It was a trick question, the correct answer was Koren. Fryatt 8 goals in 22 games - 36 shots on target, 9 shots off target, 1 hit woodwork. Mclean 3 goals in 19 games - 16 shots on target, 20 shots off target, 2 hit woodwork. Fryatt gets his shots on target, Mclean doesn't, Fryatt has a great first touch and ball control, Mclean doesn't, Fryatt scores way more goals, so I'll throw the question back to you, what evidence do you have that he isn't by far the better player? (you can forget assists, as neither of them have any to speak of this season)
You actually summed it up beautifully yourself, the correct answer is Koren. He is a much better finisher than either of the other two. My point is nothing to do with McLean really, I think he is similar to Fryatt in that he works hard but achieves little, but I'm not comparing or saying who is a better player. I do think McLean being able to play on the wing means I wouldn't drop him if we signed a new striker, I'd drop Matty instead. But really this isn't about McLean. Fryatt may get his shots on target but what use is that? Off target is a goal kick on target means the goalie has it in his hands, not much difference unless he can actually beat the 'keeper now and again. Fryatt's shots are nearly all from very close range and with no defenders to beat, I've barely if ever seen him show the confidence to shoot from a more difficult position, bearing that in mind you'd expect him to gets most of his shots on target. The fact he never manages to beat the keeper with such simple shots, and on such a regular basis makes me think he is a poor finisher. I'm going to spin this and ask you, what makes you describe him as 'quality'? Is it the finishing, the needing a hundred touches before deciding what to do with the ball, the moody and defeatist attitude he seems to have or the turning like a tank? Or is it (more likely) simply the fact that he is Fryatt and you decided long ago that he would be good?
I'm not for one minute disputing the fact that Fryatt should have finished more of the chances he's had, I'm merely pointing out that he's well over twice as likely to finish them as Mclean, hence he should be on the pitch ahead of him. Despite the missed chances, Fryatt is still one the league top goal scorers, that's because he gets himself in far better positions and generally gets his shots on target. It's a no brainer for me and I'm pretty sure for Nick too.
Fryatt is a finisher, you can tell when he gets the ball, he instinctively knows where the goal is, McClean on the other hand is not, he is a workhorse. If/when we get another striker in it will be McClean dropping to the bench, the player we bring in will be hard working and moblie.
There is no debate as far as I'm concerned. Fryatt > Mclean Don't take this the wrong way because Aaron is probably my favourite player but there is no question that Matty is the better striker. Granted he takes way too many touches at times but his all round contribution to the team is first class and we would be half the team without him. If you took Mclean's work rate out of the equation then everybody would be slagging him off. I always think that if he was another foot taller and practiced his touch some more then he would be immense. Strangely I do think they complement each other quite well though, but if it came to replacing one of them then it would be Mclean who was dropped to the bench.
He does get in some very good positions (though it's usually offside, something that Mark Cullen never gets away with to the extent Fryatt does) but what's the point if he misses the chance? And yes he gets them on target but from so close that is below the minimum expectations, most of Matty's chances are nailed on goals for any decent finisher. Overall he's OK for us, but mainly because of the way he gets himself about the pitch and links up, but if you want someone to finish the moves off, Fryatt isn't the man.
