Points per game with Josh starting

[dylanisabaddog 4,930]

P16  W11. D4. L1. points 37

thats 2.31 points per game 

Leicester are currently top on 2.2 points per game. 

If Josh had been fit throughout and we'd achieved 2.31 points per game we would currently be top with 85 points

[Satriales 651]

His injury had a massive impact on us, that is for sure. He would have been comfortably our top scorer by now, although he is now on course for that if he stays fit.

[Monty13 2,234]

5 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

P16  W11. D4. L1. points 37

thats 2.31 points per game 

Leicester are currently top on 2.2 points per game. 

If Josh had been fit throughout and we'd achieved 2.31 points per game we would currently be top with 85 points

He’s our best player IMO, shades it over Sara for me.

A striker who can score 25+ goals a season at this level (which he likely would have done if not injured) is unbelievably valuable.

He really is a complete no. 9 at this level. I wouldn’t swap him with any other Championship striker personally.

[Well b back 3,208]

Without looking through all those results I guess the one loss was Middlesbrough ?

[cambridgeshire canary 6,721]

Similar stats to Barnes.

[Monty13 2,234]

2 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Similar stats to Barnes.

Not to knock him, because he’s a great team player, but goals is where they are incomparable.

[Kathy 733]

3 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Similar stats to Barnes.

Worth his weight in gold imho. Tough, master of ****housery, in the refs ear, winds defenders up, subtle fouls in the box enabling space for others. I sometimes think his contributions are overlooked.

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,138]

1 minute ago, Kathy said:

Worth his weight in gold imho. Tough, master of ****housery, in the refs ear, winds defenders up, subtle fouls in the box enabling space for others. I sometimes think his contributions are overlooked.

I agree and not only that he allows Sargent to do his best work. I can kind of understand why some fans don't rate him, he is very slow now because his legs have gone, he's not a natural finisher, can't carry the ball at all and doesn't anticipate receiving the ball well in the box but we're always worse when he doesn't play, his movement is the main reason why our build up play is so dangerous and he plays intelligent passes so I do get frustrated when people criticize him because you need players like him in the team. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,930]

12 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Without looking through all those results I guess the one loss was Middlesbrough ?

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/josh-sargent/leistungsdaten/spieler/393325

One of the draws was away to Southampton which we all know was 2 points lost to a really awful referee. 

[Well b back 3,208]

10 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

Not to knock him, because he’s a great team player, but goals is where they are incomparable.

That Angus Gunn guy doesn’t score many either lol

[Well b back 3,208]

Anyone have Gibsons stats ? I would be quite interested in those.

[Worthy Nigelton 1,049]

He's so important for us. Does pretty much everything you want a no.9 to do. Great player.

[dylanisabaddog 4,930]

10 minutes ago, Well b back said:

Anyone have Gibsons stats ? I would be quite interested in those.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/ben-gibson/leistungsdaten/spieler/128904

[The Bunny 309]

30 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

If Josh had been fit throughout and we'd achieved 2.31 points per game we would currently be top with 85 points

That's a bit of an oversimplification of course. The sample sizes we're looking at here are very small, and there are other factors at play too. It's not like these absences were evenly distributed across the season with other variables controlled to remove bias. All we can say is we had an extremely patchy run of form back in Autumn and Josh wasn't present. How much of that was due to Josh's absence is impossible to say, although I'm sure it was a factor. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,930]

1 hour ago, The Bunny said:

That's a bit of an oversimplification of course. The sample sizes we're looking at here are very small, and there are other factors at play too. It's not like these absences were evenly distributed across the season with other variables controlled to remove bias. All we can say is we had an extremely patchy run of form back in Autumn and Josh wasn't present. How much of that was due to Josh's absence is impossible to say, although I'm sure it was a factor. 

16 games out of 38 is not very small. It's actually quite large. Of course the other major factor, as @Kathy has said, is the absence of Barnes for a big chunk of the 22 that Josh didn't play. 

Edited March 17 by dylanisabaddog

[A K Narey 85]

Josh is currently scoring one goal for every 91 minutes played.

That is considerably better than anyone else in the Championship, other than Vardy who has scored every 95 minutes, although he has been used as an impact substitute.

Anyway, strikers who can score a goal a game should be appreciated whilst we have him.

OTBC 

[Robert N. LiM 4,363]

3 minutes ago, A K Narey said:

Josh is currently scoring one goal for every 91 minutes played.

Last time I saw this stat he was doing better than Haaland! Obviously a league down but even so.

[Robert N. LiM 4,363]

2 hours ago, Christoph Stiepermann said:

I agree and not only that he allows Sargent to do his best work. I can kind of understand why some fans don't rate him, he is very slow now because his legs have gone, he's not a natural finisher, can't carry the ball at all and doesn't anticipate receiving the ball well in the box but we're always worse when he doesn't play, his movement is the main reason why our build up play is so dangerous and he plays intelligent passes so I do get frustrated when people criticize him because you need players like him in the team. 

Barnes is the swarm harmoniser. Love this term: the player who, without seeming to do anything special themselves, enables the team to function more harmoniously. (@Parma Ham's gone mouldy: one for your coaching lexicon)

Also, every team should have one player who looks absolutely furious when they score.

Edited March 17 by Robert N. LiM
tagged Parma

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,220]

9 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Barnes is the swarm harmoniser. Love this term: the player who, without seeming to do anything special themselves, enables the team to function more harmoniously. (@Parma Ham's gone mouldy: one for your coaching lexicon)

Also, every team should have one player who looks absolutely furious when they score.

With youngsters I like  ‘constructive bunching’ 🤣

 

Parma 

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 3,821]

Whilst Sargent is clearly incredibly important to us, there are two huge caveats. 

Every club in the division would be able to say 'if we hadn't lost [player] for [time period] then we would have [number] more points'. Every club has injuries to important players throughout the season, and who knows, maybe we won a few games where the opposition were missing a couple of key players, and we wouldn't have won them had those players been available?

Also, the period Barnes missed also coincided with Sargent's injury. Our PPG with Barnes is 1.89 and without is 0.8. I do feel that Sargent is more important than Barnes, but Barnes' importance should be understated. 

[nutty nigel 7,537]

In 2018 if Pukkiand Buendia had the same injuries as Sargent and Sainz had in 2023 our whole recent history may well have been different.

[Fen Canary 828]

8 hours ago, Kathy said:

Worth his weight in gold imho. Tough, master of ****housery, in the refs ear, winds defenders up, subtle fouls in the box enabling space for others. I sometimes think his contributions are overlooked.

A slightly more pale Emile Heskey 

[Fen Canary 828]

6 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

In 2018 if Pukkiand Buendia had the same injuries as Sargent and Sainz had in 2023 our whole recent history may well have been different.

Agreed. Luck is an under appreciated phenomenon in football. It can derail even the top clubs so for ones with limited resources who simply can’t afford 5 first choice strikers, losing both your centre forwards for half a season (having spent all pre season setting the team up to play to their attributes is incredibly damaging). I still think Wagner was a touch dogmatic during their layoff, trying to play in exactly the same fashion with players not suited to it and it invariably cost us more points than it should have, but you certainly can’t argue with results now he’s got his first choices back.

[nutty nigel 7,537]

29 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Agreed. Luck is an under appreciated phenomenon in football. It can derail even the top clubs so for ones with limited resources who simply can’t afford 5 first choice strikers, losing both your centre forwards for half a season (having spent all pre season setting the team up to play to their attributes is incredibly damaging). I still think Wagner was a touch dogmatic during their layoff, trying to play in exactly the same fashion with players not suited to it and it invariably cost us more points than it should have, but you certainly can’t argue with results now he’s got his first choices back.

Totally agree with that. However he found a way and results since Bonfire Night are a credit to him. On Bonfire Night after Blackburn his days looked numbered.

But half a season worth of results have gone since then and surely most are now pleased we kept him.

 

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,431]

Can’t argue with those stats. I don't recall anyone predicting Josh coming this good . 
 

We would be well in the mix for automatic promotion without our injuries this year. 
 

Can’t underestimate Barnes contribution. Refs ear is something we haven’t had since Holt.