Simeon Jackson and that need for a new striker....

[Monty13 2,316]

I put these stats on another thread as part of a post but I actually thought it was worthy of debate in its own right.

I find Jacksons contribution by far the most interesting of our forwards when you look at the statistics. I can accept the fact that he doesn''t score enough goals, 3 goals in 22 performances (PL) is pretty underwhelming, but some of the results achieved with Jackson in the team are testament to his willing running and that his pace caused the opposition problems and space for other scorers.

His SOG% is pretty weak at 36% compared to Holts 48%, but interestingly is exactly the same as Morison but with roughly half the number of shots and minutes played. Jackson 945mins 33 shots, Morison 2098mins 63 shots.

I''m not sure whether Jackson just didn''t take his chances or didn''t have enough time to perform. Of his 22 matches he started only 10 (and was subbed in all but 2) with no consistent run in the team. He never started more than 3 PL games in a row even with the results below. His substitute appearances were also predominantly in the last 15 mins of a game.

Most interestingly though of the 10 games he did start we won 7 drew 2 (one of them Arsenal Away) and lost once (Man U).

That for me shows that Jackson, or someone of better quality but with same level of pace, should be a nailed on starter with Holt/Morison when you look at the stats.

So if we were to bring someone new in I would personally want a pacey hard working striker but with a better goalscoring record then Jackson. Any thoughts on who? Or do you think Jackson deserves the chance to show what he can do with a proper run in the team? The stats show the team benefited from him starting last year.

[ROBFLECK 132]

Just thinking out loud...QPR are swamped with forwards and they''ve got one that did very well...unnoticed... Jamie Mackie... What do you reckon?

[The Young One 0]

Rhodes is that man, or Defoe (on loan)

[The Young One 0]

[quote user="ROBFLECK"]Just thinking out loud...QPR are swamped with forwards and they''ve got one that did very well...unnoticed... Jamie Mackie... What do you reckon?[/quote]Mackie would be suitable.Think jackson falls over to easily.

[ROBFLECK 132]

Defoe? NEVER gonna come

Rhodes? has never played in the PL, nor the Ch

[Gnasher 0]

Mackie is one of the only players I would consider taking off QPR, not sure how much he''d cost us though

[Yellow Shirt 17]

I totally agree with the sentiment.It''s not just that Jackson doesn''t score enough goals it''s that I don''t think we have anyone prolific enough to have a player who is a great support player in the team.It''s like Heskey without Owen or Rooney... I think Heskey and Jackson are valuable players but someone has to capitalize on the work regularly.The trouble with Jackson for me is that he is too small and light at this level where pace alone isn''t quite enough. Also he needs to chip in a just a few more goals to keep defenses worrying about him!

[Gingerpele 0]

I''d love Mackie, think he would be a fantastic signing. He''s unlikely to be a auto starter, but I think he improves on Jackson and Martin. And he can play out wide, just to add a bit more back up in that position (we still only have 3 wingers...).

As for your post Monty, firstly i''d like to say how good it is too see you putting in so much effort into your very reasonable posts. Great stuff.

First of all, I don''t think Jackson, or Vaughan, or any pacey striker we could sign will be a nailed on starter. I think were going 4-2-3-1. With Hoolahan, Butterfield and Snodgrass, I can''t see us not playing an AM. But I do agree that Jackson does provide somethign very valuable. As long as Hughton knows when to make substitutions during a game, Jackson and Vaughan could have a big impact on our results without starting very often.

I''ve always though Jackson and Morison are pretty poor finishers. Morison is about 10x better with his head, and Jackson just has a knack of getting into the wrong position to get a decent shot off.

I don''t even think we need a new striker in this transfer window. If were mainly going to be playing 1 striker, Holt as that main man, with Morison as direct competition/back-up, and Vaughan and Jackson as the men able to come on and add some pace upfront, we''ll be fine. Goals from Pilks, Snodgrass, Hoolahan, Surman, Howson, Bennett and hopefully some from the defence will see us continue are high scoring ways.

Rhodes is not the answer, not in a million years. He''s done well in League One, he''s not going to be first choice, and he is going to cost too much for a League One striker who will be sitting on the bench.

[shiplee15 0]

I still think Vaughan is that man.

Pace to burn and can finish. I know he has fitness issues but if we keep him fit i think he''ll get 10+ goals this year.

Personally i think a duo of Holt/Vaughan or Moro/Vaughan when Holty needs a rest would be very effective.

[Monty13 2,316]

Guys I don''t think Rhodes is the answer to the question I was posing, he''s not pacey, he''s strong, fairly tall, fairly good technical ability and scores goals. He''s the long term replacement to Grant Holt, if we could afford 6 million or so for someone to sit on the bench, which I don''t think we can. Personally although Defoe fits the mould, just can''t see that happening with his wages.

Mackie is maybe a good shout although I think Jackson might be pacier, but not masses in it and Mackie scores goals.

GP although I think you may be right and we are setting ourselves up for a 451 I was making the point, rather flippantly I suppose, that we were very (maybe our most) successful playing 442 with a big and a pacey striker. I don''t think Hughton is a one trick pony and hopefully we will mix it up, especially at home where I would personally prefer us to play 442 against similar level opposition. Interestingly we also played 442 against both Celtic and Ajax so I don''t think Hughton is necessarily 451 focussed and I am really interested to see how we set up tomorrow at Home for our last pre season game.

Also Jacksons contribution as a sub was statistically less impact-full on results than as a starter, of course in reality this doesn''t show the impact his running was having on tired defenders legs and keeping the ball.

Maybe you are right and we don''t need a new striker, and also maybe if he stays fit Vaughan is the goal scoring pacey forward I think we need. I suppose we will see when the season starts but personally I''m hoping to see more 442, especially at home.

[KeelansGlove 0]

Well I am not a fan of 4-5-1 or 4-2-3-1 I dont think I have ever seen a Norwich team succesful with either of these formations other than odd games. I dont mind if we look at different formations but I think if Hughton is planning 4-5-1 for most games I think it will be a very long season.

[Morisons Prozac 0]

For people who slate Jackson, they need to watch his movement off the ball and the work he does to stretch the defence and make room for others. Vastly underrated here by the morons on this site who would rather have local lad Chris "the lazy tw*t" Martin

[Gingerpele 0]

For goodness sake, no one gives two sh!ts that Chris Martin is a local lad, apart from the morons like you who seem to think others do.

And only one or two have even mentioned the possibility of Martin being ahead of Jackson. And how about you watch Martin, and see how involved in goals he is. But no, he''s lazy and people only like him because he''s local, you can''t be bothered to actually take five seconds and actually consider the fact Martin isn''t lazy (because he''s a professional footballer, in an era where you have to be extremely fit to play at the top level) he just doesn''t run around like Holt or Jackson.

I think Jackson is vastly overrated by the morons like you on here. And unlike you, i''m actually able too see Jacksons good points, just because I don''t think he''s that wonderful doesn''t mean you have to insult a player.

[Yellow Shirt 17]

[quote user="Gingerpele"]For goodness sake, no one gives two sh!ts that Chris Martin is a local lad, apart from the morons like you who seem to think others do.

And only one or two have even mentioned the possibility of Martin being ahead of Jackson. And how about you watch Martin, and see how involved in goals he is. But no, he''s lazy and people only like him because he''s local, you can''t be bothered to actually take five seconds and actually consider the fact Martin isn''t lazy (because he''s a professional footballer, in an era where you have to be extremely fit to play at the top level) he just doesn''t run around like Holt or Jackson.

I think Jackson is vastly overrated by the morons like you on here. And unlike you, i''m actually able too see Jacksons good points, just because I don''t think he''s that wonderful doesn''t mean you have to insult a player.[/quote]BOOM!Nail on the head- quite aggressively but still nail on the head!

[Phillip J Fry 0]

I would be very happy if we signed Jamie Mackie, he scored 7 premier league goals when he was playing out wide (when under Warnock he had recently converted to a striker) I think he''d be quite a good player for Norwich up front.

[Gingerpele 0]

I thought I was being rather polite Yellow Shirt ;)

If other posters are going to resort to insults, why shouldn''t I? (Ok, i''m already annoyed at something else, so should probably not be on here as some aggression was bound to appear in my posts...)

[mrs miggins 0]

i''m personally a big fan of jackson. as shown in the championship, once he hits the groung running, there''s no stopping him. we wouldn''t have got promoted without him (as well as many others).

the same thing happened last season. At the start, there was lots of running yet no goals, unfortunately he didn''t get that much of an opportunity afterwards to ''hit the ground running'' in the second half of the season.

i feel there is alot more to come from him.

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

Although vuaghan is a very similar player to jackson, just taller, he only scored 9 goals in the championship (as i recall) and much like jackson showed lots of enthusiasm in the prem (before another injury) without any goals. However he''s had a good pre season (even if they don''t mean anything) and certainly deserves the opportunity to play 

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

Holt scored loads of goals, there''s no reason why he won''t do the same.

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

Morison scored 10 goals last season which is great for a ''lazy'' player and can also play the ''lone'' striker very well.

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

martin- will be at the bottom of the pile despite being a good finisher, the championship seems to be his level. (i would personally loan him out for the season to prove me wrong)

[cityislife 0]

As it stands i would like to think our strongest strike force is Holt/Jackson.Jackson is quality. Hes exactly the player Cb''s don''t want to play against....

[Bing Bang 0]

the fact that are defence is weaker now than it was last season is my main concern

[Gingerpele 0]

The defence is only weaker in one position, LB.

Whittaker is a experienced FB, he may not be as good as Naughton in 2-3+ years time, but i''m almost certain he''s as good now. I''m also fairly sure he''s limited R.Martins appearances for Scotland as well, so if we rate Martin, we can''t not rate Whittaker.

And Turner is another experienced defender. Premiership experience at that. I''m still not quite sure why Sunderland let him go, but their loss is our gain. And Turner over a at most half games a season Whitbread is most definitely an improvement. I would have rather seen Whitbread stay than Barnett, but if he wasn''t going to be first choice, he probably wouldn''t want to stay anyway.

I''m sure Hughton will sign another FB and all will be fine. Also, as a more defence minded manager, i''m almost certain we''ll be tighter defensively with what we''ve already got than we were last season. Lambert weakest point over all three seasons was defence. It was almost like he told the defenders they are allowed to switch off once or twice a game.