A light hearted aside to lift the gloom from last night. Well, for some of us anyway. It's bad news for RF/Valjing. RF, you're going to have to stop calling Andy Johnson our least successful striker ever. I've just checked, he's got 16 goals from 75 games (or 0.213 goals per game) compared to Steve Marlet's 11 from 54 (0.203 goals per game). Even if we leave aside the argument that you can't assess a striker's worth solely by goals scored - there's a large body of opinion that AJ has been really good for us in recent weeks - it's not even true that he's statistically the worst anymore. Sorry RF, you'll have to find a new stick to beat him with.
Captain,i wont disagree with your stats. But the facts are RH bougth AJ as he hoped a goalscoring CF,and paid for us, as a club, a small fortune what 10million pounds,and is reputed to be the highest paid club player.When you see the ability that most of our other players have,at a lot less cost,i still do not believe he is worth keeping,and to get what is being said 3m from WBA. But personally I dont think Roy would pay that much.
I wouldn't mind if AJ stays though I think a move to west brom would be beneficial for all parties. Though getting rid of salcido must take priority. Until last night, while I have consistently been constructively critical of him, I have now lost patience with him and feel genuinely insulted that the admission fee I pay when going to games or the merchandise I buy contributes to his wages. While I'm not really old enough to remember the pre Al-Fayed days of the club, I find it hard to believe that even then did we have players of salcido's standard. I know there's that hugely flawed argument that it takes foreigners time to settle into the premiership, but I have not seen one moment of evidence that salcido is getting close to adjusting, massive waste of space!!!
It's the basic lack of equipment that has always worried me about Salcido. Very right footed for a left back, too attack minded for a player who lacks the pace to recover, and poor positional sense as a defender. I really don't see that he offers much, whereas Pantsil, for his faults, is much the better player - obviously not on the left, but he's still had a poor deal this season compared to Salcido.
To be fair RF, AJs goal against Wolves has tipped the stats his way. I think, subject to who we bring in, we should entertain offers for AJ. If he is still here next season, I think he can do a job as a squad player, but we need a younger version of AJ to partner Bobby. I agree with you that he has never really delivered the goals that he was bought to score and that, considering what we paid for him, he has underachieved. I also think that he works hard for the team and contributes a lot more than the goals he does (or doesn't) score. If we take statistics out of the equation, he's been a much more successful signing than Marlet. And, indeed, much more successful than Kamara, whose goals per game ratio is much better.
I remember looking up the statistic earlier this year for much the same reason. I'm going straight from memory here (and at 49, that's risky business), but McBride had the best strike rate at almost .30. But who amongst our recent strikers was second best? You're going to love this: Diomansy Kamara - some of that was padding from thrashing Petersboro in a FA Cup game, but he was above Dempsey and Zamora as I recall - killed me to see it. Interestingly, Kamara has zero assists (but five goals) this year with the team - makes sense though. If you never pass, how can you get assists?
I agree with CM on Johnson. All depends on who we can bring in. We have to forget about the price-tag that brought AJ to Fulham. The fact that he cost ã10+ has as much to do with inflated transfer fees as it does AJ's ability, although he was a recent England international when we signed him. 0.213 goals a game works out at 8 goals a season if he played in every game. Not world-beating, but how much will it cost to sign the 15-20 goal striker we'd all like to have? Top scorers in the Prem this season are Berbatov (ã30m), Tevez (estimated ã47m), van Persie, and Darren Bent (ã24m). Andy Carroll (ã35m) isn't far behind. Other than van Persie, Odemwinge and Hernandez are the only ones who were picked up relatively cheaply by their clubs - even someone like Asamoah Gyan on 10 goals cost ã13m. All this suggests that we need to either break the bank to bring in a regular goalscorer, or try to unearth an undiscovered gem somewhere. The first option isn't good in the long-term, the second may or may not come off. Either way it may be surprisingly difficult to replace AJ with anyone who's likely to do a much better job. Incidentally - another stat I heard recently is that Eider Gudjohnsen has scored one goal in something like 50 competitive appearances so we may be waiting a while for his first Fulham goal!
Numbers don't tell the story well in football - baseball, yes, football, no. In football, Diomansy Kamara easily looks better on paper than Dickson Etuhu, but Etuhu's contribution to the game can't be easily quantified. There are no stats kept for breaking up plays and forcing bad passes, but Etuhu does that 20 times a game, and the value is priceless.
Fulhamish makes a good point. The way forward for a club of our size is to try to uncover some under-valued gems. Fortunately, that's something that Mark Hughes was always good at with Blackburn, so I'm optimistic for the summer transfer window. DR, I agree that football can't be measured entirely in stats, but comparing Kamara with Etuhu isn't comparing apples with apples. You can get stats to cover tackles made, passes made etc - I recall an interesting statistical comparison of Etuhu and Sidwell a little while ago on another site. The fact that there is one obvious statistic to cite with strikers means that sometimes we overlook the other things they do. Zamora's first season with us (4 goals in 41 games) is a prime example of that.
I agree numbers don't always tell the full story, although I do like the one about the striker that cost ã50m and scored one goal in 16 games!
Woy, I like the line about never getting assists if you don't make passes - never a truer word said in jest about Kamara.
The problem with AJ now is that he does not fit into our style of play. We have players who work better in a 4 - 5 -1 and AJ does not hold the ball up well enough. His scoring record is not good at all. However, he does a job for us. We lack pace up front and I think the way he has been used recently has been the only real way we can get the best out of him. To bring him on late in the game and run at defenders is his best strength. That said Danny Hoeson has been on the bench recently, I hope he can provide what AJ does and more.
We are evolving froggie, more attacking under MH, but I hope Monday was a warning that everything has to be built on a solid defence.
Rocky, I don't know about you, but I'm looking at Monday as a one-off. Schwartzer was responsible for two goals, Baird one. Hughes and Hangeland played like their water was spiked with Ruffies It was a perfect storm of ball watching and poor decision-making. I'll add, though, that Monday's catastrophe showed just how slow we are at the back. We already knew Salcido's a slug, but how many times did Liverpool get behind Chris Baird? Hughes and Hangeland are quick enough as center backs, but without Pantsil and Konchesky - both blessed with pace - we're vulnerable. -- reminds me of a joke: two slugs are headed home after a dinner out and their GPS tells them, "In one Meter, take a right." "Jeez," one slug says, "why tell us now when we don't turn for six hours?"
We've praised Bairdinho to the hilt this season, and quite rightly too. But Monday night was a reminder that he isn't a top class full back. No matter how honest and hard workig a pro he is, from time to time he is always going to get found out, as he was in the Europa League final. As well as he's done for us, we need replacement on both sides of the back four for next season.
