Back to Blog Hub
Underlying Stats 2026-01-07

GW22 Deep-Dive: The Hidden Conductors — ICT, Influence & Creativity Picks Before the Haul

FPL Admin

FPL Elite Analyst

Introduction

Gameweek 22 is where good FPL managers separate *form-chasing* from *signal-hunting*. Points are the output; underlying involvement is the engine.

Using the ICT split (Influence, Creativity, Threat) we can identify players who are controlling matches—dictating tempo, creating chances, and living around decisive actions—even if the monster haul hasn’t landed yet.

Below are the standout GW22 profiles from the data, with an emphasis on Influence + Creativity (game control) and the “almost” indicators (expected metrics) that often precede returns.

---

The ICT Leaders: When raw output matches domination

These are the names sitting at the top of the ICT pile—either because they’re matchup-proof focal points or because their teams are built around them.

Erling Haaland — the inevitable (ICT Index: 188.4)

Haaland isn’t a “control” player in the traditional sense—he controls games by forcing them to bend around his Threat.

Threat: 956.0 (by far the most aggressive profile here)
Influence: 786.0 (not just finishing—he’s central to the game state)
Creativity: 140.7 (low relative to his other numbers, as expected)
Output check: 163 points, 20 goals, 4 assists
Underlying: xG 18.26 vs 20 goals (elite finishing, but still grounded in huge volume)

GW22 takeaway: He’s not “due” in the same way creators are—he’s simply the best bet to convert team dominance into FPL damage.

---

The Game Controllers: Influence + Creativity monsters

If you’re targeting players who run matches, these are the profiles with the strongest evidence.

Bruno Fernandes — control king, fitness caveat (ICT Index: 167.2)

No one in this dataset touches Bruno for Creativity dominance.

Creativity: 739.3 (the standout creator)
Influence: 599.0 (massive involvement)
Threat: 331.0 (not a pure finisher—more conductor than spearhead)
Returns: 5 goals, 7 assists, 100 points
Underlying: xG 7.01, xA 4.46
Flag: 75% chance of playing (hamstring)

What the metrics say: Even without a haul, a player with this Creativity/Influence combo is usually the *last pass or the pass before the last pass*. If he starts, the ceiling is always live because the ball funnels through him.

GW22 note: He’s a data-perfect buy *only if the minutes look safe*. If you can’t risk it, use him as the template for what you want elsewhere.

---

Phil Foden — creative hub with upside variance (ICT Index: 142.3)

Foden’s profile is quietly “midfield controller with finishing attached.”

Creativity: 626.9 (elite supply line)
Influence: 434.4 (healthy involvement)
Threat: 364.0 (adds goal access)
Returns: 7 goals, 2 assists
Underlying: xG 4.95, xA 3.61

Signal: High Creativity suggests consistent chance involvement; the xA supports that. If the points feel “patchy,” it’s often just timing—players with this creativity base tend to keep knocking.

---

Dominik Szoboszlai — the classic “control without output” pick (ICT Index: 121.5)

If your goal is to find a GW22 midfielder who controls games even when FPL returns lag, Szoboszlai is the archetype.

Creativity: 624.0 (near-Foden level)
Influence: 390.0 (strong in-game footprint)
Threat: 200.0 (lower goal threat)
Returns: 2 goals, 1 assist, 68 points
Underlying: xG 2.19, xA 2.75

Why he matters for GW22: This is the kind of profile that can explode when variance flips—especially if teammates start converting. You’re not buying past points; you’re buying *repeatable involvement*.

---

The Underpriced Controllers: Value profiles that look like system pieces

Not everyone needs to be a premium. GW22 is also about finding players whose ICT components suggest they’re driving patterns of play, not just finishing chances.

Enzo Fernández — surprising Threat + Influence blend (ICT Index: 141.1, Cost: 6.4)

This is one of the most interesting “control + involvement” midfield profiles in the data.

Influence: 454.2
Creativity: 458.8
Threat: 497.0 (this is the eyebrow-raiser)
Returns: 6 goals, 2 assists, 92 points
Underlying: xG 7.78, xA 3.92

Interpretation: Enzo isn’t just circulating possession—his Threat suggests he’s regularly arriving in zones that matter. If you want a midfielder who both dictates and appears in scoring sequences, this is a rare triple-threat shape.

---

Declan Rice — influence/creativity stability (ICT Index: 127.4, Value: 16.5)

Rice is often dismissed as “too deep,” but the data paints him as a reliable control asset.

Influence: 518.2 (top-tier)
Creativity: 551.9 (elite)
Threat: 203.0 (modest)
Returns: 4 goals, 7 assists, 119 points

GW22 angle: Rice is a *control-floor* pick—less boom/bust, more steady involvement. When a team dominates, his Creativity can translate into assists even if he’s not the finisher.

---

Jack Grealish — creativity-driven, haul-resistant but live (ICT Index: 121.6, Cost: 6.5)

Grealish is often frustrating in FPL because the eye test screams involvement while the points feel delayed.

Creativity: 489.3
Influence: 363.2
Threat: 363.0 (better than his goal tally suggests)
Returns: 2 goals, 6 assists, 76 points
Underlying: xA 3.36 (assists can spike if finishing improves around him)

What to do in GW22: He’s a “process” pick—if you want someone whose role screams *chance creation*, the creativity number supports it.

---

The Hybrid Edge: Control + end product in one body

These are players who either combine strong involvement with goal access, or present an unusual metric mix that hints at future spikes.

Bukayo Saka — balanced star, not just a finisher (ICT Index: 140.1)

Saka sits in the sweet spot: good Influence, big Creativity, and meaningful Threat.

Creativity: 530.0
Threat: 492.0
Influence: 379.0
Returns: 4 goals, 7 assists
Underlying: xG 5.25, xA 4.28

GW22 takeaway: Even if he hasn’t “mega-hauled,” the distribution suggests repeatable routes to points—he doesn’t need a single mode of scoring to hit.

---

Morgan Rogers — form meets involvement (ICT Index: 118.7, Form: 6.7)

Rogers offers a useful mix: strong minutes, good Influence, and enough Threat to matter.

Influence: 439.6
Threat: 415.0
Creativity: 334.0
Returns: 7 goals, 4 assists, 101 points

Why he’s a GW22 watch: This isn’t a pure creator, but he’s involved enough to stay relevant while carrying direct scoring routes.

---

Red Flags & Context Filters (GW22)

Metrics are powerful—but availability and role still gatekeep points.

Bruno Fernandes: 75% chance of playing (hamstring). Elite creativity, but minutes are everything.
Bryan Mbeumo: On international duty from GW17 onwards with unknown return date. Strong Threat (527.0) and Creativity (472.6) in the data, but status n makes him a GW22 non-starter for planning.

---

GW22 Shortlist: Who’s “controlling games” right now?

If you want a quick, data-backed target list based on Influence + Creativity:

Bruno Fernandes — Creativity 739.3, Influence 599.0 (fitness dependent)
Phil Foden — Creativity 626.9 (creator with goal access)
Dominik Szoboszlai — Creativity 624.0 (control pick, output can swing)
Declan Rice — Influence 518.2, Creativity 551.9 (stable controller)
Enzo Fernández — Influence 454.2, Creativity 458.8 (plus standout Threat 497.0)

And if you want the “game-breaking gravity” option:

Erling Haaland — Threat 956.0, ICT 188.4 (the league’s defining focal point)

---

Conclusion

GW22 is the perfect time to bet on repeatable involvement rather than last week’s points. The ICT components highlight who is actually *driving* matches:

Creativity leaders (Bruno, Foden, Szoboszlai, Rice) indicate teams running through them.
Hybrid controllers (Saka, Enzo) blend control with direct scoring access.
The outlier force (Haaland) remains the unmatched Threat machine.

When the next haul arrives, it rarely comes from nowhere—it comes from players already dominating the underlying game. In GW22, trust the conductors.