Tottenham Hotspur may be sitting in a far more comfortable league position this season under Thomas Frank, but a deeper look at their underlying numbers offers a reminder that this alone rarely tells the whole story.
Spurs are 11th after 14 games, already looking slightly more stable than they ever did during last year's turbulent campaign, yet the data shows Ange Postecoglou's side actually performed better in several important attacking and ball-progression areas despite finishing 17th. The radar chart below shows the difference between the two managers and their respective sides.
Last season's team, for all its chaos and volatility, consistently put opponents under pressure in ways Frank's Tottenham have not yet replicated. Spurs under Postecoglou drew far more fouls (12.7 per 90 to 8.5), a sign of how often they carried the ball into dangerous spaces and forced defenders into uncomfortable positions.
Their non-penalty expected goals output was also significantly higher (1.47 vs 0.97), suggesting that even in a season dominated by scrutiny, Postecoglou's side created better and more frequent chances than the current version.
Interceptions tell a similar story. Spurs won the ball back more often under Postecoglou (8.47 per 90 compared to 6.57), reflecting a team that pressed aggressively and defended on the front foot.
That momentum translated into how they moved the ball as well: progressive receptions sat at nine per 90 last season but have fallen to six under Frank, illustrating a drop in how often Tottenham manage to receive possession in advanced zones. Penalty-area passes (PPA) have also dipped slightly, again pointing to a reduction in dynamic, high-tempo attacking play.
Frank's Spurs are different, rather than ineffective. They cross more frequently (22.8 per 90 versus 19.8), signalling a more structured, delivery-based build-up that relies less on chaos and more on patterns. The approach has brought greater control and steadier points return, even if it sacrifices some of the incision and unpredictability that characterised the Postecoglou era.
The story told by the numbers is not that Spurs were better last season, the table clearly says otherwise, but that the foundations of their attacking play were more productive in several advanced metrics. This iteration of Tottenham looks calmer, more organised and more robust, but also a touch less explosive.
In many ways, Frank has stabilised the club. What remains to be seen is whether Tottenham can marry that new-found control with the attacking sharpness that, statistically at least, was more evident under Postecoglou.