Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Hank shoots Skyler

Wes Hoolahan

Recommended Posts

Curious Canary wrote:

a lot of mumbo jumbo stats that don''t tell the picture of what''s happening a the football pitch.

...........................................................................................................................

Not sure how closely you follow football or if you can assess the different skill sets of players. Yes Hoolahan is a creative midfielder player but he is not a goal scoring number 10. He''s a play maker. Usually the most important player in a team playing structured football. I suppose Dorrans can be considered a play maker but he hasn''t got the guile of Hoolahan who can hold the ball at the attacking end of the pitch. In a European qualification game last year Ireland needed to beat Germany to reach the finals. Martin O''Neill picked Hoolahan as his play maker, The Irish won and Hoolahan got man of the match. You need a playmaker if you want to play a high level of football. If you don''t you are playing hoof ball.

Hoolahan started 25 matches this season, if he''d started all 38 we would have achieved the 6 points we needed to stay up. You will find that the games we played without him, we were pretty rudderless.

Here''s a stat for you Curious Canary - the season''s Hoolahan has had the least game time, we have failed.

2013-14 season = only started 10 games = relegated from the premiership.

All other seasons (played majority of the games= either promoted or stayed up in the premiership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Heavily underused in the second half of the season because we signed Naismith.

It''s a myth we are weak with him on the field, he does more tracking back and tackling than most of our attacking players!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Six Pack since you ask

“Not sure how closely you follow football or if you can assess the different skill sets of players.”

Attended all NCFC home games except one, seven away games (plus most of the others in the pub), four under 21’s, plus the usual TV offerings of MOTD, Championship, Goal Rush, some BT and Sky games and England internationals. How about you?

Some stats can be useful, some rather dubious.

Your mention of 2013-14 made me look at the stats for that season.

You say Hoolahan only started 10 games and if he had started more we would have stayed up.

The stats cannot possibly lead you to this conclusion, it is highly speculative.

What the stats do say is that of the 10 starts:

There were only 2 wins and 3 draws.

Hoolahan scored only 1 goal and made only 1 assist (One of the most creative players in the division? I don’t think so).

Average number of points with Hoolahan starting 0.9 per match.

Projected points for 38 matches equals 34.

Norwich were relegated with 33 points and needed 37 to stay up.

Looks like Hoolahan made no difference what so ever.

Now funnily enough I was thinking about skill sets and we can debate that shortly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn''t say he was most creative player in the division !

I don''t even say he has the most assists in the team.

But if he had played most of the games in both 2013-14 and this season past we would have survived & stayed up. Particularly this season as the team as a whole played reasonably well but were let down by poor individual defending. It would not have taken much to achieve those points. Of course he can''t do it on his own, the others have to do their bit but they can only support him if he''s on the pitch.

You attended 25 matches but form your opinion by referring to stats. If you can''t see Hoolahan & Redmond as our most important attacking players I feel actually sorry for you. You''re missing a lot.

I do commend you for going to the seven away games to support the team. But It''s all wasted if you don''t know what the hecks going on in front of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know Naismith was a major disappointment for the £8m, but there''s no getting away from the fact that he joined us, was then made a starter most of the time, Wes then started only a few games (some of those on the wing where he''s always been pretty ineffective because he doesn''t see much of the ball)... and our form went to pot.  So you have to ask if there''s a connection.

 

There was a thread "Why Naismith starts.... etc".  Problem with it, whatever the merits of the poster''s arguments, was that with Naismith starting, our results became awful.

 

Wes is our main creative player and we''ve consistently struggled to create scoring opportunities when we haven''t played him.  His age means you''d think twice about playing him 2 games in a week but otherwise he''s still as influential as he''s ever been, when he''s played behind the striker.

 

It''s hard to say about the 13/14 season because our striking options were so ill-suited to a team in our position, but I do suspect that if we''d played him regularly, it probably would have got us some extra points and might have been enough for survival.  Probably the same is true this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Curious Canary"]Six Pack since you ask

“Not sure how closely you follow football or if you can assess the different skill sets of players.”

Attended all NCFC home games except one, seven away games (plus most of the others in the pub), four under 21’s, plus the usual TV offerings of MOTD, Championship, Goal Rush, some BT and Sky games and England internationals. How about you?

Some stats can be useful, some rather dubious.

Your mention of 2013-14 made me look at the stats for that season.

You say Hoolahan only started 10 games and if he had started more we would have stayed up.

The stats cannot possibly lead you to this conclusion, it is highly speculative.

What the stats do say is that of the 10 starts:

There were only 2 wins and 3 draws.

Hoolahan scored only 1 goal and made only 1 assist (One of the most creative players in the division? I don’t think so).

Average number of points with Hoolahan starting 0.9 per match.

Projected points for 38 matches equals 34.

Norwich were relegated with 33 points and needed 37 to stay up.

Looks like Hoolahan made no difference what so ever.

Now funnily enough I was thinking about skill sets and we can debate that shortly.[/quote]

I''ve posted these before but if you are going to look at the stats at least look at a decent sample. You are correct in that the second season under Hughton was the season that Wes started the least and also his presence made the least difference in terms of PPG when he played (albeit we were still narrowly better than when he didn''t). I think though that is in part down to how the team played that season and the fact he was disillusioned. Stats also suggest he will be very important next season.

Whilst I agree with the various comments about Naismith I think its also worth pointing out that pretty much all of Naismith''s decent performances (aside from 45 mins v Newcastle) came when he played in the same line up as Wes, Redmond and Mbok. We did not play that combination (or even with three of them together) often enough in my view. I accept that it was too open for some games but we scored goals for fun when the four of them did play.

2015/2016

Wes Starting: P25 W7 D6 L12 Points 27 PPG 1.08

Wes not starting P13 W2 D1 L10 Points 7 PPG 0.54

2014/2015

Wes starting: P28 W17 D6 L5 Points 57 PPG 2.03

Wes not starting: P19 W7 D5 L7 PPG 1.37

NB (Excludes playoffs where he did not start in the away draw. he started in both wins.)

2013/2014

Wes Starting: P10 W2 D3 L5 Points 9 PPG 0.9

Wes not starting P28 W6 D5 L17 Points 23 PPG 0.82

2012/2013

Wes Starting: P28 W9 D10 L9 Points 37 PPG 1.32

Wes not starting P10 W1 D4 L5 Points 5 PPG 0.5

Last 4 seasons:

Wes Starting: P92 W35 D25 L31 Points 130 PPG 1.41

Wes not starting: P70 W16 D15 L39 Points 63 PPG 0.9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like all statsitics they must be set within their proper context.

Neil tended to exclude Hoolahan in games against better opposition because he felt that we needed to break at pace on the counter attack as we weren''t going to get much ball in and around the opposition goal.

Hoolahan has tended to feature from the start more against weaker opposition where we can dominate the ball and get him into positions near the opposition goal more frequently where he is so effective.

So I think that does explain to a certain extent the higher returns with him in the side than without. In all likelihood we''d have lost many of those games he was left out of whether Hoolahan had played or not - just because of the strength of opponent.

However, I completely agree that we still look a more coherent and better team when he is playing. He is the one player we have genuinely comfortable at receiving the ball in tight areas and sees passes that no one else in the squad can. That will be essential next year against team who ostensibly come to park the bus.

He has massive flaws in his game and a player of his undoubted class should get far more goals. But in reality if he did he''d be David Silva and playing at Man City not Norwich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jacko"]Like all statsitics they must be set within their proper context.

Neil tended to exclude Hoolahan in games against better opposition because he felt that we needed to break at pace on the counter attack as we weren''t going to get much ball in and around the opposition goal.

Hoolahan has tended to feature from the start more against weaker opposition where we can dominate the ball and get him into positions near the opposition goal more frequently where he is so effective.

So I think that does explain to a certain extent the higher returns with him in the side than without. In all likelihood we''d have lost many of those games he was left out of whether Hoolahan had played or not - just because of the strength of opponent.

However, I completely agree that we still look a more coherent and better team when he is playing. He is the one player we have genuinely comfortable at receiving the ball in tight areas and sees passes that no one else in the squad can. That will be essential next year against team who ostensibly come to park the bus.

He has massive flaws in his game and a player of his undoubted class should get far more goals. But in reality if he did he''d be David Silva and playing at Man City not Norwich.[/quote]

To a degree that might have been the case Jacko although not entirely. For example he left him out against Palace and Sunderland yet played him in both games against Man United and Arsenal and at home against Chelsea. The above stats are also over 4 seasons and cover games against all types of opposition but I will acknowledge that on occasion he gets left out of some of the harder away games due to the misguided notion that it makes us more solid.

I think he started leaving him out earlier in the season in games against the "bigger" sides away from home because he thought it makes us harder to beat. I think he''s wrong on that and our record against the "big" sides in the recent seasons we''ve been back in the prem also backs that up because we''ve beaten Man U x2, Arsenal and Man City with Wes starting and only managed a couple of draws in games against big sides where he hasn''t been involved. My personal view is that we fare better against them with him in the side because he can keep the ball and receive it in tight areas. Neil alluded to this when he picked Wes and Dorrans together in the Arsenal home game because ("he wanted to play his best technical players") yet for some strange reason did not apply the same logic to away games for the first two thirds of the season.

Anyway we both agree he will be crucial next season and hopefully over the course of next season Madison can come through and show us he is going to be the long term successor to Wes. I hope also that we give Wes an extra year so he gets a testimonial. His game has arguably improved with age so I think he''s got at least two more seasons left in him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Jim Smith"][quote user="Jacko"]Like all statsitics they must be set within their proper context. Neil tended to exclude Hoolahan in games against better opposition because he felt that we needed to break at pace on the counter attack as we weren''t going to get much ball in and around the opposition goal. Hoolahan has tended to feature from the start more against weaker opposition where we can dominate the ball and get him into positions near the opposition goal more frequently where he is so effective. So I think that does explain to a certain extent the higher returns with him in the side than without. In all likelihood we''d have lost many of those games he was left out of whether Hoolahan had played or not - just because of the strength of opponent. However, I completely agree that we still look a more coherent and better team when he is playing. He is the one player we have genuinely comfortable at receiving the ball in tight areas and sees passes that no one else in the squad can. That will be essential next year against team who ostensibly come to park the bus. He has massive flaws in his game and a player of his undoubted class should get far more goals. But in reality if he did he''d be David Silva and playing at Man City not Norwich.[/quote] To a degree that might have been the case Jacko although not entirely. For example he left him out against Palace and Sunderland yet played him in both games against Man United and Arsenal and at home against Chelsea. The above stats are also over 4 seasons and cover games against all types of opposition but I will acknowledge that on occasion he gets left out of some of the harder away games due to the misguided notion that it makes us more solid. I think he started leaving him out earlier in the season in games against the "bigger" sides away from home because he thought it makes us harder to beat. I think he''s wrong on that and our record against the "big" sides in the recent seasons we''ve been back in the prem also backs that up because we''ve beaten Man U x2, Arsenal and Man City with Wes starting and only managed a couple of draws in games against big sides where he hasn''t been involved. My personal view is that we fare better against them with him in the side because he can keep the ball and receive it in tight areas. Neil alluded to this when he picked Wes and Dorrans together in the Arsenal home game because ("he wanted to play his best technical players") yet for some strange reason did not apply the same logic to away games for the first two thirds of the season. Anyway we both agree he will be crucial next season and hopefully over the course of next season Madison can come through and show us he is going to be the long term successor to Wes. I hope also that we give Wes an extra year so he gets a testimonial. His game has arguably improved with age so I think he''s got at least two more seasons left in him.[/quote]

 

I think the point about needing Wes against the sides that will try to park the bus is key - and quite a few sides will do that.

 

Wes reminds me of Ian Crook in a lot of ways and I have the same concerns about replacing him.  It''s hard to imagine City without Wes because he''s been with us for so long and I really hope we have him next season, but he can''t last forever.  When Crook left, we didn''t replace him and it was nearly 10 years until we got out of the 2nd tier...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In terms of points against the recognised big teams this season, Wes started in the one-all draw at home to Arsenal, the win away to Man Utd and the goalless draw away to Man City.

He also started in the 1-0 losses at home to Man Utd, Arsenal away and Chelsea away, and the defeats at home to Liverpool (4-5) and Chelsea (1-2).

So the notion that Wes has been excluded from matches against ''better opposition'' is false.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was setting out Neil''s reasoning more than own opinions in the previous post.

Personally I think (despite being 5 ft 4) he''s actually probably our best player at holding the ball up, bringing others into play and getting us up the field. I think Old Trafford rather debunked the myth that he can''t play away from home against a top side.

But he was left out in a lot of away games against big teams last season. Liverpool, Man City, Leicester, Chelsea to name just a few. Realistically, with or without Wes we''re probably losing those games in all probability. Not a foregone conclusion of course but likely.

He''d be in my team every day of the week but at 34 years old we are going to have ration his workload next season to make sure he doesn''t get burnt out. The ironic is that for all the investment and monies spent on our rise through the leagues, he''s still comfortably the most unique and technically gifted player we''ve got.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jacko, reckon you have called it right.

Hoolahan can look good at home against the weaker teams.

Basically because he spends a lot of time on the ball, the better teams don’t give him that time and space.

The stats that Jim Smith produced can lead to all sorts of false conclusions.

Take 2015/16 points gained per match with (1.08) and without (0.54).

Do they suggest that we are twice the team with Hoolahan in?

Of the 13 games where Wes did not start (I must start calling him Wes it’s so much shorter, it doesn’t mean that I’ve joined the “Wes cult”) there were 8 where he did not feature at all, 7 of these were away.

The trouble with the “Wes cult” is the way they see what’s going on in front of them.

On a marks out of ten basis every game would be:

Wes 9

Redmond 7

Everyone else 4 or 5

I don’t see it like that. The first names I want to see on a team sheet are Redmond, Howson and Tettey, not Wes and 10 others.

If Wes is so good it makes sense to build the whole team around him.

So what position does he play ideally and what formation?

Left side/wing – no

Right side/wing – no

Secondary striker – no

Holding midfield – clearly no

Centre midfield “In the hole” – yes that must be it – and that means we must play 2 upfront (because Wes is not the secondary striker) – and that means we only have 3 in midfield.

So its 4-3-Wes-2.

Is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Curious Canary"]So what position does he play ideally and what formation? Left side/wing – no Right side/wing – no Secondary striker – no Holding midfield – clearly no Centre midfield “In the hole” – yes that must be it – and that means we must play 2 upfront (because Wes is not the secondary striker) – and that means we only have 3 in midfield. So its 4-3-Wes-2. Is it?[/quote]

 

Why ?

 

If you take our playoff final lineup, we had Wes playing in the hole behind Jerome, two CMs and Redmond/Johnson on the flanks.  Which is pretty typical of the lineup with Wes in the team, and generally that has been our most effective team setup over the last couple of years IMO.

 

If we go behind and need to chase the game, sometimes we''ve gone two up front, which hasn''t worked that well this season, although it was better the season before when we could bring on Hooper alongside a big striker (eg when he got the winner against Blackburn).  I think that would have worked better than having Jerome and Mbokani both on towards the end against Arsenal, but it''s all academic now.  Anyway, when we''ve started two up front in the Prem, we generally find our midfield gets outnumbered and the two up front don''t see much of the ball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
F£&@ the stats

You simply do not get rid of players like wes Hoolahan

Given half a chance he''ll tear this league a new arse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Curious your interpretation of the stats is baffling to say the least!!

When have we started this year with Hoolahan in the hole and two strikers ahead of him? Don''t think we''ve even done that since the championship season under Lambert!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Curious Canary wrote:

So what position does he play ideally and what formation? Left side/wing – no Right side/wing – no Secondary striker – no Holding midfield – clearly no Centre midfield “In the hole” – yes that must be it – and that means we must play 2 upfront (because Wes is not the secondary striker) – and that means we only have 3 in midfield. So its 4-3-Wes-2. Is it?

Why ?

Why?

Read the bit in the brackets.

Wes simply does not score enough goals.

If he doesn’t score who does?

A single striker isn’t going to score many because he’s isolated.

At least we agree about Hooper, a player than can finish, find space up front, control the ball and spot a

quick pass,

And we agree about Redmond and Johnson.

Although I would probably give them a bit more credit for getting us promotion than you.

And now that Hooper and Johnson are gone (probably Redmond too) where are the goals coming from next season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...