Conor Washington Vs Martyn Waghorn

[Superbladesman7]

Thought i’d have a look at their records (albeit from Wikipedia as I’m no Blades Analytics on twitter).

Interesting as I make Washington has 99 professional league goals and Waghorn 76 if I read it correctly.

Waghorn is also 2 years older. Okay around half of Conor’s goals came in his early years at St Ive’s but still not bad.

I feel this could be another Wilder masterstroke as a lot of us (myself included) were keen for us to spend a good fee and get Waghorn in probably to show we had a bit of cash and intent if nothing else.

Pros:
Free
Sound like similar type of players in getting around the pitch and pressing which should suit our system well if not necessarily ‘goalscorers’.
Bit more pace
1 year deal if it doesn’t work out.

Cons
...

Good work again Sir Chris!

 

[LondonBlade89]

Would be a pretty decent fight between the two as well, tbf. That's what I thought was being debated here anyway.

 

[mattbianco1]

Washington
45 League goals, 5 of which came for Newport in the Conference (is that professional?) He has a ratio of 0.21 goals per game and has played 213 games with 70 of those being off the bench.

He has scored 15 Championship goals in 92 apps (58 starts).

Waghorn
Slightly better goals ration of 0.27 per game. He has 76 league goals from 276 games (179 starts).

He has never played below Chamionship level. Unless you consider the SPL to be just that.

Waghorn is by far a much better striker.

But - Wilder has proved that he can make run of the mill players into great ones.

 

[Fanny magnet]

I can't get over the performances I saw waghorn put in for rangers ,he looked garbage
Didn't see him last season but I have a feeling Mick McCarthy got the best out of him and lampard won't

 

[Blade56]

20th October

 

[Eric Cartman]

On the back of last season it's a pretty stupid comparison. Also the interest of the two this summer... one went for £6mil or so, the other released from his contract.

 

[Blade56]

1 year deal if it doesn’t work out.

Cons

Con. If he turns out to be a gem he will have the pick of clubs and we will have to join the queue at the end of his contract

 

[Brian Blessed]

Thought i’d have a look at their records (albeit from Wikipedia as I’m no Blades Analytics on twitter).

Interesting as I make Washington has 99 professional league goals and Waghorn 76 if I read it correctly.

Waghorn is also 2 years older. Okay around half of Conor’s goals came in his early years at St Ive’s but still not bad.

I feel this could be another Wilder masterstroke as a lot of us (myself included) were keen for us to spend a good fee and get Waghorn in probably to show we had a bit of cash and intent if nothing else.

Pros:
Free
Sound like similar type of players in getting around the pitch and pressing which should suit our system well if not necessarily ‘goalscorers’.
Bit more pace
1 year deal if it doesn’t work out.

Cons
...

Good work again Sir Chris!

End of thread.

 

[blader]

Don’t really see any value in comparing the players. Waghorn is a very average player that went for too much, Washington is a very average player but at least he’s free!

I do think people are getting their knickers in a twist over not a lot here. CW is our 4th choice striker and probably won’t see much game time if the other 3 stay fit. He’s just a body that will provide a bit of depth.

To be honest, if we don’t have the finances to get a starting striker, we’re just as well signing a cheap 4th choice option anyway IMO.

 

[Danny_Boy]

20th October

That’s my birthday

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Waghorn is better.

No argument about it.

 

[alcoblade]

Thought i’d have a look at their records (albeit from Wikipedia as I’m no Blades Analytics on twitter).

Interesting as I make Washington has 99 professional league goals and Waghorn 76 if I read it correctly.

Waghorn is also 2 years older. Okay around half of Conor’s goals came in his early years at St Ive’s but still not bad.

I feel this could be another Wilder masterstroke as a lot of us (myself included) were keen for us to spend a good fee and get Waghorn in probably to show we had a bit of cash and intent if nothing else.

Pros:
Free
Sound like similar type of players in getting around the pitch and pressing which should suit our system well if not necessarily ‘goalscorers’.
Bit more pace
1 year deal if it doesn’t work out.

Cons
...

Good work again Sir Chris!

Good post, but you’ve missed the obvious and important Con;

His goal scoring record is poor / bang average.

Lots of potential upside, but that’s riding on Wilder’s skill, not current reality.

 

[alcoblade]

Washington
45 League goals, 5 of which came for Newport in the Conference (is that professional?) He has a ratio of 0.21 goals per game and has played 213 games with 70 of those being off the bench.

He has scored 15 Championship goals in 92 apps (58 starts).

Waghorn
Slightly better goals ration of 0.27 per game. He has 76 league goals from 276 games (179 starts).

He has never played below Chamionship level. Unless you consider the SPL to be just that.

Waghorn is by far a much better striker.

But - Wilder has proved that he can make run of the mill players into great ones.

I would consider that the SPL is below the Championship.

Your conclusion is probably right though.

 

[Rodley]

PRO

IN FUCKING WILDER WE TRUST

 

[Dnblade]

Washington
45 League goals, 5 of which came for Newport in the Conference (is that professional?) He has a ratio of 0.21 goals per game and has played 213 games with 70 of those being off the bench.

He has scored 15 Championship goals in 92 apps (58 starts).

Waghorn
Slightly better goals ration of 0.27 per game. He has 76 league goals from 276 games (179 starts).

He has never played below Chamionship level. Unless you consider the SPL to be just that.

Waghorn is by far a much better striker.

But - Wilder has proved that he can make run of the mill players into great ones.

Is there a stat for goals per minutes played MB?.. I would think Washington has had far less minutes on the pitch...often coming off the bench late on or subbed off.. I bet he hardly played a full 90 under Holloway.

 

[Danetheblade]

Washington and sharp.. that's a scary prospect in my opinion. Washington is much more pacey than anything we have. If he can find his Peterborough form. We've just got an absolute steal of a player. For fuck all! Let's not forget. This lad once went for 2.5 million. Hungry. Point to prove. Let's see what he's got before throwing him to the wolves.

 

[ElephantBlade]

I can't get over the performances I saw waghorn put in for rangers ,he looked garbage
Didn't see him last season but I have a feeling Mick McCarthy got the best out of him and lampard won't

I know what you mean, but Rangers have been awful for a while... I legit think I could have got a game at one point.

 

[DaveBassettsgoneonholiday]

Being as all bar one of you missed my only ever moment of genius on here on the other thread i'll put it here too.....
Cons in, not Waghorn
....... is an anagram of.....

 

[I should coco]

Waghorn is better.

No argument about it.

You missed out your usual 'FACT'.

Only your Pinchy quote footer saves you from being a complete and utter cockwomble.

 

[ben1987]

One was free and one was over 5 million. Hardly comparable.

 

[Eric Cartman]

People who keep talking about his ‘Peterborough form’ realise that was in League One - right?

 

[CaptainMorgans]

There is no comparison really. Recent form tells you that Waghorn scores 16 and assisted 11 in the Championship last season, whilst Washington struggled for a game at lowly QPR.

 

[derfblade.3]

That’s my birthday

 

[Nick Jansky]

People who keep talking about his ‘Peterborough form’ realise that was in League One - right?

We get it. Obviously a shit signing.

 

[Eric Cartman]

We get it. Obviously a shit signing.

That’s not the point I’m making. People keep saying ‘if he rediscovers his Pboro form’ etc - if he does that that’s bad news - we’ll be in League One.

We need him to step up a level from that.

 

[Ricky]

Washington on a free or Waghorn for £5m and daft wages?

Washington for me. He's younger, quicker and I think he'll score goals for us. He's not simply a 4th choice striker, he'll play plenty this season.

Released by QPR looks bad on paper but it's rarely black and white.

It's a great punt on a free transfer, I just wish we'd secured him for 2 or 3 years.

 

[bertieblade]

What’s to say that we have not got an option to extend his contract?
Would make sense for both parties as it gives him security if he performs and us a valuable asset.
He must also realise that if he does not perform he is on the lower league scrap heap. Assume all will be revealed in wilders interviews

 

[ucandomagic]

Conor Washington has the right initials.

Meanwhile Waghorn’s are the same as Woolford’s!

Subtle Magic Message

 

[Tom Bott]

There is no comparison really. Recent form tells you that Waghorn scores 16 and assisted 11 in the Championship last season, whilst Washington struggled for a game at lowly QPR.

Jordan Rhodes was bought for his previous form.

The only comparison is what happens this season.

 

[10-0 win]

Watched Washington for N Ireland vs Norway in euroqualifier 2016, scored and looked more than decent, my thoughts at the time, why don't we get players like him. He's actually very pacey and makes clever runs, strong and not without technical ability.He's played LW/RW aswell as central striker at QPR. So he's a versatile due to his strong runs. Waghorn is a static CF and hardly contributes to the overall play as Washington does.