Compare the results when Sargent is in the team to those without him.
That comparison ignores other factors in play apart from Sargent being in the team, i.e. at play in Sargent's appearances in the first 4 games (plus 14 minutes against Huddersfield) on the one hand, and the games since his return (i.e. the last five games).
Firstly, in that first group of games, opponents had had little opportunity to work out how to combat our idiosyncratic setup with Sargent and Barnes playing as false 9s. Ben Lee documented how that situation changed, as opposition coaches wised up and our structural weaknesses were exposed. So it is far too simplistic to attribute the different outcomes of those games, compared with subsequent games, as largely due to Sargent's presence or absence.
It took a further 13 games for our defensive shortcomings to be addressed, games marked by a staggeringly awful GA total. Meanwhile, despite the absence of Sargent, Sainz and, for a period, Barnes, our GF figures stood up pretty well. We were still scoring at a rate comparable to clubs like Coventry or Hull.
Action was taken during the international break, which Jack Stacey referenced in his post-match interview following the QPR match, the first game after the break. The break was spent working on ways to improve the defence. Stacey said they did so because everyone realised that conceding 2 goals a game couldn't continue.
So, secondly, by the time that second group of games came along, (i.e. the ones after Sargent's return and when Sainz had become a regular starter), our GA figures had been halved, from 2 goals per game, to just one, which is how it remains. Nobody is saying that performances haven't been affected by the unavailability of players, but to attribute everything to their presence or absence is simply wrong. Halving the rate at which we concede has been, IMO, the major factor in our improvement over the last 14 games, in only 4 of which has Sargent started.
Additionally, it would be wrong to ignore the role of that defensive improvement in the re-emergence latterly of a more free-flowing brand of football. If players are required to be "brave", as Wagner puts it, i.e. take more risks, the importance of confidence that the downside risks can be controlled, shouldn't be under-estimated, which is exactly what is involved in seeing everything through the filter of injuries and absences.
Good players help achieve more points…
And so does good defending.