I wrote this in the shoutbox last night.* At least one person PVieira21 scoffed. I understand. It's counterintuitive. I bet the reaction to this thread title is incredulity. That first touch, his runs, those crosses!
* Not the whole post, just the thread title.
Before I prove it. Let me be clear. I am not saying Angelino is not good. I am also not saying this is his fault. Nor am I saying we could not be good next year if his loan is extended. I am simply saying that when he played (s0 far) this year we have been significantly worse than when he does not. It could be he is good but does not mesh with this team; it could be the coach's fault; it could be luck or the schedule; it could be our back line is not good enough to make up for his offensive focus; it could be he is a luxury good we cannot afford. Or maybe he should have adjusted his game. I'm literally not suggesting any of these is the case. I just want to prove the fact that we have been much better without him so far this year.
Record As A Starter
He has started 7 games and the team has Won 2, lost 6 and drew 1. PPG 0.78
When he does not start the record is 7-8-6 for a PPG of 1.29. If we played at that rate all year to date we would have 5 more points (39).
Now I am aware that he played 3 games where he did not start, and our record is 2-0-1. Am I shortchanging him by not giving him credit for that? No.
In the two wins the score when he was on the bench is NYCFC 3 Opponents 0. When he played in those two wins (a total of 39 minutes) the score was 2-2. He can get no credit for those wins. You want to make an issue of the tie? Fine. It's a draw. Let him have it. Then the remaining game PPG goes up to 1.3 and his is 0.80.
Also, the record when he does not start includes the 11-game winless streak early in the season. Remember when our PPG was 0.58 after 13 games? All before he showed up. Counting those games we have played better without him. This is a very fair measurement.
Average Goals For And Against
For this analysis I counted all the minutes. Starting, subbing, etc.
When Angelino has not been on the field we average 1.23 goals per 90 minutes. When he does play that rises to 1.96. So when he plays our average goals per 90 goes up by an immense (I think) 0.72 goals.
But then there is defense. He is technically a defender, remember?
When he does not play our goals against per 90 is 1.28, slightly higher than the 1.23 we score. Not great. On the low side of mediocre.
But when he does play our goals against per 90 is a ridiculous 2.47. When he plays our goals against rises by 1.19 goals per 90 So when he has played he our offense improves by 0.72 G/90 and our defense suffers by 1.19 G/90.
I think those are extraordinary high numbers that cannot possibly be put down to one player. His arrival also coincided with the arrival of other new players. But it is also impossible for me to ignore that our latest 2-game winning streak (the first time we won 2-straight home games) came when he was benched, and that we have been better during those games when he is sitting than when he plays. In the totality of his playing time our offense is much better when he plays but our defense gets even far, far worse.
Again, this is not all on him. It is chemistry, luck, a short data set, etc. I'm not inclined to say he actually is responsible for dropping 5 points in the standings. But it is pretty much indisputable that he has not helped us. I do not see how you can make that case. He's fun to watch, but his loan has not otherwise been an advantage to date.
One final note. His playing time includes the 5 goals against fiasco in LA. But it also includes the 5 goal explosion we had against Orlando. You want to toss out one you toss out the other.
* Not the whole post, just the thread title.
Before I prove it. Let me be clear. I am not saying Angelino is not good. I am also not saying this is his fault. Nor am I saying we could not be good next year if his loan is extended. I am simply saying that when he played (s0 far) this year we have been significantly worse than when he does not. It could be he is good but does not mesh with this team; it could be the coach's fault; it could be luck or the schedule; it could be our back line is not good enough to make up for his offensive focus; it could be he is a luxury good we cannot afford. Or maybe he should have adjusted his game. I'm literally not suggesting any of these is the case. I just want to prove the fact that we have been much better without him so far this year.
Record As A Starter
He has started 7 games and the team has Won 2, lost 6 and drew 1. PPG 0.78
When he does not start the record is 7-8-6 for a PPG of 1.29. If we played at that rate all year to date we would have 5 more points (39).
Now I am aware that he played 3 games where he did not start, and our record is 2-0-1. Am I shortchanging him by not giving him credit for that? No.
In the two wins the score when he was on the bench is NYCFC 3 Opponents 0. When he played in those two wins (a total of 39 minutes) the score was 2-2. He can get no credit for those wins. You want to make an issue of the tie? Fine. It's a draw. Let him have it. Then the remaining game PPG goes up to 1.3 and his is 0.80.
Also, the record when he does not start includes the 11-game winless streak early in the season. Remember when our PPG was 0.58 after 13 games? All before he showed up. Counting those games we have played better without him. This is a very fair measurement.
Average Goals For And Against
For this analysis I counted all the minutes. Starting, subbing, etc.
When Angelino has not been on the field we average 1.23 goals per 90 minutes. When he does play that rises to 1.96. So when he plays our average goals per 90 goes up by an immense (I think) 0.72 goals.
But then there is defense. He is technically a defender, remember?
When he does not play our goals against per 90 is 1.28, slightly higher than the 1.23 we score. Not great. On the low side of mediocre.
But when he does play our goals against per 90 is a ridiculous 2.47. When he plays our goals against rises by 1.19 goals per 90 So when he has played he our offense improves by 0.72 G/90 and our defense suffers by 1.19 G/90.
I think those are extraordinary high numbers that cannot possibly be put down to one player. His arrival also coincided with the arrival of other new players. But it is also impossible for me to ignore that our latest 2-game winning streak (the first time we won 2-straight home games) came when he was benched, and that we have been better during those games when he is sitting than when he plays. In the totality of his playing time our offense is much better when he plays but our defense gets even far, far worse.
Again, this is not all on him. It is chemistry, luck, a short data set, etc. I'm not inclined to say he actually is responsible for dropping 5 points in the standings. But it is pretty much indisputable that he has not helped us. I do not see how you can make that case. He's fun to watch, but his loan has not otherwise been an advantage to date.
One final note. His playing time includes the 5 goals against fiasco in LA. But it also includes the 5 goal explosion we had against Orlando. You want to toss out one you toss out the other.
Last edited:
