That goes without saying, but it doesn't negate the original point. If you don't think a keeper can win or cost you points, why bother getting a good one at all?
Exactly what or says. It does not say additional or more, it is a general prediction. Maybe Karius and Migs both saved is 10-15pts a season too so there's no improvement
All I am saying is nobody can show 10 to 15 points per year for any keeper I'm saying it's a tired pundit cliche that no pundit can prove. The facts simply don't support it, it would require a keeper to stop every single mistake made. Of course the best possible keeper is needed. I've already published the real data several times as this has come up before. I am challenging anyone who is bothered to go show where these 10 or 15 points might be. Hell here is another example. Swansea. If karius saved off that add bad clearance leading to a shot we would have one point more. Let's ignore it was a driven shot from 10 yards like...
I'm only asking because I'm struggling to interpret it and I don't see a problem with what mito's written. He's simply asked if those 10/15 points ''could be saved'' [?] how did Karius and Mignolet lose 10/15 points? That's a perfectly reasonable question imo. So what does 'saving points' mean in your view?
MITOs comments are based purely on it being an additional 10-15pts, it doesn't say that. End of (my) point.
I disagree. He's only asked where K and M lost 10/15 points which is just logic. If you can ''save'' points as the quote says, then logic dictates that you can lose them too - which is all mito's asked. Where are you getting this ''additional'' points thing from?
It's not just about mistakes a keeper makes that directly leads to goals/loses, or about saves which lead to wins. It's about mistakes which come from defenders due to zero confidence in the keeper so they don't pass back or they go for balls they shouldn't so the keeper doesn't need to, it's about keepers claiming high balls and not spilling them causing panic in the box, it's about shots being parried to safety rather than keeping pressure on the defense by gifting chance after chance, it's about accurate passing so we keep possession and remove pressure on us.Confidence is huge. Defenders and midfielders having confidence in a keeper is a big factor here. Whole host of things which you can't simply quantify with stats which lead to loses or draws. I don't know enough about Alisson, he hasn't impressed me in the grand total of 3 games I've seen him play, but I'm pretty certain our team have scouted him intensively enough to know he'll contribute to less defeats/draws (and thus more points) than Karius.
In fairness to the g man. if there's 10 or 15 points in a new keeper then whether it's mistakes not made or saves made that were not made the only way those points can been seen is if our 75 points were 85 or 90 points. goalkeepers don't score goals. don't make assists regularly unless route 1. they can only.make.more saves or less mistakes. ergo its logical to say if a good keeper is worth 10/15 points our **** keepers must have cost us that. or else what were not **** at all.
which is exactly why the 10 points thing is a tired cliche. you've said something far far more intelligent and insightful.on the matter when compared to the original pundit comment.
I think a better keeper would have got us another 6-7 points last season. This is a figure I plucked out of the air based on nothing more than my gut instinct, the same as all other pundits who express an opinion. I think we might be taking it all a bit too seriously.
I'm just making a point that it's impossible to prove that cliche. so thanks for backing me as being right
