Seeing as they will be bit part players, there off the bench capabilities aren't great tbh. We have Lambert to come off the bench.
I agree, in theory if you sign a top quality player then the first team player he replaces becomes the squad player. It'd be the ideal way to create more depth. But in this instance we're replacing a departing player and there really isn't anyone out there remotely good enough to replace him. So we either sign someone of lesser quality or change the formation to one up front. Either way we still need competition for Sturridge and Remy might be as good as we can get right now. I'm not excited by the prospect of Remy either, but I think our options are limited just because there aren't many top quality strikers available or even out there.
What are "bit players" for a club like ours? Playing weaker opposition league games, fa cup and league cup ties? covering for injuries in bigger league games and CL games? And expected to produce a winning individual and team performance in all those games? It's compete in every comp time folks, players for all seasons etc etc.....
I never said we should replace Suarez that's impossible since Real and Barca won't sell C.Ronaldo or Messi respectively. However, that doesn't mean we can't sign a top quality player still, even a top upcoming player. I actually think Remy is of similar quality to Studge TBH, but nor do I rate Studge as highly as most.
Sturridge is paid to score goals, he finished just outside the top ten in Europe last year, playing second fiddle to Suarez (he looked better when Suarez was banned). Since there's not many in that top ten we can actually buy..........who out of the rest would people prefer....do they have to be able to work on the same pitch as Sturridge a la Suarez or just compete for being the main man? http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/topscorer/topscorer14.htm
With the pot of money we've now got, there are plenty of strikers better than Studge that we could in theory get but perhaps wouldn't be the best way of spending money. Having said that, we seem to be keen on chucking money at things anyway so why not
He may have scored a lot but how many chances did he need to do it? Will he get many chances again or were most created by either Suarez himself or Suarez being in the side creating space for others? As many of you know, I don't like looking at stats, I use my eyes. Studge is good but he's not great, his finishing needs to improve a lot if he wants to be recognise as one of the top players in the world.
I know you hate stats, but his conversion rate was actually pretty damn good. Just thought I'd throw that out there to annoy you
Go on then, I'll play ball. Whats his chances to goals record like? I'm predicting at least five chances before he scores.
You could say that about most strikers....was it the guys around them or them doing it themselves... I'd agree with you about Stats but a striker has to score goals for the 3 points to happen...he did. He did it in matches with very few chances...take the United match...couldn't actually kick the ball due to injury, got very few chances and scored the one winning goal...... Otherwise we really should be targeting any 15 plus strikers from lower in the PL since they obviously didn't get half the chances Sturridge or messi or Suarez got..... Or question it another way....If BR had been stupid enough to insist it was feed the Sturridge rather than feed the Suarez would Suarez have got 31? Because Suarez chance to goal ratio still managed to be appalling....chances to goals is a stat too mind.....
Shots to goals: Suarez-17.1% Sturridge-21.2% Balotelli-9.2% Bony-14.8% I know these are obviously influenced by the amount of shots(and from stupid angles/distances) each player takes, but being slightly more fussy with shot selection isn't necessarily a bad thing. One in five was almost spot on by the way, it's just happens to be pretty good compared to a lot of other strikers.
I also criticised Suarez for this, I've had many a argument on here about whether or not (which he isn't) he is a antural goalscorer. I take you point about Studge but I'm talking about clear cut chances such as a one-on-one. A top striker should be scoring these almost every time, Studge doesn't.
It's not that long ago we were saying the same thing about Suarez. "How many chances does he need to score?"
So Studge is one in five then The only one I'm surprised with there is Balotelli although I haven't seen him (club level) since he left Man City. So what's the stats for a decent striker such as Aguero and RvP...?
I still do! 17.1% is a awful conversion rate for a player of his calibre. However, he creates that many chances he scores enough to plaster the cracks.
But does it not depend on how many chances are created? How the team is set up. I mean I'd agree with you if we set up like Chelsea and he only got those 3 chances a game. There's a risk he doesn't score at all then. And it wasn't a criticism of your opinion by the way...who do you believe on that list would do better with the chances Sturridge and yes Suarez got last year?
Balotelli's was shocking. He had something like 150 shots, scored 14 and 100 of those shots were long rangers. Wasteful. Aguero's is 19.7% RVP is 19.3%
Can't see the list now but Messi and C.Ronaldo are the obvious one, Aguero would too. I think the style of play and chances create hep to cover cracks tbh. Obviously, like others, I'm not bothered if it takes five chances for them to score if they are getting six or seven chances a game, its goals that matter. However, I grew up watching Rush, Fowler and then Owen at Liverpool, all of them would have blitzed the 31 goals Suarez got given the same chances!
