Is he that bad? I think he's been decent for us. Better than what Kos was when he first arrived on the scene. Give him time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippy
Printable View
Is he that bad? I think he's been decent for us. Better than what Kos was when he first arrived on the scene. Give him time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippy
Aubameyang missed some great chances against Bayern last Saturday. Like 2 or 3.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Henry was called a bottler for his misses in big matches for us.
It's just not a real thing. The diffference between top class strikers and everyone else is how many opportunities they get.
Kos waaaay better than Mustafi is now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Mustafi looks better than Vermaelen, fwiw. I think he will develop into a great centerback but we fans need to let him get there first instead of just saying he is.
I don't get how you can say it's not a real thing, surely a striker is defined by more than just what chances he creates.Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermind84
Cavani even if you are purely showcasing the two games against us, missed chances that cost his side a win in both games....it's as simple as that that was the difference between PSG winning and not winning both fixtures.
Now we all criticise Giroud because of chances he misses, and more so especially when he starts he drops into midfield and shows no mobility so it reduces the chances created for him. Now Cavani is an improvement on that because he makes fabulous runs and his movement totally bewitches defenders but ultimately what use is it if he's going to fluff chances like that. Giroud misses chances for sure, but to be fair on Giroud even he has not missed that many clear cut chances in a game (of course that's partly because he hasn't made himself available for said chances)
It's not a real thing. It's one of the ways pundits have mislead us about understanding of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
Like I said before, most strikers tend to convert around 20-25 percent of their chances. Goals in itself are a matter of luck. They are freak occurance that happen in a match. It's why Jonathan Wilson famously said goals are overrated. It's not diminishing the importance of goals, but looking only at goals tends to diminish the process that less to the goal. Özil is a special player because he creates chances at an absurd clip. Those chances lead to opportunities on goals which would hopefully lead to the freak occurance of a goal. The more chances you have at a goal, the greater the chances of that freak occurance taking place.
Strikers like Cavani missing a boatload of chances are frustrating to see, but we should be more frustrated at the striker who doesn't get a single shot on goal in a match. That's why most of us are complaining about only getting 3 shots on goal the last 180 minutes Arsenal have played. That's pathetic. I'd rather have Cavani missing a lot of chances but still getting a goal than what we are getting now because the we will regress back to the mean eventually.
Also before this hot streak of Giroud, he was converting something like 2 goals in his prior 25 shots. That's pathetic.
The problem with that argument is that you are conflating quantity and quality of chancesQuote:
Originally Posted by mastermind84
If Cavani had four or five reasonable chances to score and missed four and scored one, than yes what you are saying would carry some weight
In both Paris and at the Emirates, the chances Cavani missed were actually far easier than the ones he scored
In Paris he rounded Ospina and had an open goal only to find the side netting, he was clean through on goal a number of times
That after his first minute header he missed all of these not just decent chances but glaring chances cannot be chalked up to statistics
The same in London, the goal he scored was actually very good in that he ghosted into the box and was picked up by no-one, but again clean through on goal....an absolute free header and he misses both.
That's a problem and if we are being honest the two Arsenal games are not outliers, i remember the ridiculous amount of chances he missed against Chelsea in 13/14 quarter finals at Stamford Bridge just one of which taken would have taken PSG through to the semis but instead Chelsea punished that profligacy and scored the second goal and went through instead.
It's a factor but not the difference between top class. Was Adebayor in that elite bracket? He'd often carve out a lot of chances. I disagree on this one. Some of the best strikers in football would have quiet games but bury that one chance they had in the dying moments of the game. That's the mark of an elite striker. I think what your describing about chances comes down to good athleticism and that's different to actually being a good striker. Put Walcott up front and he'll get chances.Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermind84
As for Kos...I'm don't mean now, I mean his first couple of seasons. He wasn't very good.
Yep pretty much, and aside from his terrifying pace and his amazing technical ability.....this is what made Henry a great strikerQuote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Cavani's runs and the way his movement bamboozles defenders is pretty impressive, but if he's creating these amazing chances for himself that he's not finishing than what's the point.
Yep. It’s losing sight of the purpose of a striker. We rarely see real technicians in that position these days. Ronaldo really changed what it meant to be a striker when he arrived on the scene. The Real Ronaldo. He could dribble like a winger but score like a striker and he’d drop deep. It was the same for Henry. We can’t dismiss the striking element as just pure luck. If that were the case, we’d be able to get away with Sanogo or Gervinho playing up front when Wenger tried it some years back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
I'm not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
The fact that Cavani is getting good chances shows his quality.
If he was taking four shots from 40 yards out, then I wouldn't say a good word. Getting those chances show he has quality.
Also, and what my main point is, how often do you see strikers convert their only chance? It's easier to remember singular moments and forget a)consistency b)when they miss on that single moment.
I'm not saying Cavani is in the Suarez, Auba, Lewandowski, Aguero, or even Costa class.
What I am saying is that his performances over these two legs were elite.
They weren't elite because he missed a lot of sitters!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermind84
His movement is elite, I won't argue with that but his finishing leaves a lot to be desired...it wasn't a one-off either, he's a very patchy finisher, needs at least 5 or 6 clear cut chances before he buries one.
If he was leading the line for us missing the chances he does this place would be in meltdown!
He's like a slightly upgraded version of Giroud with pace.
What I am saying to you is that the chances he is creating are totally irrelevant because he's not taking themQuote:
Originally Posted by mastermind84
When you create the chances to score that any half decent striker should be taking and Cavani is routinely missing them, that's the problem
A top striker has no business missing the chances Cavani has missed and that they are good chances that he's created for himself pale into insignificance when they are numerous chances he has failed to convert.
And in both games it has cost PSG Wins they should have got
I'm glad it's not just me who sees how ridiculous the argument being made isQuote:
Originally Posted by selassie
It’s an odd argument because Adebayor would often divide opinion on here. I know MM is no fan of Walcott up front either and he’s had games where he’s had loads of chances to score but he never gets this sort of praise. It’s an odd argument. Mobility is definitely important and he’d be an upgrade on Giroud in that department but I’m not so sure about everything else. Giroud’s biggest flaw is his lack of pace. I think his overall finishing has improved and now it’s the lack of movement that’s really killing us.Quote:
Originally Posted by selassie
You're definitely not alone on this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
Even your compliments are back handed :sulk:Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Yep, I don't get it either Herbs!Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
Yep totally agree P'n'G. :good:Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
:lol: That came out wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbert_Chapman's_Zombie
But going off what MM has said, does that mean Giroud's performance against Monaco was a goal short of an elite performance?
If you find yourself in front of goal that many times, yes it was a strong performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Elite woulda been finishing one of those chances. Cavani actually finished one yesterday.
I think what this comes down too is I appreciate the process and result. A lot of you only care for the result.
Most people appreciate both. You don't have to look too far to find my arguments on why I thought Theo and Sanchez were more suited up front for us over Giroud. Pace and movement would create more opportunities on goal. You've said neither were suited to play up front when we've had this debate in the past so not sure how you can conclude the above.Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermind84
Theo isn't suited to play up topQuote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
If you go back, I was one of the first to advocate for Sanchez playing center forward while a few shouted me down.
My issue with Sanchez is that he chases the ball, which he still does. The last match he played for Chile is the way I always want Sanchez to play center fired for us.
Strikers getting into positions to take on good chances and finishing at a 25% clip>>>> those who score memorable goals but are nonexistent the rest of the match.
We may have both agreed on Sanchez being able to play up front last year but since the season kicked off you've kept saying he lacked the intelligence to play there.Quote:
Originally Posted by mastermind84
Why isn't Theo suited up front? I hear your point about the importance of a striker being able to get into a good position to score which is why a couple of seasons back I argued we should be playing Walcott up front when most on here backed Welbeck because of his build and pace. The problem I had with Welbeck, despite looking the part, we hardly created any chances with him up top. We might as well have been playing Bif up front because we looked the same in terms of approach. Walcott has a different effect on the team when playing up top and if he were played there throughout the whole of last season and if he could have stayed fit, I'm positive Ozil would have broke that assist record.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Not being funny and everything, but who is Welbeck?
:lol: Danny Welbeck.
Dan-Dannny Welbeck, oh I remember him...I think:unsure:Quote:
Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory