A comparison based on data between Kieran McKenna and Enzo Maresca

Following the surprise departure of Mauricio Pochettino, Chelsea is still searching for a new manager. The majority of sources concur that Kieran McKenna, Enzo Maresca, Thomas Frank, Roberto De Zerbi, and Ruben Amorim have reached the shortlist, with the first two managers topping the competition, despite varying reports on the front-runner for the job.

The Pride of London will use data to assess the two Championship managers in question, with Chelsea hoping to name a manager before the end of next week.

Because the two managers’ teams were in the English second division together the previous season, comparing their teams will provide a reasonable approximation between their playing styles.

It makes sense to describe the environment that both managers entered before digging into the data. Leicester City, who concluded the 2022–2023 season in 18th place, was demoted from the Premier League.

James Maddison, Harvey Barnes, and Timothy Castagne were among the important players who left the team. Rebuilding was, nevertheless, partially funded by the parachute payments and the transfer proceeds from those sales. Leicester invested more money in the summer window than any other Championship team, spending a total of €44 million to bring in young players.

Ipswich Town, on the other hand, had much less financial support. Omari Hutchinson was the top player for McKenna, who mostly operated in the loan market during the transfer window because to their limited financial flexibility after only been promoted from League One to the Championship the previous season. While Ipswich did accomplish a few low-cost signings, the majority of the playing time was typically dominated by League One players.

Although there is a clear difference in the squad investment, both managers still depended on the core of their team from the previous season.

Now, onto the fun part – using data analytics to rate the different aspects of their play style.

General Overview

Leicester and Ipswich contrast in their approach, with Maresca choosing a possession-heavy system, similar to Pep Guardiola’s side, and McKenna adopting a flexible strategy that can play vertically or ball-oriented, depending on the opponent.

Opta Analyst’s playstyle comparison graph reflects the distinction between the two systems.

Attacking Metrics

There are a lot of fascinating findings on the offensive figures.

To begin with, the most fundamental statistics show that Ipswich scored three goals less than Leicester (89)—that is, 92% of the total. But Maresca’s team is clearly ahead based on the expected goals (xG) metric, which gauges the caliber of opportunities generated.

This highlights an important point: Ipswich’s attackers converted their opportunities far more effectively than Leicester’s did. The same can be seen in the ‘goals – xG’ data, where McKenna’s squad outperforms by an astounding amount.

There is much debate as to whether that productivity can be sustained over several seasons.

Let’s move on to how the two managers help their team create opportunities.

Leicester’s somewhat more cautious approach to possession reduces the variety of weapons in their arsenal; they mostly rely on cutbacks, wingers’ inventiveness, and penetration passes that get past rival defensive blocks.

Consequently, the Foxes rank highly for Shot-Creating Actions (SCA) from take-ons and open play (much like Ipswich). Intriguingly, McKenna’s team excels at SCA when it comes to rebounding shots and dead-ball situations—two areas in which Leicester struggles.

The SCA from each scenario and the team’s ranking according to the metric are displayed in the table below.

Ipswich’s vertical style is indicated by their direct speed of 1.88 meters per second (m/s) – third in the league, compared to Leicester’s 1.61 m/s – fifth-lowest.

Furthermore, the ‘Zones of Control’ data visualization juxtaposes the stylistic differences.

Therefore, the two managers pose a different style offensively. So, Chelsea’s sporting directors must decide which brand of football they would prefer to watch at Stamford Bridge, as they are equally effective.

Defensive Metrics

A team’s use of out-of-possession strategies is crucial since successful play on the field is always based on defensive solidity.Chelsea, who gave up 63 goals the previous season, needs to tighten up in the backfield in particular.

Due to their comparable defensive strategies of pressing high and forcing turnovers in the opponent half, Leicester and Ipswich are expected to be similar.

The Opta Analyst data on high turnovers and Passes Per Defensive Action (PPDA)—the amount of opponent passes permitted by the team prior to taking a defensive action—corroborate each other.

McKenna’s Chelsea supporters might be put off by Leicester’s superior defensive performance compared to Ipswich, which saw them give up 16 goals less (41 versus 57). On the other hand, the anticipated goals against (xGA) measure shows that both sides gave up around the same amount of chances, hence the underlying data paints an accurate picture.

You might wonder why there is such a large variation, though.

It’s because Mads Hermansen, the goalie for Leicester, had a fantastic season in net.It’s worth noting that Václav Hladký, the goalie for Ipswich, had a respectable season. But Hermansen much outperformed his peers, as the data indicates and the eye test confirms.

Moreover, inconsistencies in opposition finishing have also contributed to Leicester’s impressive goals conceded numbers. When analyzing the finishing efficiency of the opposition against the two teams using the ‘goals – xG’ data, we can identify an evident disparity – suggesting that Leicester benefitted from the opposition attacker’s misfiring, whereas Ipswich did not.