into the net, because the No. 4 removed the guesswork. But if the forwards do not get into the right position, have the right body angle, exercise good decision-making and execution, there is little Fabregas can do to help.
Key passes don’t exist without the shot, so they – like all stats – cannot tell the whole story. The best scenario would be analyzing the xG of the shot that came off the key pass, but alas, I just don’t see Opta in the budget any time soon.
However, the relationships between several stats and between several teams can illumine certain patterns. Chelsea are making the passes that lead to shots, but the shots are not the kind that lead to goals. The Blues may or may not benefit from a better passer like Cesc Fabregas, because ultimately his impact depends on the man who brings down his passes.
Maurizio Sarri needs to work the whole squad to get into better positions and patterns so – no matter who sends the pass – the recipient can take a high-probability, accurate shot and more of these key passes can enter the assist column.