A few days ago I came across a comparison (click for link) between the decisiveness between Zarate, considered by many a real success and having had a great season, and between Totti, considered by many to be done, too old, too stale and having had a weak season. As the numbers in that blog post effectively shows, Totti's goals equalled those of Zarate's in quantity, but far surpassed the laziale's in importance. The comparison doesn't even factor in that Totti played 13 games less than Zarate, which already here suggests a recalibration of the season talking points ("Zarate good, fresh; Totti done, too old") are necessary.

But I wanted to look at it from another angle as well, so I looked at some statistics of how Roma fared when Totti played, compared to when he didn't. All information for compiling these numbers were found on Lorenzo's fantastic site The numbers suggest Roma is still very much Tottidipente, and further suggests that Totti's importance on Roma's success can hardly mean he's had such a mediocre season as many are throwing out there.

- First the numbers of Roma's actual season: 63 points collected in 38 games; a 1,6 points per game average. As we all know, this took Roma only to sixth place.

- Roma without Totti: 18 points collected in 15 games; a 1,2 points per game average. Stretched out to a full season, 38 games, that would be good enough to finish 14th, just ahead of Siena, on 45 points.

- Roma with Totti: 45 points collected in 23 games; a 1,9 points per game average. If we do as above and apply that average to a 38 game season, Roma collects 72 points. That'd be just behind 2nd and 3rd placed Juventus and Milan, but still be enough to comfortably take Roma into 4th place with CL qualification in the summer,
even with a serie B level defense.