The "overlying numbers" and the "underlying numbers" are all measures, all statistics. In any case, they currently aren't too distant to reconcile in any interpretation. The season-long narrative has been that our xG (reduced from last season) wasn't adequate for a strong league challenge. A month ago when our "overlying numbers" were better, this was being framed as a question by the wonk pundits: "Are Arsenal good this season?" For now, the same pundits regard that question as answered: "Arsenal are not good this season".
If G is the measure, it's lower than we need. If xG is the measure, it's still lower than we need. If it's the difference, G–xG, that's a fun way to to articulate our observable predicament with "conversion", and it's lower than we need. Finally, we have fewer points than we need. Statistically, empirically, visibly, underlyingly, overlyingly, footballistically, poetically, in all these ways we're a side that dominates territory, progression and possession but will not score enough goals or win enough matches to win the league.
At the level above, adjacent to and below all the numbers, in the much-maligned lost domain of storytelling and meaning-making, my story is that our players, including the notoriously gunshy Jesus and Havertz with the formerly highly productive trio of Martinelli, Ødegaard and Saka, have the quality to do better.
While a signing may help us, my story is that a new player would likely be drawn into our the same dynamic that grips our existing first team squad. If you were to describe Arsenal relative to our rival league clubs, you might say that the demands, detail and discipline of Arteta's system are comparatively high and unchanging. In my story, those factors explain the low mood, unconfident self-expression, and fatigue of our playing group.
It seems to me Arteta needs to alter these methods. We need to stop this slide into a situation where the preferred numbers are failing to shift the story, and return to being a club where a powerful story shifts the numbers.
