How to put Celtic’s 2-0 first leg victory over AZ Alkmaar into context?
- Qualitatively we know they finished 1 point behind PSV Eindhoven last season.
- Celtic are 50th in the UEFA Coefficient rankings and AZ 89th. That’s very much an historical view.
- AZ are 74 on the ELO ratings (1642) compared to Celtic who are not in the top 100 (1568). AZ are placed near The Rangers in this rating system.
Quite interesting, and this all gives the impression of a vaguely tough outfit, but I prefer the match performance data!
Last Time Out
Here are the match stats from the first leg:
By all the key summary metrics that looks like a comfortable and deserved 2 goal win. Over 3 expected goals from 15 shots, 8 on target. Celtic forced 7 saves from AZ.
How to assess the strength of AZ?
Packing
A fascinating tactical contrast saw both sides set up in an approximate 4-3-3 shape. Whilst Celtic’s approach under Postecoglou will be to dominate possession and exert control, AZ were keener to get the ball through Celtic’s lines quickly. They valued directness over control.
Consequently, AZ racked up a Packing Score of 388 – this is a derived score based on the number of forward pass and dribble actions completed that take opponents out the game, and how many opponents you take out. They achieved this mainly through right centre back Letschert (17 pack passes – 3 more than any other player on either side), right back Sugawara (12) and midfielder Koopmeiners (8).
In the last three seasons, only Lazio, Lille and AC Milan have come close to this level of line breaking forward passing. That is, the French Champions and (at the time) the second-best teams in Italy. In 19/20 Lazio’s Packing Score in losing 2-1 at Celtic Park was 366.
AZ’s style is akin to the awkward Cluj side faced over the last few seasons. Or at least an upmarket version thereof! Cluj looked to get the ball forward using big diagonals and fight for second balls. AZ were far more ground passing orientated and clearly had superior players, but the principle remains.
Given AZ’s ability to play through Celtic is up there with the best teams Celtic have faced recently, how did Celtic respond?
Celtic’s Packing Score of 399 has only been bettered against weaker European opposition. In terms of games versus better teams – this is similar to the scores achieved in beating Cluj 2-0 and Lazio 2-1 at home. Both those performances will be remembered as very good nights for Celtic.
xG
Celtic’s xG of 3.16 is becoming unremarkable under Postecoglou. However, single game xG > 3 was achieved 12 times in the terrific 19/20 season. 12 times it was against poor domestic opposition where Celtic won with an aggregate of 46-6. The only major European game to see Celtic surpass 3 xG was losing 3-4 to Cluj (face palm).
In 20/21, Celtic achieved > 3 xG only 7 times. Most were again versus poor domestic opposition with the exceptions being one match in Europe (6-0 vs KR Reykjavik) and in losing 0-2 to The Rangers (face palm).
This season Celtic have already exceeded 3 xG in 5 games out of 9 under Postecoglou.
Goalkeeper Saves
Verhulst made 7 saves for AZ. In the last three seasons of European football, Celtic have only forced the ‘keepers of FK Sarajevo, Nomme Kalju, KR Reykjavik and Ferencvaros (face palm) or more than 6 saves in a single match.
In 19/20 opposition ‘keeper averaged 4.38 saves per 90m surprisingly rising to 4.55 last season. This season opposition ‘keepers are averaging 5.2 keeper saves / 90m (or 6.14 post Midtjylland).
Summary
In summary, AZ are not far off some of the best teams Celtic have faced in Europe in the last three seasons. Yet Celtic racked up a performance in winning 2-0 that ranks with some of the best performances we have seen from the team recently.
The known risks, of course, remain. The defence is no where near optimised; AZ have the capacity to create well over 1.5 – 2 xG of chances; them team is still adapting to the demands of Postecoglou.
The ELO Ratings site has Celtic with a 76.4% chance of winning the tie overall from a 2-0 start.
And all that with Angeball only (**checks File Download dialogue box**) 23% complete.