Point 1 is just not true.
Point 2 is also not true as the above shows.
Look what I was replying to. Look at the wider context of the data. Look at my wider response.
We haven’t had our best players on the pitch anywhere near the other top 5. Whether they are all there or not was not the point I have raised I was responding to someone who raised it.
See above.
What did the other examples all have though that this squad doesn’t? Quality depth.
To make your point you’ve selected peak Arsenal, peak United and the Golden Generation.
Of course it is, you navigate around data in a way that makes ETH look better on purpose, making all the small tweaks that work in his favor - Garnacho, Mainoo, Varane, even Hojlund. If you used availability instead of mins on the pitch then Garnacho is basically 100%, Mainoo is going to be at least in 60s, Højlund and Varane both in 70s, and if you do what you have done eg for Villa by removing all players that have been out for season and replacing them with their backups you could even have Martinez replaced by Maguire and Shaw replaced by Wan-Bissaka.
I do understandrstand that because of your adoration for ten Hag and your desire to help him look better here, you have to build an argument around data that works here. I would probably be doing the same if it was about a manager/player that I liked a lot. For what it’s worth I think you have done very well here to serve the purpose of this exercise.
The perception of depth quality is also affected by how well the manager gets the players to perform. I’m sure the likes of Kiwior or Tsimikas would not be considered ‘quality backups’ but rather along the lines of whatever name calling our fans have used towards Lindelof, Wan-Bissaka, McTo etc., if they were here.