Well, first of all, I don't think Rhodes is "seemingly in his prime" as you put it. In fact, he's "seemingly not in his prime".
This comment was based upon his age, 27 and the fact that he's now a developed player with experience rather than just a young unknown. Although i accept that nowadays, in England we seem to have top strikers burst onto the scene looking exciting, with pace and scoring goals, by the time they're 26-29 they're finished - Wallcott, Sturridge, Rooney to name a few.
However, the hugely inflated transfer fees for Rhodes show that teams think he is an "in his prime" striker
In his third coming Billy has made a great contribution to the team in terms of goals. I don't think his general play is particularly good tbh. He does a few things occasionally, like holding off opponents and tussling for the ball, very well - but a lot of the time he isn't actually contributing much to the game. Some fans will say that's because he's not getting the service - maybe so, sometimes, but I don't think he is exactly tearing defenders a new one every week or popping up all over the place and causing defences to panic when he's got the ball. What he does have is a remarkable instinct for being in the right place at the right time and putting the ball in the net. And that's why he's the first name on the team sheet every week. Because we've not got anyone else who can do that consistently.
Got to disagree with this. Billy is an excellent player, sometimes i don't think his finishing is what it should be but he does a lot of work up front, pulling defenders wide, creating space for other strikers/ midfielders/ wing backs. Last season, frustratingly he spent a lot of time out wide, hunting for the ball, because he didn't have the service. This season he's had much better service and his wide runs have been unselfish, too much at times, to create space for other players to get into the box.
During this spell with us he's often played the lone striker or target man with another faster player alongside him. He's realised during his career that he's not blessed with pace, so worked on his physicality and i think we have a better striker for it. Had he done this a few years ago, i'd hazard that he'd have scored a lot more goals for the teams he's played for and probably spent more time in the Premier League.
Tussling for the ball is not something he's really going to get a lot of joy from though, against better or experienced defenders. Noticably away at Chesterfield, he ended up out wide in the second half, but this was because up against Evert, he got nothing, so he went out wide and it changed the game, but it allowed for Clarke to thrive too - with power and pace through the middle.
I think the downsides to his game are his pace over anything more than a couple of yards, his long range striking and his finishing.
Long range striking - this is probably more to do with the fact that he's often been the target man, so played with his back to goal or he's been out wide 'hunting', but during this very successful season, he's not had that many goals from distance, just the one v Shrewsbury away (i think). Its not a major criticism, but more of an observation as most of his goals come from 12 yards, where he's excellent.
Finishing - I know that this is harsh, perhaps very harsh, but he misses a lot of chances. Ironically in games where he has few chances he takes them and you know you can rely on him to put his chances away... However, in games where we get a lot of chances in the box, he can often miss simple opportunities. Again, its very harsh.
Rhodes has a better goal scoring record, has generated massive transfer fees, but what you get with Billy seems to be far more for the team than with Rhodes.
