A few tactical thoughts from Wolves and Norwich games

A change in system saw Blues run out comfortable winners over Norwich, as Gary Rowett's 4-4-2 took Norwich by surprise and exploited a few weaknesses in Norwich's defence. This was a far cry from the Wolves game, in which Blues were crushed in their own deep block and failed to get a stranglehold on the game.

I'm going to look at what worked and what didn't.

1. David Davis' role:

I was quite vocal on twitter about Davis' performance in the Wolves game. He was incredibly poor in that game, but I don't think that's his fault. He has a specific set of skills that really suit a pressing game, which is why I actually think he's a decent winger in certain situations. That said, in the double pivot at Wolves his eagerness to press and lack of composure on the ball really showed up. Blues were forced to go long due to Davis' resistance to dropping deep to collect the ball. Davis touched the ball just five times in a central position in Blues' half - Gleeson around 10 or 11, which still isn't good enough, but it's better.

More importantly, he was defensively slack. A lot of Wolves possession came in Blues' left halfspace, which should have been his responsibility as the left-sided DM. It's clear looking at touch-maps (below; Blue represents Wolves touches. Wolves attacking towards left) that this is where a lot of Wolves' joy came and allowed them to put pressure on Grounds and Shotton on that side. Davis attempted just one tackle in this area, and he was the only one to make a tackle there.

Blues failed to defend their left half-space properly. (Via WhoScored)

Now, against Norwich, he played in a system which suited him. Rowett decided to press aggressively, which was especially useful with Cameron Jerome out, as it meant Norwich couldn't play a long ball over the top in order to evade the press. This pressing system suited Blues wingers down to the ground - I've long admired Maghoma's defensive abilities - and Blues won the ball 12 times in the Norwich half, three times as many as against Wolves. Davis often instigated the press and Norwich struggled to get past it, relying on Tettey to be the dictator.

2. Central midfield.

An overlap into the Davis chapter, but Tesche and Kieftenbeld dealt with Hoolahan very well. Hoolahan is an incredibly dangerous player if he can get into 'Zone 14', the space just outside the edge of the box. Tesche and especially Kieftenbeld stopped him getting into that position where he can hurt Blues. Norwich managed to get so far but appeared to hit a wall.

Norwich consistently lost the ball 30-35 yards from goal. (Via WhoScored)

Predictably, Blues had issues in the half-space on the other side, however in a 4-4-2 with pressing wingers that's where the space will be. Norwich gave the ball away many times in the right half-space and as such, Blues were able to win the ball back nearly twice as much as against Wolves.

Tesche and Kieftenbeld were also more comfortable in playing possession football when we needed to and broke forwards from midfield well - including one instance where Tesche really should have scored.

3. The Front Two

Che Adams has made a big difference already. Despite playing in a similar position, he's a very different proposition to Diego Fabbrini. Interestingly, against Norwich, he stayed central and Donaldson shifted out to the right a lot, making a sort of 4-3-3 at times. Donaldson has benefitted most from Adams' ability to press defenders, turn and run at defences and occupy defenders. Donaldson looked much more like the player he was two years ago, as he sprinted past Norwich players, was a physical presence and a goal threat. 

Adams collected the ball in central positions in the opposition half 13 times against Norwich, where he can run at defences. His pace and strength are incredibly useful in holding off defenders and makes him and Donaldson a nightmare to play against. 

According to Expected Goal data, an objective measure for measuring quality and quantity of chances, Blues attacked Norwich better than any other side in the league. Blues created an 'expected' total of 1.7 goals, including the penalty, which is more than Norwich conceded in the first three games put together. Given Donaldson created Tesche's chance, won a penalty and then scored, it's fair to say he was a big part of that. 

It's entirely possible this total is conservative - Tesche's chance had only a 63% chance of being converted according to location and angle, but this doesn't take the speed of attack and position of defenders and goalkeeper into account which would likely make it a better chance. Similarly, Adams' one on one from a tight angle.

4. Conclusions

It's difficult to make conclusions from such small samples, but Blues were demonstrably better against Norwich. On the other hand, that system won't necessarily work against every team. I would, however, play the same side against Fulham, whose left back is particularly dangerous. It's well documented that Fulham have made the most passes in the league, so maybe going and pressing them will be dangerous as they may be best placed to dodge it. I would still try it, however, as Matt Smith will hurt us if we try and play deep, as Fulham will be able to hit him directly. 

4-4-2 seems to suit us but I wouldn't rely on it in every game - but Che Adams has to play no matter the system.

Why NOT signing a striker might be the best idea...

There's been a lot of anger aimed at the club and Gary Rowett, due to the perceived need for a centre-forward - which appears to directly contradict the clamour for Jack Storer and in some corners, Ronan Hale, to get game time. However, I'm going to make the case against signing a centre-forward, though I'm aware it might be controversial.

Three points:

1. Donaldson is actually pretty good.
2. Wide forwards are an economically safer bet
3. Jack Storer

Let's start with the football side. Clayton Donaldson is a lot better than a lot of fans seem to remember. Yes, he doesn't score loads of goals - but 10-15 goals, or 0.27 per 90 as I prefer to use, is pretty damn solid in a team not set up to exploit the centre-forward in terms of goals. There is a reason that all of the attacking midfielders who got significant minutes took more shots than Donaldson per 90 minutes. Jon Toral was a more consistent goalscorer, David Cotterill scored at 2/3's the rate of the Jamaican international and Maghoma at the same rate.

What does this mean? That unless Blues change the way they attack, the striker isn't going to get 25 goals a season. Much of the striker's job in this Blues team is as a facilitator, a creator and a link-up man. Many Blues attacks start with a direct ball to Donaldson who finds a winger or attacker and push forward. He is, essentially, the quintessential target man.

It's entirely possible that we could improve on Donaldson, but it's also quite unlikely for the money we have. Donaldson, were he for example 27, would be worth £3-4m. A player with 0.49 goals + assists per 90 in over 3000 minutes, as well as his ability to link attacks and set off counter-attacks. How do you improve on that for £1-2m?

The answer is through smart scouting and youth development.

Blues cannot compete financially with the top 10 in this league. Everybody knows that. That means we're probably not going to go up this year - which would make spending money on a striker who might score another four or five goals this year a waste of what resources we have. In order to be able to compete with them you need to consistently raise funds by buying under-valued players and selling them on, turning our limited resources into larger resources so we can make a proper promotion bid in the long-term. Ask yourself - which players are worth the most in today's market?

Young, British talent; goalscoring wide players; and centre-forwards, are always worth more money than their counterparts. If Jacques Maghoma scores 15 goals next year, his price would skyrocket - a 28 year old, playing in England, with 15 goals from the wing would cost around £4m in theory if you buy from a top half Championship club. Derby paid around £6m for Tom Ince, who scored at around 0.33 times per 90 last year, though he is younger and English.

Centre-forwards who score goals are very, very difficult to get for cheap. Blues are a team that is set up to give wide men space to attack - so the smart thing to do, economically, is sign cheap, or under-priced, wide forwards and hope they multiply in price.

That's why I love the links with Che Adams and Greg Stewart. They make so much sense in footballing and economic sense. If Che Adams has a decent year, his price will double. If he gets 20 goals over 2 years, he would be worth 5 times the price we pay for him. He's fast, versatile, English, young and scores goals from wide. £1.7 or £2m sounds like an absolute steal, because even if it goes wrong you won't lose much.

Greg Stewart is older, and not English, but he's at the peak age, and should be worth more than £500k. This is a guy who scored or assisted 0.67 times per 90 in, albeit, the Scottish Premier League, from wide. It's a gamble from Blues, should they sign him, but one that makes sense. If he has a good year or two, scores a few goals - he'll be worth a lot more than that. You can sell that and then re-invest in similarly under-valued players. That's how you make enough money to compete.

The final point is the emergence of Jack Storer. It would make sense to give him game time as soon as possible, and signing a striker will only limit that. Storer is 18, and has impressed everybody in pre-season - it would only be fair to let him play at some point at the start of the season. As I've said so many times, young, English goalscorers are worth a LOT of money. He would only have to score a few times this year to be worth a few million, and if he's as genuinely good as Blues seem to think he is, he will be worth more than our entire squad in six months.

Playing Storer makes so much sense for the long term future of the club. Either: He is good, we mould him into the perfect forward for the team and we have the striker we've been looking for without spending much money; He is brilliant, and we sell him for £5m+ and re-invest, improve the squad and improve, slowly but surely; or he is not all that great and we lose... nothing. It's low risk, very high reward.

In summation, Blues aren't going up or down this year, so improving the squad a small amount doesn't really make that much sense. Instead, it makes sense to play young players (Solomon-Otabor, Storer, Brown) and sign young or undervalued players to sell on (Adams, Stewart) and build for the future. It's what Southampton do, it's what Dortmund do, it's what Brentford do (one of the lowest wage budgets, but consistently in the top half) and I think it's what we should do. Rowett is a smart guy, and I'd trust him to buy smartly and have a long-term plan; I just hope the young players get the minutes they need to improve this year - more important than signing a striker, for me.