Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mr footy

Stats dont lie

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, City 2nd said:

We have a manager and a team of coaches who rely very very heavily on stats! Not to mention Mr Webber and his team, who rely very very heavily on the stats of players they wish to sign, and those they have signed!

Well I did say stats are only as good as the people that interpret them, which suggests Webber and co are very good at using stats, because since he and Farke arrived, the club has developed beyond all recognition from what it was four years ago.

Yes, we are still finding our feet in the Premier League after a very difficult start to the season, but even now, after four games, covid interupted pre-season, transfer windows, international breaks which deprived our new players from settling in to the club, we are still just one win off from the team in 13th place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

I’d also suggest Webber has got as many wrong as he has right with the signings it’s not an exact science. 

More right than wrong I would argue.

Krul, Zimmermann, Hanley, Giannoulis, Williams, Mumba, Vrancic, Leitner, Trybull, Pukki, McLean, Hernandez, Srbeny, Stiepermann... all came and did what they were brought in to do, successfully.

Watkins and Husband were said to have already been agreed prior to Webber's arrival.

Biggest disappointments have probably been Drmic and Francke to be fair. Though some will argue some of the youngsters brought in haven't progressed as hoped perhaps. And maybe some of the loans... but those are even iffier than normal signings as they have no long term commitment to us, some can't seem to get past the rejection of the parent club thinking that they are already first teamers - like the chap we had on loan from Spurs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

I’d also suggest Webber has got as many wrong as he has right with the signings it’s not an exact science.

Webber has been clear with his remit of being a top 26 club, our success in those positions via the signings and investments has been proven across 4 seasons now.

If his goal was top 16/17 then yes you could call him out for getting as many wrong as right.  But that's never been the objective, hard to swallow as a fan, but it's the truth. And it's that truth which has fuelled our success and building of the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not arguing on the success of the club or of Webber himself. Simply there I would say it hasn’t all been a success with the incoming transfers 50% is a good success rate in my opinion

lets look from 2017 when Webber was appointed 

2017 arrivals. 
Grant Hanley - success 

Marcel Franke - flop

Onel - success 

Stieperman - success 

Srbeny - I think he failed to live up to his potential but I can see people who would think he might of been good for the squad. 
James husband - flop 

Vrancic - success 

Sean Raggett - flop

Tristan Abraham - flop 

Kenny McLean - success 

Marley Watkins - flop

Zimmermann - success 

trybull - success 

Harrison Read - did okay 

Mo Leitner - success 

2018 

Ben Marshall - flop 

Emi Buendia - best signing ever 

Felix Passlack - flop 

Philipe Heise - flop 

Tim Krul - success 

mason bloomfield - flop 

teemu Pukki - success 

Jordon Rhodes - success 

2019 

Sam McCallum - TBD 

Ralf Farmann- for me a flop but can see how some would say that isn’t fair 

Sam Byram - good when fit just never fit 

Lukas Rupp - jury is still out for me on him has good days and bad. 
 

Dan Adshead - looks a talent 

Josip Drmic - massive flop 

ibramhim Amadou - flop but never really played in his position 

Ondrej Duda - didn’t do anything so it’s a flop for me. 
 

Melvin Sitti - flop 

Patrick Roberts - flop 

2020

Hugill - did the job he needed to do 

Placheta - not done anything as of yet has potential though 

Gibson - success 

Dowell - success 

Sorensen- success 

Giannoulis - success 

Mumba - success 

Sinani - flop 

Soto - flop 

Skip - success 

Quintilla - will say he was a success hard to judge on time missed. 
 

Nyland - can’t judge 

 

Up to  20/21 that’s 45 signings with in my opinion (you’re allowed to think differently than me) 20 signings that have been a huge success, 15 flops and 10 who it’s too early to say on or who wouldn’t be fair to judge. 
 

I would say that actually a pretty good ratio for a club that has had very little money to spend and continuously sold its best assets. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

I am not arguing on the success of the club or of Webber himself. Simply there I would say it hasn’t all been a success with the incoming transfers 50% is a good success rate in my opinion

lets look from 2017 when Webber was appointed 

2017 arrivals. 
Grant Hanley - success 

Marcel Franke - flop

Onel - success 

Stieperman - success 

Srbeny - I think he failed to live up to his potential but I can see people who would think he might of been good for the squad. 
James husband - flop 

Vrancic - success 

Sean Raggett - flop

Tristan Abraham - flop 

Kenny McLean - success 

Marley Watkins - flop

Zimmermann - success 

trybull - success 

Harrison Read - did okay 

Mo Leitner - success 

2018 

Ben Marshall - flop 

Emi Buendia - best signing ever 

Felix Passlack - flop 

Philipe Heise - flop 

Tim Krul - success 

mason bloomfield - flop 

teemu Pukki - success 

Jordon Rhodes - success 

2019 

Sam McCallum - TBD 

Ralf Farmann- for me a flop but can see how some would say that isn’t fair 

Sam Byram - good when fit just never fit 

Lukas Rupp - jury is still out for me on him has good days and bad. 
 

Dan Adshead - looks a talent 

Josip Drmic - massive flop 

ibramhim Amadou - flop but never really played in his position 

Ondrej Duda - didn’t do anything so it’s a flop for me. 
 

Melvin Sitti - flop 

Patrick Roberts - flop 

2020

Hugill - did the job he needed to do 

Placheta - not done anything as of yet has potential though 

Gibson - success 

Dowell - success 

Sorensen- success 

Giannoulis - success 

Mumba - success 

Sinani - flop 

Soto - flop 

Skip - success 

Quintilla - will say he was a success hard to judge on time missed. 
 

Nyland - can’t judge 

 

Up to  20/21 that’s 45 signings with in my opinion (you’re allowed to think differently than me) 20 signings that have been a huge success, 15 flops and 10 who it’s too early to say on or who wouldn’t be fair to judge. 
 

I would say that actually a pretty good ratio for a club that has had very little money to spend and continuously sold its best assets. 

 

I think it’s a bit harsh to call Sinani and Soto flops when you’re still waiting to decide on McCallum. Since they were signed they’ve all been out on loan with Sinani and Soto yet to play for us and McCallum the making just a single appearance in our League Cup defeat to Luton last season. I have to say I have doubts on Soto, but I do believe in McCallum and Sinani - they’re both doing quite well on loan in the Championship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, HazzaJet said:

I think it’s a bit harsh to call Sinani and Soto flops when you’re still waiting to decide on McCallum. Since they were signed they’ve all been out on loan with Sinani and Soto yet to play for us and McCallum the making just a single appearance in our League Cup defeat to Luton last season. I have to say I have doubts on Soto, but I do believe in McCallum and Sinani - they’re both doing quite well on loan in the Championship.

We will not see Sinani or Soto in a Norwich first team shirt and in my view that counts as a flop harsh maybe but they haven’t done anything to suggest they will be a success. McCullum has time on his side and clearly has potential 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

We will not see Sinani or Soto in a Norwich first team shirt and in my view that counts as a flop harsh maybe but they haven’t done anything to suggest they will be a success. McCullum has time on his side and clearly has potential 

I see your point there. Can’t ever see Soto in a first team team shirt. Can only see Sinani in a first team shirt if he does well this season, and we go straight back down selling at least 2 of our attacking midfielders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 13/09/2021 at 10:18, TIL 1010 said:

If you think Arsenal are one of the top seven sides in this League you having not been watching the tellybox and you certainly were not at The Emirates on Saturday. They are one of the poorest Arsenal teams i have seen in many a year.

As were Leicester, who had numerous 1st team players missing. Arsenal were really poor on Saturday yet we created very little.. big improvements needed asap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

Up to  20/21 that’s 45 signings with in my opinion (you’re allowed to think differently than me) 20 signings that have been a huge success, 15 flops and 10 who it’s too early to say on or who wouldn’t be fair to judge. 

But he's buying untapped potential.  If you spent 20 mil on 10 players and 6 were worth 10 mil each at the end of the plan, 'flops' are all part of that process and included in the overall buying strategy.  If 50% of the players we got in this window are the real deal, we'll be laughing as his strategy as worked.

If the tactic was to focus all our spending into 2-3 expensive players and they flopped that would be a dramatic fail.  This window has been very much about putting many eggs in many different baskets and seeing which hatch.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Google Bot said:

But he's buying untapped potential.  If you spent 20 mil on 10 players and 6 were worth 10 mil each at the end of the plan, 'flops' are all part of that process and included in the overall buying strategy.  If 50% of the players we got in this window are the real deal, we'll be laughing as his strategy as worked.

If the tactic was to focus all our spending into 2-3 expensive players and they flopped that would be a dramatic fail.  This window has been very much about putting many eggs in many different baskets and seeing which hatch.

That is an excellent summary of our approach. We look for character too and really hope they improve the team. Buendia took the best part of a first season before his performance level really took off. 

Webber's strategy in buying that potential and in younger players will ensure we retain value. Maddison was another (McNally era) and clearly we knew we were buying a winner. 

He is often 'one step ahead' in my opinion. I'm pleased with the strategy and unlike one or two posters here, I sometimes consider a sale (at times) as cashing in on that value. Again, it's what you have to do at a club like ours (speaking of ownership).

Edited by sonyc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/09/2021 at 19:53, mr footy said:

We are worse this season than last time we were in the prem.Fact.tackles made ,shots on target etc all down on first 4 games compared to last time we were in prem.I have always been optimistic about are chances of staying in this league but I cant see it and that truly saddens me .Watford will fancy a win against us on this form .I hope and pray I am wrong and we survive.

Liverpool, Man City, Leicester and Arsenal is a difficult start for any team let alone one just promoted. Easier times ahead lets just see if we can make some progress now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're 3 points off 13th place, having played Liverpool, Man City, Leicester and Arsenal. I suggest you keep your order for Tena Men on hold for the time being.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very fine margins in this league and luck tends to be against you when you are at the wrong end of the table. The fact that it has come down to fine margins against Leicester and Arsenal I suppose has to be encouraging.

We more than held our own against Arsenal in the 2nd half of the first half, and they are a far better side than Leicester. There is gradual progress and we just need a bit of luck for a change to get that first win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Google Bot said:

But he's buying untapped potential.  If you spent 20 mil on 10 players and 6 were worth 10 mil each at the end of the plan, 'flops' are all part of that process and included in the overall buying strategy.  If 50% of the players we got in this window are the real deal, we'll be laughing as his strategy as worked.

If the tactic was to focus all our spending into 2-3 expensive players and they flopped that would be a dramatic fail.  This window has been very much about putting many eggs in many different baskets and seeing which hatch.

I understand the approach and am by no means Critical of it. As I’ve said above a 50% success rate on signings for any club let alone one run on a shoe string for many years has to be a success. I think you can notice the progression year on year from where we were which is always a positive. The pressure is now on Farke to deliver results this season with the most money we’ve ever spent 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

It's very fine margins in this league and luck tends to be against you when you are at the wrong end of the table. The fact that it has come down to fine margins against Leicester and Arsenal I suppose has to be encouraging.

We more than held our own against Arsenal in the 2nd half of the first half, and they are a far better side than Leicester. There is gradual progress and we just need a bit of luck for a change to get that first win.

The table last year would not suggest Arsenal are a better side than Leicester. Not the fact Leicester won the FA cup last season either. Nor the fact that Leicester have won the league more recently than Arsenal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 13/09/2021 at 10:35, Tetteys Jig said:

to be fair we only got 18 more points from the other 35 games so I'd hope we can beat that! Sure if we don't then clearly we deserve to be relegated again.

You're clearly just trolling I hope or this is an incredibly smooth brained take on it all.

I wasn't trolling at all.
I was just presenting the fixture-for-fixture results across the two seasons and leaving the reader to decide what to make of it !

It does feel like Norwich are a better team this season than last time in the Premier league. Then, we had far too many duff results against teams in the bottom 6 or so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, K Lo said:

I wasn't trolling at all.
I was just presenting the fixture-for-fixture results across the two seasons and leaving the reader to decide what to make of it !

It does feel like Norwich are a better team this season than last time in the Premier league. Then, we had far too many duff results against teams in the bottom 6 or so. 

exactly, we failed to turn up in our "winnable games" and raised our game to get some results vs the likes of Spurs, Man City, Leicester etc.

Hopefully we're far more street smart this time. Time for judgement will be after this next run of 9 games where there's only really Chelsea that should scare us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@By Hook or Ian crook ok, going to challenge some of these. 

If you are going purely on Webber signings only, Watkins and Husband were allegedly already lined up before he was fully onboard. So if you want to include those as his signings, I guess that's ok but equally, they weren't 100% his.

Harrison Reed - was a success. Not, "did okay". Most fans would have taken him back following that season. He was Skipp MkI though not as good as Skipp turned out to be, still very successful for us.

Tristan Abraham - signed at age 18. Players that age are signed on the potential they may become something. Not that they already are. It is rare to find a talent like Tzolis. So yes, whilst he didn't make it in the end, its a very different signing than one that is brought in to play for the first team straight away, which he wasn't. For example, I didn't see you put Pierre Fonkeu, Savvas Mourgos or Simon Power in your list, all signed at the same time, all a tad older and all for the U23's... I have another point to make on these in a bit(1).

The others I largely agree with.

2018-19
Again, you do a sort of odd thing with Mason Bloomfield.
image.png.84c0eddd4f958593c732c8e71ede7fd1.png
Bloomfield, Jones, Richards, Scully, Coley, Johnson, Hondermarck, Famewo, Hayes and Lambert were all signed for U21's or lower. Again, I'll get to that point I want to make about some of this later(1).

Passlack - there are a few players you have listed like this too. Who we never saw a lot of, for very good reasons. Passlack could have been a bit inspired but needed game time. He struggled to get past the emergence of one Max Aarons, and lets face it, that is no mean feat. Since Aarons got his first start, he has rarely been pushed out of the team by anyone. In fact, when he hasn't started at RB it's because he has moved across to cover LB. Was this loan a success as in, did he start a ton of games? No. But was that because he was rubbish or because Aarons is just brilliant? Either way, you need depth. Harsh to call it a flop IMHO. For what it's worth, he was young, he's still only 23...

Philip Heise - see Passlack, only instead of Aarons, you have Lewis. So again, we never really got to see much of Heise, but that's because we had a terrific, young left back who not only stepped up to prove he was good enough for the Championship, which is what Heise was signed to play in, but upon promotion to the PL he stepped it up and performed there too, which is where he remained. Heise was a victim of the success of the team, and like Passlack, our own youth scouting system coming good with two fantastic, young full backs. Harsh to call a flop, never saw enough to be a success - but in these cases, to be a success would be to be better players than Aarons and Lewis... tough ask.

Ben Marshall - an odd one. Played well prior to coming to us and then seemed to just flunk altogether. Non footballing things going on there if you ask me. A certain flop, but a very strange one.

Emi Buendia - "best signing ever", I'm glad for some that he will be. Heavily debatable though. Those who can remember will say Martin Peters because he was a world cup winner and a quality player. Buendia was perhaps a bit more of a rough diamond, cut wonderfully by Farke. Splitting hairs a bit here, but sure, very good player and great success.

I could go through more but I think you get the gist. You are seemingly throwing some youth players in to fit your totals but then leaving others out, some of which were actually older at the time. If you are judging by immediate first team impact, probably worth ignoring those clearly not brought in for that.

Then you have the likes of Roberts, Heise, Passlack etc who were brought in to start only to see younger players who were not considered ready for it at the start of the summer, to improve over pre-season, get their starts and prevent them from progressing. Cantwell, Lewis, Godfrey, Aarons all played their part in those players not getting game time and a chance to be a success on the pitch for us. One could argue without them, none of the youngsters would have had to fight for their place so wouldn't have progressed in quality. I guess we'll never know for sure, either way, harsh to call them flops.

1) Some folks have spoken about the market for loans. There have been those that have alluded to some of the youngsters we have signed, having made more than their signing fee back in loan fees. Cast your mind back a few seasons and Chelsea were loaning out the best part of 30 players. Imagine the average loan fee was around £200k, that's £6m for the season coming in for loan fees. Now youngsters may well be a bit less, but their wages are also easier covered by the clubs loaning them. So I suspect that some of these players are signed in view of loaning them out intelligently. First of all to make some money on owning their registration but then also with the hope of them progressing their careers away from us and at the very least increasing their value with potential to sell.

Soto is a fantastic example. Signed on a free. Loaned out straight away. Loaned out for a full season this season with the potential of a €1.5m sale at the end. And we essentially didn't do anything but give him a contract and have him train with the first team at the end of last season.

Either way, there is certainly a lot more to some of the younger signings than just expecting them to make an immediate impact, or even an impact at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would suggest that Lukas Rupp should be considered a 'success'. Considering it was reported we paid an initial 500k (euros) for him, he is still in the team in his third season and in total 40 plus appearances. 

The number of agreed successes is exceptional considering the amount paid for most. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks @chicken

I get and understand your points the beauty of football is that it’s open to interpretation. The way I have described the signings is simply my interpretation of how I believe they performed. Some will argue better some worse but the beauty of football is we are able to have the discussions. It’s choices the managers have to make every week on the pitch with the tactics they choose to try and win a game. 
 

You’re right I’m not old enough to remember Peters so purely based upon the players I’ve witnessed play for Norwich would I call Buendia our best ever signing. He is without doubt the best player I’ve seen play for us, I think my first game was around 89/90 and I’ve had a few idols in that time but none that brought as much joy to watch for me as Buendia I admired his grit and feistiness as much as his flare it’s a rare combination. 
 

I get your point about missing out players I tried to only include the ones who were brought in for a decent fee or with expectations that they would effect the first team squad. Some of that is to do with the fact that we as a club have progressed too fast for some of the players we have brought in over previous windows. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

The pressure is now on Farke to deliver results this season with the most money we’ve ever spent 

Personally I don't believe pressure is on Farke based on money spent.  As you've said yourself, only 50% of the talent may flourish and that's being generous - particularly at this level. 

In fact I feel that Farke has a big job in turning these players into a Top 16 side, and personally don't have the expectation that he should deliver on that and there's no excuses if he fails etc.. I think it's a massive task.   Whereas last season he did have pressure on him, after keeping players like Cantwell, Emi & Aarons.

Also, we've made money in this window, we spent about 60m and had 35m come in for Emi - That's a 25m spend in a league where you get 100m from existing in the bottom 3 positions.

If we had doubled our spending and had proven talent coming in - then yes, pressure definitely on  Farke.   But the only real pressure I feel right now is his insistence on playing the ball out from the back and losing possession cheaply, that's where I can see people losing their nerve.

I'm not really sure what the point you were making if I'm honest? 🙂 lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Google Bot said:

Personally I don't believe pressure is on Farke based on money spent.  As you've said yourself, only 50% of the talent may flourish and that's being generous - particularly at this level. 

In fact I feel that Farke has a big job in turning these players into a Top 16 side, and personally don't have the expectation that he should deliver on that and there's no excuses if he fails etc.. I think it's a massive task.   Whereas last season he did have pressure on him, after keeping players like Cantwell, Emi & Aarons.

Also, we've made money in this window, we spent about 60m and had 35m come in for Emi - That's a 25m spend in a league where you get 100m from existing in the bottom 3 positions.

If we had doubled our spending and had proven talent coming in - then yes, pressure definitely on  Farke.   But the only real pressure I feel right now is his insistence on playing the ball out from the back and losing possession cheaply, that's where I can see people losing their nerve.

I'm not really sure what the point you were making if I'm honest? 🙂 lol

I think any manager that has been back with 9 new players and a relatively large sum of money spent (huge for us) would have pressure on them to succeed. That does not mean if he fails that he has done a bad job or we should get rid of him. I think Farke would put the pressure on himself to be able to turn these players into top 16 players it’s a nice problem to have if you ask me. It’s a lot better than the days where we were getting beat by Colchester. 
 

I admire Farke for his principles but I do agree he needs to be more flexible with his approach. It’s all well and good wanting to play out from the back but if he’s going to insist on playing formations that make it hard to get high up the pitch there are times we should be going more direct. It’s interesting that he is happy to change formation on the basis of opponents but not playing style perhaps this should be something reflected on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

I think any manager that has been back with 9 new players and a relatively large sum of money spent (huge for us) would have pressure on them to succeed.

Alternatively, he's lost a pivotal defensive midfielder in Skipp, and a creative/goal scoring duo in Emi (and Pukki). And those have been replaced with 'potentials' to improve the mean average of the general squad, making money in the process with TV revenue.

While I fully respect others who now make him fully accountable and without excuses.  For me personally, I think he had more pressure of expectation start of last season with the players at his disposal and would've been considered a failure if we didn't at least make playoff final.

This season, the tools he has relative to the opposition means he's the underdog in this race - and by quite a distance (IMO).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

The table last year would not suggest Arsenal are a better side than Leicester. Not the fact Leicester won the FA cup last season either. Nor the fact that Leicester have won the league more recently than Arsenal. 

That's so last year. Arsenal gave us more problems than Leicester, I think it was 3 points there fore the taking against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

That's so last year. Arsenal gave us more problems than Leicester, I think it was 3 points there fore the taking against them.

Personally think the three points was there against both. C’est la Vie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/09/2021 at 12:52, Kenny Foggo said:

As were Leicester, who had numerous 1st team players missing. Arsenal were really poor on Saturday yet we created very little.. big improvements needed asap

Have a word with yourselves and look again at the values of the players we faced in our first 4 games, including Arsenal and Leicester.

Our record signing is (maybe, now) about £11m and he hasn't played yet. How many of the 44 players who started against us in the first 4 games are worth less than that?

I'll help you out with this. Maybe 1, Thomas for Leicester, who then brought on two £25m substitutes by the way. (And they'd probably get more than £11m for Thomas if they sold him)

Arsenal's starting 11 has a total value of about £360m according to Transfermarkt. Ours was about £50m by the same site, and almost half of that is in one player (Aarons).

None of our players would have made their starting 11. None. Not even Aarons.

Anyone who is seriously judging this Norwich team by the first 4 games is completely deluded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, sgncfc said:

Have a word with yourselves and look again at the values of the players we faced in our first 4 games, including Arsenal and Leicester.

Our record signing is (maybe, now) about £11m and he hasn't played yet. How many of the 44 players who started against us in the first 4 games are worth less than that?

I'll help you out with this. Maybe 1, Thomas for Leicester, who then brought on two £25m substitutes by the way. (And they'd probably get more than £11m for Thomas if they sold him)

Arsenal's starting 11 has a total value of about £360m according to Transfermarkt. Ours was about £50m by the same site, and almost half of that is in one player (Aarons).

None of our players would have made their starting 11. None. Not even Aarons.

Anyone who is seriously judging this Norwich team by the first 4 games is completely deluded.

Aarons was wanted by Barcelona and you don’t think he’d get in the Leicester side?  
 

Cantwell and Aaron’s would both of been worth more than 40 million each should we of chosen to sell them this summer. 
 

Any team is judged on their results we’ve had 4 tough games no doubt but that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be room for analysis or criticism. No person should be above reproach so long as it’s constructive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, By Hook or Ian crook said:

Aarons was wanted by Barcelona and you don’t think he’d get in the Leicester side

If you re-read it you'll see I was talking about Arsenal as the side he wouldn't get into. But as you mention it I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that he would oust Castagne or Ricardo in the Leicester team, no. Very unlikely in my opinion.

Cantwell and Aarons were not worth £40m. If they were, we would have sold them. No one bid for either of them. Not at £40m, not at £30m. Cantwell is barely scraping into our side at the moment. Anyway the comparison was via their Transfermarkt valuations for both teams. The subject of this thread is "Stats don't lie". Unless of course you don't like the stats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am all for stats, they are great when taken into context. There is a strategy to beat every opponent some of that will be given away by stats some by the instinct of a manager. To borrow a bit from boxing few would of predicted the Rope-a-Dope tactic would of won people championships but look at how Ali used it to beat Foreman. I’d say that’s similar to how Leicester played when they won the league where they knew they were so good on the break they encouraged teams to attack them and pick them off on the counter. 
 

We definitely seem to be going to a moneyball approach to signings. Our scout are obviously looking out for certain metrics when looking at players. 

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...