Pirate55
The Last Man Standing 17/18
Yes, I would. They would all improve our squad in areas needing strengthening. After Rose's outburst, I doubt he will be with us much longer. The only question is when he leaves.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Transfer speculation
- Thread starter Cochise
- Start date
Yes, I would. They would all improve our squad in areas needing strengthening. After Rose's outburst, I doubt he will be with us much longer. The only question is when he leaves.
ricky2tricky4city
Tom Huddlestone
Sold/sell
walker 50m
Wimmer 20m
Sissoko 20m
Rose next summer 55m
GNK and Janssen....another year to prove themselves.
Rose for Martial next summer once Jose has fudged him over.
walker 50m
Wimmer 20m
Sissoko 20m
Rose next summer 55m
GNK and Janssen....another year to prove themselves.
Rose for Martial next summer once Jose has fudged him over.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
edited my previous post and its on the previous page so will repost here to follow on...
would we be happy with Sessegnon Barkley Martial and Sanchez in, with Rose and Walker being the ones who made way?
should more or less be even on the net spend front
weaker at full back potentially but with two young Rose/Walker types in reserve so long term prospects good
stronger at CB and in turn allowing Dier more freedom to cover/rotate with Wanyama/Dembele without having to shift around the team should one of them become injured/suspended
stronger in the attacking positions with some added pace and creativity.
would be a good window i think, though i am loathe to lose Rose who i rate as one of our best players and one who typifies the Pochettino regime (outburst aside)
Pirate55
The Last Man Standing 17/18
again, yes I would be happy. I think the timing of when Rose leaves depends on Poch and whether he thinks Rose's outburst can be overcome.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
While I agree in general, with regard to the bolded - honestly I would describe it as "different" rather than "weaker" at FB.
I really feel both Walker and Rose are over rated, particularly in the attacking side of things.
I would describe them (generally) as basically the same. Both excellent athletes, both excelelnt 1 v 1 defenders, both cover a huge amount of ground often getting caught out of position, but both have the ability to recover usually, and both do not half as much good in an attacking sense than people would have you believe. Neither offer a decent cross, a reliable shot, or incisive passing.
To replace them both with wingbacks would negate the relative weakness of (for example) Sessegnon and Trippier defensively. Both are capable, but neither are as good as Rose/Walker here. However, both are miles ahead of Rose/Walker offensively. Trippiers crossing is sublime, and his use of the ball intelligent. And sessegnon is a genuine goal thread with pace on the flank. Both could add a massive dimension to our attack, something I honestly feel neither Rose nor Walker can claim.
And, of course, Davies is on hand should we want to change tactics. I think its is much to his credit and often unrecognised just how little we have missed Rose while he has been out.
Now I realise much of what I just said is probably blasphemy, but its how I feel and have done for a long time. Its certainly no knee jerk to recent events, I was holding much the same conversation this time last year.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
I think its more on Levy. Levy will see a bigger picture on this, and will not allow a player to engineer a move on these terms.
He has held fast on outbursts in the past, and sold only when he wanted to. This will be the case now I think, barring a stupendous offer that cannot be refused.
i disagree with you there regarding Rose, i think he is a fantastic attacking fullback, a level or two above Davies who i see more as a support player in attack rather than an attacker in his own right, which is how i see Rose. i also rate highly his (on the pitch) attitude and mentality - a real driving force imo with Davies being a more withdrawn character
Clearly! (assuming Rose stays - Sessegnon, if it did happen, would probably be loaned back for a year)
Alternatively, Balde instead of Diop
Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
His attitude, absolutely, I love it. Takes no prisoners, works his socks off and I think makes an impact.
Attacking wise we'll have to agree to disagree.
Have a look at this:
http://www.squawka.com/comparison-m...uccessful_take_ons_%/assists/key_passes#total
If it works...
In a similar amount of games last season:
Rose made less forward passes but more dribbles/take ons. Suggests his attacking movements catch the eye more, not necessarily that Davies doesnt provide.
Rose 2 goals vs Davies 1 (though Davies did score Sunday!)
Rose significantly more shots, but Davies with more accurate shots. Again, it could be argued Rose catches the eye more, rather than Davies "does" less.
Davies had 3 assists to Rose's 2, and each had the same number of key passes.
And I think it bears repeating - we did not miss Rose in his absence. His last game was a draw at Sunderland on 31/01. After that, with Davies regularly playing, we had 14 wins and 2 losses, scoring 41 goals - we didnt skip a beat in attack and improved in defense.
I looked at the defensive stats more and Davies is clearly superior there, though Im not sure Ive seen anyone argue otherwise.
DeleHarry
Jose Dominguez
http://www.squawka.com/comparison-m...e_ons_%/assists/key_passes/chances_created#90
ive added in chances created and sorted it by per 90 to give what i consider a fairer reflection of the stats... which gives Rose - considerably more shots per 90, more chances created (key passes + assists iirc), considerably more take ons/successful take ons - that to me supports the idea that Rose is more of an attacking full back than Davies (who as i said earlier i see as a supporting full back) so i can get on board with your previous suggestion that they are different as opposed to one being the superior player - but in my mind the team works best with attacking full backs, or at least one attacking full back - with Davies and Trippier as our first choice full backs we are fielding two supporting full backs which, imo, limits our attacking play - last season Davies would have played in the team regularly with Walker on the opposite flank meaning the team as a whole still had that attacking full back threat, albeit only from one side, without both Rose and Walker we lose that part of our game - and whilst KWP and, for the purposes of this discussion, Sessegnon could provide that threat they are both rather young/inexperienced and cant be expected to cover the output of Rose and Walker
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Im kind of with you and kind of not.
Stats can be twisted anyway people desire, take Total Shots. Rose has twice as many so is better, right?
Then add in accuracy, they are virtually level! 1.35 * 33% = 0.4455, 0.67 * 67% = 0.4489...
I wasnt trying to prove either a definitive "winner", rather point out the difference in output was much less than I think many expect, and each has a different style that can play tricks on the eye as to how players are percieved.
Where we agree is in the definition I suppose. To my mind Davies attacking output really wasnt significantly lower than Roses. Roses is more flash and bang, but Davies has an understated productivity*. Passes vs Dribbles etc. So I can certainly see your definig them as attack/supporting, Im just not sure its actually that definitive in the results when all is said and done.
As to the Walker/Trippier distinction, Trippier is most certainly more productive than Walker in attack, by a distance. And some of our best performances came with a Davies/Trippier pairing at the end of the season when Walker was inexplicably (now totally explicable!) left out. Played as more of a wing back than full back, I think Trippier wipes the floor with Walker as an attacker, and has his defensive commitments supported as well (where Walker was always superior).
If its an aesthetic thing between attacking/supporting then fine, Ive no issue, though I think the performances and results bear out that neither Rose or Walker was significantly missed.
*credit to Davies. He was definitely a more reserved, more defensive player at the beginning, but I really feel he developed his attacking game a lot through the back half of the season. Not as obvious as Rose, doesnt dribble as much, isnt as quick, but he certainly became more and more of a presence in the final 3rd IMHO.
Stats can be twisted anyway people desire, take Total Shots. Rose has twice as many so is better, right?
Then add in accuracy, they are virtually level! 1.35 * 33% = 0.4455, 0.67 * 67% = 0.4489...
I wasnt trying to prove either a definitive "winner", rather point out the difference in output was much less than I think many expect, and each has a different style that can play tricks on the eye as to how players are percieved.
Where we agree is in the definition I suppose. To my mind Davies attacking output really wasnt significantly lower than Roses. Roses is more flash and bang, but Davies has an understated productivity*. Passes vs Dribbles etc. So I can certainly see your definig them as attack/supporting, Im just not sure its actually that definitive in the results when all is said and done.
As to the Walker/Trippier distinction, Trippier is most certainly more productive than Walker in attack, by a distance. And some of our best performances came with a Davies/Trippier pairing at the end of the season when Walker was inexplicably (now totally explicable!) left out. Played as more of a wing back than full back, I think Trippier wipes the floor with Walker as an attacker, and has his defensive commitments supported as well (where Walker was always superior).
If its an aesthetic thing between attacking/supporting then fine, Ive no issue, though I think the performances and results bear out that neither Rose or Walker was significantly missed.
*credit to Davies. He was definitely a more reserved, more defensive player at the beginning, but I really feel he developed his attacking game a lot through the back half of the season. Not as obvious as Rose, doesnt dribble as much, isnt as quick, but he certainly became more and more of a presence in the final 3rd IMHO.
i guess what im seeing in those stats is their specific role/style differences - Rose has higher numbers for attempted XY and Z because he is the more attack minded of the two - he looks to provide the 'finish' more than a player like Davies who will be more conservative in his play, so i expect to see Rose shoot more than Davies because he is that way inclined, and due to being a full back rather than a winger/forward etc his productivity will naturally be lower - id imagine if Davies was to change his style to that of Rose then we would see his productivity drop as a result? similarly if Rose was to play more conservatively his productivity may increase (as he looks first to support and only take on the attacking duties when they become more of a sure thing?)
Lemonade Money
Les Medley
Yep, qualifying one year, the tournament the next. Would allow for better quality of football (quicker learning curve playing together), and better managers/coaches (working part time in between club duties).
Lemonade Money
Les Medley
No, Dirty.
glasgowspur
Luka Modric
Totally agree on walker, if he wasn't English or hadn't been here for so long must people would rate him no higher than bardsley or clyne.
would also mean less break time for players in the off season - basically playing a summer tournament every year
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
I think for either their roles are the same, its how they achieve them thats different.
They each get the ball forward, provide width and support the attack. Thats what full backs in our team do. They do primarily support the attack rather than explicitly attack the goal themselves.
Rose does this with runs and dribbles and trying to force his way, Davies does this with passes and movement and more conservative mindset.
Its telling that Davies shots/passes/dribbles are more accurate or more reliable, although less prolific compared to Rose. That perfectly supports the differences in style between the two.
For example, Rose will lash a shot from 30 yards out. Davies will keep possession moving instead, perhaps with a shot coming 3 passes later. Does one dictate a player as more attacking than the other? Or just of a different method? Productivity wise - what is actually achieved - I personally prefer Davies approach.
But - he isnt that nippy little player that takes a player on and smashes one from distance is he? Which is the sort of thing that sticks in peoples minds and has them make associations with certain attributes isnt it?
Personally I think without question Davies is the better defender, but it is arguable he is just as attacking as well. And if he isnt, its not by much.
Does Rose look more attacking? Sure. Is he actually providing more in attack though? That makes a difference superior to Davies contribution?