"When I ranked the top 50 players before the Premier League season started, the landscape of the league seemed relatively settled. Liverpool and Arsenal would battle it out for the title; Manchester City might do the same if Rodri came back healthy; Chelsea seemed adrift from that top trio, and also everybody else as the surefire fourth-best team in the league. Those teams were the clear four best teams because they had the clear four-best rosters."
"Nine games into the season, Arsenal are in first, yes, but then they are followed by ... Bournemouth, Tottenham, and Sunderland? Did you read that right? Bournemouth, Spurs, and Sunderland really round out the top four? And then Man City are down in fifth, Liverpool in seventh, and Chelsea -- the Club World Cup champions! -- are sitting in ninth? And they haven't even played Man City or Arsenal yet?"
"The rankings are a combination of who I think the best players are (i.e. the ones who would contribute the most to winning if they were to play every minute of every game) and the players who are providing the most value (i.e. the players who are actually playing minutes and helping their teams win). This way we don't have a list comprising only players"
Preseason projections placed Liverpool, Arsenal, Manchester City, and Chelsea as clear top four teams based on roster strength. Nine games into the campaign those expectations have been disrupted: Arsenal lead, followed unexpectedly by Bournemouth, Tottenham and Sunderland, while Manchester City sit fifth, Liverpool seventh and Chelsea ninth despite recent Club World Cup success. Arsenal players generally are performing at a high level and Erling Haaland remains strong, but many player evaluations are uncertain across other clubs. Rankings combine projected impact if playing every minute with actual value delivered through minutes played and contributions to team wins.
Read at ESPN.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]