Sterling in a Citeh Shirt

Screenshot would have been easier

 

I said in my comment the goals scored in the first season following signing were estimated per £1m spent N'Gog scored 3 in total.

 

Sorry, you've lost me there

 

I said that it used to be considered that to be thought of as value for money, a striker should score in his first season as many goals per £1m spent on him so e.g. Torres £20m was expected to get 20 goals. [he actually got 24 league goals, 33 in all comps so was value for money ..... obviously]

Bisc said N'Gog was good value then but based on the above is £1.5m for 3 goals good value ...... you decide

 

He cost 1m and scored 3 goals in first year so going by your theory he is 3x better than average

And even if e cost 1.5m then he's still above the 1 goal per mil theory that you yourself said was the benchmark.

 

I was getting the impression that you thought N'Gog wasn't value for money. Are you saying he was good value...? Because 3 goals for £1.5m is £0.5m per goal


PS...Rushie was phenomenal value for money based on that calculation

 

As you said 'a bargain'

 

Hey I was only using your benchmark to rate him....

 

I never subscribed to the £1m per goal = value for money theory - it was just something pundits used to go on about. Having said that, it wasn't a bad theory but it was also a theory that only fitted a certain period in football history because as you rightly say, how does Rush fit into that, similarly can we really expect Benteke to bag 32 goals this season? Back to N'Gog, I expected more goals but honestly he didn't get many games to prove himself so while I wouldn't say he was a bargain, maybe he was value for money.

 

I'd never heard of the theory tbh, nor is it something I'd subscribe to either. If you're a striker, you should be aiming for 20 goals (roughly 1 in 2). If you're an AM then you should be looking at between 10-15 goals. If you're a DM then you're not here for goals. B2B, about 5-10 goals. CBs and FBs can chip in but I see them the same as DMs. Basically, the transfer fee as no bearing on the return imo.

N'Gog was value for money purely based on how little we paid for him, never mind the fact we made a profit when we sold him again. Add the nineteen goals (nine in the league) from him and I fail to see how he can't be considered value for money.

That's not to say he was a quality player. There is a difference between being a good player and value for money.

 

I understood what you were getting at, jb.

 

Thanks mate, I'm not always sure it comes out on screen like it appears in my mind

RHC has the right idea, like those competitions on biscuit packets or whatever ... ''in 15 words or less say why ....'' premise being - keep it short and to the point

 

True, but there are severe communicative limits to an unpunctuated stream of expletives.

 

Very rarely are my outbursts devoid of punctuation. Like you, I pride myself on it

 

I wasn't referring to grammatical punctuation. I meant unpunctuated as in uninterrupted.

N.B. For some quaint reason my spellchecker doesn't like the word "unpunctuated".
Or "spellchecker", apparently. It wants me to punctuate it.
Stupid spell-checker.

 

#streamofconsciousness

 

So you're saying your inner monologue is an endless stream of invective?
That must be fun.

********************
Anyway, peeps. I'm off now for a couple of days. Will be back sometime after the game.
Have fun, and be nice to each other ( if those two things aren't mutually exclusive).
And to our team.

 

To be fair, he's been better than I expected. But he's not that good - his timing and choosing of runs is still very poor, and you can clearly see it's forced and doesn't come naturally to him.

But you're absolutely right though - it's the biggest load of nonsense I have come out with. After all, look at all the throughballs our AM's have played through to him. I'm guessing he has simply missed so many chances after being put clean through?

And again, you're absolutely right - just put a goal scorer in any team, any set up and expect him to score. That's how it works - I know, how about Barcelona start putting in high crosses into Messi and Suarez. They score goals so I'm sure they'll adapt to a style which is not natural to them.

 

So that's the strikers fault and not the AM player, or maybe even the way they've been told to play? Right oh....

If there were balls going into the area that he wasn't reading or making himself available for, then you could point the finger at him.

As it stands you quite simply can't. You got him wrong before he signed and you're still getting him wrong now. He's more than capable of getting on the end of balls played in behind and making intelligent runs, the fact that they haven't been arriving is not down to him.

 

Who are you tomming this weekend?