Centre midfielders - a statistical analysis

[BLUETIT]

I struggle to see Pack or Vaulks as decent Championship midfielders. What do either of them do consistently well?

Vaulks is great at giving the ball away !

[Harry Paget Flashman]

All stats come from whoscored.com and are total stats from each's whole Cardiff City career.

Goals and assists

Ralls: 679 minutes per goal, 841 minutes per assist
Vaulks: 729 minutes per goal, no assists
Pack: 2075 minutes per goal, 830 minutes per assist
Bacuna: 5617 minutes per goal, 2809 minutes per assist

It's probably not a surprise that Ralls and Vaulks are our most likely sources of goals from centre midfield. With Pack's passing accuracy and delivery of set pieces, he is marginally our most creative in terms of assists.

Shots

Ralls: 70 minutes per shot, 64% outside the box, 28% on target, 38% off target
Vaulks: 75 minutes per shot, 67% outside the box, 38% on target, 31% off target
Bacuna: 99 minutes per shot, 77% outside the box, 16% on target, 39% off target
Pack: 160 minutes per shot, 50% outside the box, 15% on target, 58% off target

A continuation of goals and assists, Ralls and Vaulks are our best centre midfielders in terms of shooting. Bacuna clearly feels confident hitting shots from distance but has been useless. Pack is much less likely to have a go from distance and shooting is something that is a part of his game.

Passing

Pack: 85% short pass accuracy, 69 minutes per key pass
Bacuna: 81% short pass accuracy, 170 minutes per key pass
Ralls: 80% short pass accuracy, 63 minutes per key pass
Vaulks: 77% short pass accuracy, 91 minutes per key pass

All players had a relatively similar short/long pass ratio, so I decided to look at short passes and key passes (whatever whoscored.com define as a short pass). It comes as no surprise that Pack is our best passer and Vaulks is our worst passer. Bacuna rarely takes set pieces, so is less likely to make key passes, but it does also highlight his lack of creativity as shown with the number of assists he provides.

Tackling

Vaulks: 23 minutes per tackle, 52% success
Ralls: 27 minutes per tackle, 67% success
Bacuna: 35 minutes per tackle, 65% success
Pack: 38 minutes per tackle, 64% success

Vaulks enjoys getting stuck in the most, though his success rate is not great. Ralls is the best tackler at the club.

Bad Touches/Dispossessed

Pack: 244 minutes per bad touch, 207 minutes between each dispossession
Ralls: 94 minutes per bad touch, 133 minutes between each dispossession
Bacuna: 91 minutes per bad touch, 108 minutes between each dispossession
Vaulks: 87 minutes per bad touch, 110 minutes between each dispossession

Once again, Pack is the most assured in possession.

Dribbles

Pack: 94% success
Vaulks: 76% success
Ralls: 73% success
Bacuna: 57% success

Lots to consider with all that lot. There are also things that cannot be quantified with stats and stats that suggest one thing might offer pointers to other issues.

If we're going to continue with a midfield two, who would you choose? Pack and Bacuna might help keep the ball but offers less urgency and little creativity. It appears Vaulks has the most energy around the park, but with that he's not the best tackler or passer. Ralls is the most complete midfielder we have and has to be one of the centre midfield two, so do you go with the energy and goals of Vaulks, the control of Pack, or Bacuna, who offers the least in terms of creativity, doesn't appear statistically to excel at any one thing, but does the defensive side of the game pretty well?

Another question is whether our centre midfielders are good enough for a side aiming for the playoffs? In terms of passing and general skill, I'd probably say no, but in terms of workrate and defensive ability, probably yes.

Does Pack's passing and possession stats get boosted by the areas he gets the ball and where he is passing.

Allowing for his pass for Wilsons goal he's not threading many through the eye of a needle in and around their penalty box.

[the other bob wilson]

I struggle to see Pack or Vaulks as decent Championship midfielders. What do either of them do consistently well?

Eric's stats tell you as far as Pack is concerned and I see Vaulks as a Ralls type player (I think Ralls is a good Championship midfielder), but not as accomplished as him - i.e. a decent player at this level.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Does Pack's passing and possession stats get boosted by the areas he gets the ball and where he is passing.

Allowing for his pass for Wilsons goal he's not threading many through the eye of a needle in and around their penalty box.

Undoubtedly, but that would be true for most midfielders.

[surge]

Do people need to quote the whole of the OP to add four (max) sentences?

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Do people need to quote the whole

Good point

[MacAdder]

Stats are useful. They are used in many aspects of life and without them, strategies would be more difficult to draw up and predictions formed less accurate.

When it comes to football though, and in this case, I take statistics with a large pinch of salt.
There are so many variables that can skew the results, for example the quality of the opposition, formation played, the quality of teammate.. The time period is also key.

As I have said before Eric, I find your statistical posts interesting but some carry more kudos than others.
I watch Bacuna on the football field and what I see is a player with ability and composure. He has played out of position for most games this season but I, and more importantly the manager, realise that he has to be on the football pitch.
That can't be said for the other one-paced three mentioned who lose the ball frequently and make it seem like a hot potato when in possession of it, especially when pressed by the opposition.
This is why we tend to go back to Smithies more often than not and have a rep for being a long ball team.

I trust my eyes more than stats when it comes to football.
One thing I think we are all agreed on is that Bacuna moving into midfield is not the answer to all our shortcomings.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Stats are useful. They are used in many aspects of life and without them, strategies would be more difficult to draw up and predictions formed less accurate.

When it comes to football though, and in this case, I take statistics with a large pinch of salt.
There are so many variables that can skew the results, for example the quality of the opposition, formation played, the quality of teammate.. The time period is also key.

As I have said before Eric, I find your statistical posts interesting but some carry more kudos than others.
I watch Bacuna on the football field and what I see is a player with ability and composure. He has played out of position for most games this season but I, and more importantly the manager, realise that he has to be on the football pitch.
That can't be said for the other one-paced three mentioned who lose the ball frequently and make it seem like a hot potato when in possession of it, especially when pressed by the opposition.
This is why we tend to go back to Smithies more often than not and have a rep for being a long ball team.

I trust my eyes more than stats when it comes to football.
One thing I think we are all agreed on is that Bacuna moving into midfield is not the answer to all our shortcomings.

I think the thing of trusting our own eyes is an interesting one. I recall many thinking that Smithies distribution was better than Etheridge, but the stats didn't suggest that. I'm of a similar mind to you with regard our players losing the ball, but our midfielders are among the best in the division for not having bad touches.

As always I present the data and hope it starts some interesting debate, observations, thoughts etc. It's never meant to be definitive, they can't be.

[MacAdder]

I think the thing of trusting our own eyes is an interesting one. I recall many thinking that Smithies distribution was better than Etheridge, but the stats didn't suggest that. I'm of a similar mind to you with regard our players losing the ball, but our midfielders are among the best in the division for not having bad touches.

As always I present the data and hope it starts some interesting debate, observations, thoughts etc. It's never meant to be definitive, they can't be.

Absolutely, great stuff