More Striker = More Goal

[S40BLADE]

All round we were the least creative team in the division last season regarding chance creation, shots on and off target. This needs to change and strikers are definitely not the first issue. We need a proper play maker and better forward play from our wide players. Also some pace and power to actually maintain somewhat of a counterattacking threat. Our spine is so incredibly strong but we NEED that bit of spice and flair added to our arsenal.

 

[CaptainMorgans]

Why are you going on the attack Chabuddy G, some people disagree with you. It's fine to have a different opinion...

 

[Chabuddy G]

Why are you going on the attack Chabuddy G, some people disagree with you. It's fine to have a different opinion...

On the attack? Bdumtshhh

People can disagree all they want, but in this case they’d just be wrong. We don’t create chances, how that can be argued is beyond me

 

[Chabuddy G]

I was clearly talking about the season after next not the preceding two.

Ah yeah clearly you were. Obviously.

 

[Chabuddy G]

You might be right in terms of cost, and I agree that we dont need to necessarily replace our starting strikers, rather replace the backups, like Clarke/Zivkovic/Robinson.


I don't judge our strikers on the chances they missed, I do expect them all (Mousset, McGoldrick & McBurnie specifically) to score more and generally be more clinicial and dangerous though. Every player in the 11 should be looking to improve on last season.

But wouldn’t you say they can only do that with much better service?

 

[CaptainMorgans]

On the attack? Bdumtshhh

People can disagree all they want, but in this case they’d just be wrong. We don’t create chances, how that can be argued is beyond me

It doesn't have to be as black & white as you're making it though.

Yes, we need to create more chances. But better strikers can help with that.

Does it not stand to reason that better strikers, probably will equal more goals?

I don't think anyone entirely disagrees with what you're saying. Just going about it in a bit of an odd way.

 

[Chabuddy G]

It doesn't have to be as black & white as you're making it though.

Yes, we need to create more chances. But better strikers can help with that.

Does it not stand to reason that better strikers, probably will equal more goals?

I don't think anyone entirely disagrees with what you're saying. Just going about it in a bit of an odd way.

Better strikers that create and score their own chances? I’m sure everyone wants one of those. How much do you think they’ll cost? Do you think we can afford it?


Sorry mate, don’t tell on me

 

[Webding]

I don’t worry too much about expected goals when judging a striker’s performance, I just expect them to fucking do something (xFDS). If they’re not scoring, then contribute, run the channels, batter the centre half, make chances, whatever. Ours usually don’t.

Which has led to the semi-ironic conclusion of the most wasteful forward being the one that gets a pass from me. The rest need to do a lot more next season.

 

[Drunk blade]

On the attack? Bdumtshhh

People can disagree all they want, but in this case they’d just be wrong. We don’t create chances, how that can be argued is beyond me

Come off it our strikers missed shed loads last season.. Mcgoldrick as good a player as he is missed a hatful of absolute sitters..

 

[Chabuddy G]

Come off it our strikers missed shed loads last season.. Mcgoldrick as good a player as he is missed a hatful of absolute sitters..

McGoldrick I’d give you. I don’t really see many for the others.

Shed loads? Tad exaggeration

 

[Kanye]

But wouldn’t you say they can only do that with much better service?

Yes and no.

I would hope that all 3 will have become better players, and, if presented with the exact same chances as last season, marginally improve their goal tallies and contributions in general.

However, if we want significant improvement, then yes, absolutely - we need to be creating better chances.

 

[Chabuddy G]

Yes and no.

I would hope that all 3 will have become better players, and, if presented with the exact same chances as last season, marginally improve their goal tallies and contributions in general.

However, if we want significant improvement, then yes, absolutely - we need to be creating better chances.

We’ll have to agree to disagree. I think McGoldrick apart the amount of chances they missed is par for the course for most PL strikers. Infact I’d say I’d expect them to miss more (and score more). But they can only do that with chances created.

I can count on 2 hands the chances McGoldrick, Mousset and Sharp missed. That shouldn’t be the case really.

 

[Isaw Joeshaw]

This is an interesting debate and there are valid points from the various angles within it .

However , one thing being overlooked as it always seems to be on this topic is the fact that our system only allows for 2 natural goalscoring / attacking players to be on the pitch at the same time which puts an extra burden on them.

All the high scoring teams in the league start the vast majority of games with at least 3 such players and sometimes 4 for the likes of City , Liverpool , Man U etc . Many of these are players who are not only capable of scoring themselves but are also able to open up defences and create opportunities for others ( Sterling , Martial etc.)

This approach gives them far more attacking options and variations than we have . It is perfectly understandable that in our first season back we adopted a cautious approach , but now that our defence has proved itself capable of handling most things thrown at it , perhaps it's time to look for a more expansive approach .

Given the paucity of strikers available who might be remotely within our price range / wage structure , I would not be at all worried to see us start the season with any 2 from McBurnie / Moose / Sharp up front with McG just behind in his natural role .

 

[HolmesfieldBlade]

that is a nonsense statement. The forwards collectively were 11 under on Xg. Better forwards would have converted those chances.

and it’s not more strikers For the sake of it. It’s better ones.

McGoldrick probably contributes to more than half of that under performed xG.

Love his build up play but you can’t miss that level of chances in the Premier League and get away with it.

 

[DeanLearner'sCat]

I want to see us try two #10's behind a lone striker. It does seem counter-intuitive to play with one less striker if you want to be more of an attacking threat, but I think we need a more creative midfield. Two AMs gives us an extra man in midfield and should help us keep the ball. Plus, they can drift wide and help protect the flanks defensively/help create overloads in attack. Atalanta have done this at times in Serie A, and they scored a shitload of goals last year.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Lots of chances in 45 mins against Dundee reserves, not many goals to show

I prefer the option of better strikers.

 

[Chabuddy G]

Lots of chances in 45 mins against Dundee reserves, not many goals to show

I prefer the option of better strikers.

Against Dundee reserves
In a pre season friendly
In atrocious conditions

 

[Houston_Blade]

Against Dundee reserves
In a pre season friendly
In atrocious conditions

But if more chances = more goals surely we’d score more in a pressure free game against a crap team?!

 

[Chabuddy G]

But if more chances = more goals surely we’d score more in a pressure free game against a crap team?!

Callum Robinson upfront with Billy Sharp. Our 3 first choice strikers weren't playing.

Don't judge things on pre season friendlies hahahahaha
Callum was absolutely banging them in last season, that went well

 

[Houston_Blade]

Callum Robinson upfront with Billy Sharp. Our 3 first choice strikers weren't playing.

Don't judge things on pre season friendlies hahahahaha
Callum was absolutely banging them in last season, that went well

My point yesterday was that we could look to move Sharp and Robinson on and get a couple in with a more clinical streak in the PL. You countered that with “More striker = more goals”.

But as you say, everyone else is wrong. As it’s an internet argument so you’ll stick to your guns no matter what now so we’ll move on.

 

[Chabuddy G]

My point yesterday was that we could look to move Sharp and Robinson on and get a couple in with a more clinical streak in the PL. You countered that with “More striker = more goals”.

But as you say, everyone else is wrong. As it’s an internet argument so you’ll stick to your guns no matter what now so we’ll move on.

We won't be looking to move Sharp on, he's just signed a new 2 year deal

 

[Houston_Blade]

We won't be looking to move Sharp on, he's just signed a new 2 year deal

Well we need to add more strikers then because the ones we’ve got won’t score enough goals, even with more chances.

 

[SteveBlade]

More striker = more striker

Better striker = more goal

Same striker = same goal

Worse striker = less goal

I still think that it works both ways. Having quality strikers constantly making runs and creating space makes those playing behind them look better. It's difficult to create too many chances if your strikers can't run, or in the case of Mousset, can only run for half a match at best.

 

[Chabuddy G]

More striker = more striker

Better striker = more goal

Same striker = same goal

Worse striker = less goal

I still think that it works both ways. Having quality strikers constantly making runs and creating space makes those playing behind them look better. It's difficult to create too many chances if your strikers can't run, or in the case of Mousset, can only run for half a match at best.

The strikers make plenty of runs they just aren’t spotted or the players choose not to play the pass. Lundstram, Stevens and Baldock were all particularly guilty of this last year.
It’s part of the high percentage chance creating game we try to play. Rarely shoot from outside the box or lump it in to the box. Truth is, we don’t create that many.

 

[Houston_Blade]

The strikers make plenty of runs they just aren’t spotted or the players choose not to play the pass. Lundstram, Stevens and Baldock were all particularly guilty of this last year.
It’s part of the high percentage chance creating game we try to play. Rarely shoot from outside the box or lump it in to the box. Truth is, we don’t create that many.

So is it “More midfielders and wingbacks that can spot the runs of our strikers = more goal”?

 

[Chabuddy G]

So is it “More midfielders and wingbacks that can spot the runs of our strikers = more goal”?

It’s ‘tweak the system to allow a touch more creativity and we’ll score more goals’

 

[Houston_Blade]

It’s ‘tweak the system to allow a touch more creativity and we’ll score more goals’

Ok, make sure you let Wilder know that we don’t need to sign anyone else. It will save us a fortune.

 

[Chabuddy G]

Ok, make sure you let Wilder know that we don’t need to sign anyone else. It will save us a fortune.

Who said anything about not signing anyone? I literally said it in the OP

 

[Chabuddy G]

That's how it works right?
Straight out of the Neil Warnock school of scoranomics

View attachment 89504

Let's become a little more expansive and sign a bit more creativity and see if the current batch are good enough shall we? I suspect if they weren't feeding off scraps in 25 or so games last season our goals scored column would be a fair bit higher.

Harry Kane and Robert Lewandowski would have struggled to reach double figures for us last season.

Buendia or Jed Wallace for me please Chris...

“The lads up top aren’t getting much service”

Well tickle me fucking pink Christopher...
Shame we didn’t just sign another striker, that would’ve solved everything.

Oh wait

 

[CaptainMorgans]

“The lads up top aren’t getting much service”

Well tickle me fucking pink Christopher...
Shame we didn’t just sign another striker, that would’ve solved everything.

Oh wait

I was very much "team Buendia." Thought it was more important to get service up to the strikers we had than to improve the strikers. However, the movement of our lads at the top of the pitch - Brewster in particular, has been diabolical. 5 touches?