That's probably true.
But I'm interested in finding out how much better than **** Ben Davies really is.
If it's not by much, then we should be looking elsewhere.
Rose Davies
1897 2874
90s Pd 21.08 31.93
Aer 27 53
Per90 1.28 1.66
Int 44 63
Per90 2.09 1.97
Blo 8 11
Per90 0.38 0.34
Def Err 3 1
Per90 0.14 0.03
Err Gl 1 0
Per90 0.05 0.00
Tac 46 59
Per90 2.18 1.85
Goa 1 2
Per90 0.05 0.06
Cle 77 130
Per90 3.65 4.07
Doesn't necessarily work like that.
Firstly, Rose didn't come through as a full back. He was always a midfielder until he started playing occasionally for the first team. If Davies has always played at full back, then you might expect him to be further advanced in his development in that position.
Secondly, Davies has had a very solid run of games since he broke into the first team at Swansea two years ago. Danny Rose has never had a solid run of games anywhere other than at Sunderland. And he ended up as their player of the year that season. In all, Danny Rose has only played 20 more league games at first team level than Ben Davies. And he has actually played 7 games fewer at Premier League level. And definitely fewer at full back.
That's not to say that Danny Rose is good or that he is likely to improve. It's just that I'd like to see how Ben Davies compares on a per game basis and whether he is genuinely much better than Danny Rose. If he isn't, then he isn't good enough for us.
According to those stats, not much better at all.
Code:Rose Davies 1897 2874 90s Pd 21.08 31.93 Aer 27 53 Per90 1.28 1.66 Int 44 63 Per90 2.09 1.97 Blo 8 11 Per90 0.38 0.34 Def Err 3 1 Per90 0.14 0.03 Err Gl 1 0 Per90 0.05 0.00 Tac 46 59 Per90 2.18 1.85 Goa 1 2 Per90 0.05 0.06 Cle 77 130 Per90 3.65 4.07
Better on defensive errors, but we all know Rose is terrible for that.
Only stat where he really shows as better is clearances/90 although I don't quite know how a clearance is defined. Is it a pass to a DM just outside the danger area? Is it a hoof upfield in the old English "Get it clear" style?
But apparently we have been looking at Davies for a long while, so it should be a ' in Spurs scouts we trust ' which isn't always the easiest thing to say.
Of course we can trust in Poch to make Davies better
I didn't say that Poch wouldn't want him, just that he is a name that the club has been looking at before Poch arrived. Just like Dembele, Verts and Sig were eyed up before AVB arrived.Don't really buy that line of reasoning. If we sign him I think Poch will at least have said "yes, please!"
He's a PL player and has been for a couple of seasons, he's young and talented and at a club we can sign good player from. If our scouts weren't well aware of him and hadn't done extensive work looking at his strengths and weaknesses it would have been ridiculous.
Rather than comparing them can we not be grateful for potentially having 2 young British left backs that could potentially become very good?
I didn't say that Poch wouldn't want him, just that he is a name that the club has been looking at before Poch arrived. Just like Dembele, Verts and Sig were eyed up before AVB arrived.
I'm sure Poch is OK with the potential signing
Why then shouldn't we trust Poch on this?
I said that we should trust in him improving the player......... like he did with many at Southampton. What is the problem, as I've said clubs these days present managers with potential targets, manager selects who he wants from the list, and if he gets a player he then proceeds with the job of integrating him into his side.
Rather that than the manager calling his favorite agent and asking him who he's got that's available.
I said that we should trust in him improving the player......... like he did with many at Southampton. What is the problem, as I've said clubs these days present managers with potential targets, manager selects who he wants from the list, and if he gets a player he then proceeds with the job of integrating him into his side.
thats a good tool. If thats true, its a no brainer. Better in every department
How about we forget about stats and rely on whether he does well or not on the pitch with our own eyes. I know that Danny Rose didn't do particularly well with my own eyes. I'm hoping that Spurs have done the homework on Davies and that he's an upgrade or at least a potential one.
Why wouldnt you use stats? As I just said they arent everything, but believe it or not you dont see everything a Spurs player does and even when you do things are forgotten as football is so busy....
I know stats arent everything but overall those stats suggest Rose was the superior player no?