Darwin measures up against his peers. I understand it. What I'm saying is there isn't enough detail in those numbers to remove all doubt.
Darwin's/Gakpos/Jota's minutes do not exist in an environment where they're the same value.
If someone plays 1000mins in teams with a rotated squad of kids every game vs someone playing 1000mins alongside better teammates who play consistently with each other and have chemistry and a higher level of talent, those minutes are not created equal.
Its something which is never elaborated on when these numbers are presented as if they exist in some sort of vacuum without outside influence or factors.
If we're trying to scientific about this kind of thing why is there such a long list of variables constantly waved away.
He's put up good numbers against good teams as I mentioned. Over a larger and larger data set you smooth out those quirks rotation, sub effects, team strength. This is why you don't want to strip it back to just vs top 4, just in December, just on rainy days, because you the open it up to more random chance or outside factors. I don't know for sure, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I imagine the strength of team faced by say Jota and Nunez in the league isn't massively different on a per minute basis. I'm happy to accept that over 1000s minutes the xa averages out who played with Tsimikas, or more against a Burnley or not. Because it's a largish sample and we know teams in the league aren't really a situation where Diaz is only ever playing with the league cup side and Nunez isn't. Football doesn't work like that
Recent Posts
