Atlanta United's chances aren't created equal

Atlanta United aren't generating the right kinds of chances

This post is free. The next one (and many after that) won’t be. Consider becoming a paid subscriber for $7 a month and get every article, podcast and Discord post from us. 10% of our profits go to Soccer In The Streets.

If you’re already a subscriber/member of the World Famous Five Stripe Final Discord, tell a friend.

---

I’ve written a couple of times over the last few weeks about Atlanta United’s historic inability to connect on through balls and how it’s affecting the team and its key players. To recap: Atlanta United has yet to create a single shot from a through ball this season. The team completes a through ball about every 948 passes from open play, the lowest non-COVID year ratio in FBref’s MLS database (back to 2019).

That’s notable for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, the data shows that through balls lead to the highest quality chances (aka the chances most likely to end up in the back of the net). Second and funniest/bleakest, Atlanta predicated their whole offseason on finding players who would make runs in behind for Alexey Miranchuk.

That led to this (lightly edited for clarity in the text below) exchange with Ronny Deila at yesterday’s media availability. Emphasis is mine.

---

Ronny Deila: “…and we've had now 60 chances this year. 60, chances we have, like, how we count chances, and we have scored 14 goals. That is one goal out of 4.1, 4.2 chances that is not even close to gold standard. 2.5 or less is normal. So opponents, They have had 60 chances this year, exactly the same as us. They scored 24 goals. So of course, the efficiency inside the boxes is important.”

FSF: “Ronny, coming in the year. It seemed like the idea for the roster build was to get a lot of pace up top, have folks running in behind. Atlanta is last in through balls completed this year. I'm wondering your thoughts as to why that might be?”

Ronny Deila: “We haven't been accurate enough and also we need to look more for it, but we had a big opportunity now against Philadelphia last game, in the transition in the second half, but then took a touch too much. So it's like we are focused on it. Because what we see in training today as well, we have a lot of runs in behind and work on the timing of this.

“So it's about accuracy, and it's about runs. We need to attack the space even more than we were doing, and then when that ball goes we have to follow up and support so you're not standing and watching what's going to happen. So these are things where we can do better, but we are maybe the most crosses in the league and chances created on crosses.

“So, like, you know, you can find positive things and you can find negative things in everything. So if you're going to see the team in stats, then you have to pick up the whole picture. And I think the picture is what I said earlier. It's quite true. The opponent has scored 11 goals in transition. We have scored three. Just says everything about that.”

FSF: “Do you value crosses as much as other chances?”

Ronny Deila: “I value whatever chance you can get. So if they close the central pitch, we have to get crosses. If they close the wide areas, you have to go into the center. But it's about when you win the ball, we have a real first ball for forward, inside, and then we have to attack space. So then you keep it, or you attack so, but as I said, when we have the points we have, we will, of course, be negative in a lot of the stats, and that's what we have to improve. And that is one of the areas that this is what we are working on.”

---

So, let’s go in order here.

First, I’m not sure where the “60 chances” number is coming from. That doesn’t mean Deila is wrong—Keep in mind here too, he’s pulling the numbers off the top of his head—but he’s looking at an internal metric I can’t really discern and using that to defend the team’s chance creation.

Frankly, I don’t really understand the idea that a team is supposed to convert a certain number of chances. Chances aren’t a punch card for a free goal. However, he’s definitely right that Atlanta aren’t converting chances at anywhere close to a normal rate.

Per American Soccer Analysis, the Five Stripes are creating about 1.43 xG per game while scoring 0.79 goals per game. That disparity is the second-worst in MLS this year (and technically the second-worst in ASA’s database, although we should note that eight of the bottom 10 are 2025 teams because sample size matters). They’re definitely getting a bit unlucky.

But, also…they might just be kind of bad at finishing. Over 48 games in the last two seasons, they’ve generated 1.58 xG per game and scored just 1.17 goals per game. That’s the worst mark in the league over that span by a significant margin. Finishing is only barely real if it’s real at all, but when the numbers are this stark with this large a sample size, it makes you question if Atlanta is just hilariously unlucky or if there’s an added skill penalty coming into play here.

Just for extra context, here are the biggest culprits/unluckiest players in that span.

Anyway, just going to point out that even if 2025 Atlanta United were converting chances at a more consistent rate, the underlying numbers still wouldn’t be expecting much. They’re sitting at a totally mediocre 1.24 expected points per game based on the chances they’ve created and allowed. That’s definitely more salvageable than 0.79 and, yeah, you never know what would happen with a different game state or two, but a regression to the mean isn’t going to turn them into a juggernaut.

Still, Deila has a legitimate point that they aren’t converting opportunities at a high rate. But what about his assertion that Atlanta is creating chances from crosses more than “maybe” any other side and that the team should “value any chances they can get?”

Well, per WhoScored, the Philadelphia Union are generating the most chances from crosses per game with 3.3 per game. Atlanta United is 11th with 2.4 key passes via cross per game. Unless there’s an internal metric saying otherwise, Atlanta isn’t leading here and is closer to the middle of the pack than the top of the heap.

As far as total crosses go, the Union are in the lead there too. Per FBref, Atlanta are seventh with 18.2 cross attempts per game.

Those are total numbers. If we look at how frequently they’re crossing the ball, they’re still toward the middle of the pack. The Five Stripes average 474.3 open-play passes per game. That means they play a cross about every 26 passes.

Would it actually benefit them to be top of the league in crosses and cross frequency, though? Well, maybe if they were as hyperdirect as a team like the Union, who are constantly playing early crosses towards defenders running towards their own goal. But we know from the eye test that the vast majority of Atlanta’s crosses are floated to the back post against set defenses.

I think we can see that show up in the numbers by looking at the amount of “big chances” Atlanta is creating. Opta defines a big chance as: "A situation where a player should reasonably be expected to score, usually in a one-on-one scenario or from very close range when the ball has a clear path to goal and there is low to moderate pressure on the shooter. Penalties are always considered big chances." Atlanta is currently 23rd in big chances created with 27 on the season.

Unsurprisingly, teams that create more big chances score more goals and win more games.

Unsurprisingly, teams that get stuck relying on crosses typically generate slightly fewer big chances.

Unsurprisingly, the teams that complete through balls more frequently generate big chances way more often.

And, unsurprisingly, teams that play through balls more frequently tend to win more games.

Maybe that brings us closer to the whole picture. The crosses that are happening aren’t leading to big chances, the chances Atlanta actually generates aren’t finding the net, and the team’s thesis behind its offseason roster build has been dumped in the trash. What percentage of blame you should assign to the coaching and personnel causing that isn’t clear.

Regardless, a team can’t live on crosses alone. Atlanta has to start finding other ways to create high-value chances and ways to ensure that the crosses they do play are more dangerous, more often. That’s, of course, easier said than done. It does sound like Deila and company are working on that in some way. But I’m reminded that a key criticism of Deila’s game model at other stops has been an over-reliance on crosses. Who knows how urgently they’re working to deviate from their current style of chance generation and when and if that work will come good.