You can play any system, if you have the players and the opposition that "plays along".
Going 4-3-3 effectively reduces the attackers from 4 to 1-3. It might work if you have two roving wingbacks ... then again, no-one stops fullbacks joining in the act in a setup with 2 wingers - just remember Candeias' and Tavernier`s interplay. Which in turn would make that system having up to 6 attackers in the opposition half.
The problem we have - from MW to SG - is that opponents have sussed out our style of play and the respective players and dug in. Hence, for the most part (and unless we score once or twice early and teams open up a little) these last 3+ years, games have quickly turned to toil and low-score affairs. The reasons are no rocket science, TBH.
Kent and Aribo do their stuff, but are IMHO not "lethal" enough as a goal threat in a front line. Likewise, they like to rove about and with Morelos a) being far from his lethal self and b) also moving to the wings or deep, who is going to score? So oftentimes we have barren spaces either side of the field ... and if the wingbacks can't hit a ball past the first man ...
It was in fact pretty annoying that we persisted with that system no matter what and no matter how people ran after their own form, yet wingers sat on the bench and in the stands quickly becoming the target of the "not-good-enough"-brigade, while those on the park failed to deliver. We had and got Hastie, Middleton, Jones, Barker et al, but never used them in a system that would most likely have benfitted us against the Scottish trench diggers.
We have enough peole at the club who can play on either side as wingers, and still have one or two strikers. And as it stands now and how he plays, I wouldn`t mind actually putting Patterson wide right in a 3-5-2 or the like, as he seems to be full of enthusiasm, ability and is in-form.