Alexandre Lacazette

[Brwned]

From whoscored: 26 goals, 6 assist, 2 dribbles per games and approx 1,6 key passes per game.

And still not even an option, cause he dont suit LvGs style...

We need a proper #9 and Lacazette is not that player.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

We need a proper #9 and Lacazette is not that player.

What kind of striker is he? Anyone he is similar to?

 

[fatboy]

It's more ideal to have good quality in place that needs bedding in than it does to have way lower quality (and quantity) than what is needed.

Signing a right back is needed as long as Rafael isn't trusted and can't stay out of the physio room. Valencia is neither a right-back nor a winger anymore.

We might keep Valdes, meaning that he has been training with the players for quite some time and he has played under Van Gaal before, not a big change except for the very big drop in quality.

We need a CB, we have 2 injury-prone first-third choices whom neither are top-quality (yet), and behind them we have Blackett who is far from ready for even a backup spot, McNair who is a good backup and Evans who is a crawling dissaster. We definitely need a CB of top quality.

We currently have an aging Carrick who is also gotten more injuries, he is a key-player who will need replacing, either by a backup to Blind or a top-quality player. Having only one player to fill in for Carrick here is a issue. (Personally I don't think we need 2 midfielders, we need 1 and could get away with bedding in Pereira)

Depay is already signed, and though it on paper might not have been needed, he is a top talent and with Young aging, Di Maria not settling in (or deemed a winger for LvG yet) and Valencia pretending to be a right-back we only have Januzaj behind them who is more miss than hit.

With the system more set, Depay offering goals from the left, less injury issues and a proper defense and backup for Carrick, our attacking lineup will be fine without a striker, even if it ends up with us having Rooney, Chicharito and Keane as our alternatives.
Of course I'd love to add another striker, but failing to do so won't be a big issue if we can get a better platform for them to play on.

I get that you are worried about the amount of players that are potentially coming in, but the issue would be much bigger if we had to rely on a back-line of Blind, Blackett, Evans and Valencia, with a midfield where Herrera is our best defensive-contributor (and creator).

I've no doubt I'm getting the players we need. But there seems to be no telling who's going to get his philosophy quickly and who's not. On paper we should be more "balanced", but no guarantee we'll click.

It took us a good 30 games last season before we hit out stride. Momentarily. And looks like we'll have more new players to bed in than the last time.

 

[bucky]

We need a proper #9 and Lacazette is not that player.

Why isn't he a proper #9?

 

[andersj]

It makes sense for van Gaal to not buy a player he thinks isn't suited for his style of play. I don't know much at all about Lacazette but van Gaal knows what qualities he wants from his strikers, he's not changing that for anyone. If Lacazette is great at dribbling and finishing, but can't hold up the ball and stop dropping deep which van Gaal wants do we get much use out of him? We'd be wasting him and would be better off with someone else. (this is hypothetical- I can't judge Lacazette myself).

Depay is a complete goalscoring forward, he fits the profile of a winger for van Gaal.

There are pros and cons with all managers, with LvG the pros (for me) outweigh the cons. But this is a huge con. Fergusons ability to utilise different type of players ability was vital to his success.

He made totally different strikers like Cole, Sheringham, Hughes, Solskjær, Nistelrooy, Hernandez and RvP look adept. Sometimes in the same season.

At the moment we lack players who gives us penetration. It results in "slow-moving zombie football". That was part of the problem in Bayern. Despite having Ribery and Robben. Man Utd lack a Ribery or a Robben. We have Depay, but LvG pleads us to be patient with the kid. (LvG probably misjudged AdM and thought he could do a similar job.) In my opinion Lacazette would provide a lot of the abilities our team lack today, specially in terms of penetration, taking on defenders and running behind them.

I also think that a target/linkup striker will struggle without players who provide this type of threat for him. Wingers/strikers that makes it difficult for the opponent to put their defence higher up the pitch. Just ask RvP how important Walcott, or even Valencia, was to him.

My predicition is that if Louis van Gaal fail to succeed with a striker, he will fail as a Man Utd-manager. But his biggest worry in short term should be to find players who can give the team penetration in the last third of the pitch.

 

[Brwned]

What kind of striker is he? Anyone he is similar to?

He does have some similarities to a young Benzema without the same raw power. Very mobile, likes to drift all over the pitch, selfless on the ball, gets involved in the tippy tappy football, that sort of thing. I think he'd be perfect in a fluid strike partnership alongside Sturridge for example, or even alongside Giroud like in the last game I saw for France, but I'm not convinced he'd be a great option as the lone striker for a team like us. His hold-up play isn't one of his strengths.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

He does have some similarities to a young Benzema without the same raw power. Very mobile, likes to drift all over the pitch, selfless on the ball, gets involved in the tippy tappy football, that sort of thing. I think he'd be perfect in a fluid strike partnership alongside Sturridge for example, or even alongside Giroud like in the last game I saw for France, but I'm not convinced he'd be a great option as the lone striker for a team like us. His hold-up play isn't one of his strengths.

Benzema does perform very well in a 433 as the central striker though. Could you see him develop that part of his game?

 

[Roman Bellic]

What are his flaws? because most comments about him on here are positive..

 

[Invictus]

What are his flaws? because most comments about him on here are positive..

1. Does not hold the ball up exceptionally well, which indicates that he's not quite ready to be the focal point of attack ala Kluivert or Van Persie or even Olic. He's more suited to a dual striker role where his dynamism comes to the forefront and he can link-up with a similar kind of forward. If Van Gaal were more flexible though (highly unlikely), he could form a neat little partnership with Memphis.

2. Is quite shifty, fluid and deceptively strong, but of average height and loses a lot of headed chances or muffed clearances - which kind of goes against the grain according to Van Gaal. Because decent if not great aerial ability a kind of prerequisite for his strikers.

3. Can become overly emotional and has flashes of temper (eg. he accumulated 3 yellow cards in the last 7 games for Lyon) which adversely affects his decision making on the pitch at times. Strikers need to maintain the composure because under Van Gaal they might touch the ball only 10 or 15 times per match, and have only 1 or 2 goalscoring opportunities. That necessitates 110% concentration at all times, and they can't be wasteful.

4. Can he work within the confines of a rigid tactical framework ? Some of his best performances have come with him drifting in and out of the the 'No. 9' position at Lyon with Fekir and co. Underrated factor but a lot of players (even some exceptional ones) just can't handle the level of detail forced upon them under Louis whose system can even minimize their natural talents.

5. To be fair this applies to almost every import - not tested in a big league (Ligue 1 is Tier 2 at best), and doesn't have a very good record in European club competitions, and that is not a trivial matter IMO, although it does vary from person to person. A lot of players who excelled in smaller leagues can fail to translate in the Premier League, Bundesliga or La Liga, especially when it comes to adjusting to a club like United, then you have to rely on projection rather than some form of concrete evidence.

 

[Roman Bellic]

1. Does not hold the ball up exceptionally well, which indicates that he's not quite ready to be the focal point of attack ala Kluivert or Van Persie or even Olic. He's more suited to a dual striker role where his dynamism comes to the forefront and he can link-up with a similar kind of forward. If Van Gaal were more flexible though (highly unlikely), he could form a neat little partnership with Memphis.

2. Is quite shifty, fluid and deceptively strong, but of average height and loses a lot of headed chances or muffed clearances - which kind of goes against the grain according to Van Gaal. Because decent if not great aerial ability a kind of prerequisite for his strikers.

3. Can become overly emotional and has flashes of temper (eg. he accumulated 3 yellow cards in the last 7 games for Lyon) which adversely affects his decision making on the pitch at times. Strikers need to maintain the composure because under Van Gaal they might touch the ball only 10 or 15 times per match, and have only 1 or 2 goalscoring opportunities. That necessitates 110% concentration at all times, and they can't be wasteful.

4. Can he work within the confines of a rigid tactical framework ? Some of his best performances have come with him drifting in and out of the the 'No. 9' position at Lyon with Fekir and co. Underrated factor but a lot of players (even some exceptional ones) just can't handle the level of detail forced upon them under Louis whose system can even minimize their natural talents.

5. To be fair this applies to almost every import - not tested in a big league (Ligue 1 is Tier 2 at best), and doesn't have a very good record in European club competitions, and that is not a trivial matter IMO, although it does vary from person to person. A lot of players who excelled in smaller leagues can fail to translate in the Premier League, Bundesliga or La Liga, especially when it comes to adjusting to a club like United, then you have to rely on projection rather than some form of concrete evidence.

This is great thanks, its kind of refreshing to get an accurate analysis for once, instead of the usual "Lacazette is definitely United quality" comments based off of youtube clips.

I also read your analysis on Benteke and they both seem like solid players with plenty of room for improvement.

 

[sully1]

What kind of striker is he? Anyone he is similar to?

He's more of a wide forward if you ask me or even a number 10, very similar game to a young Rooney and current player id compare him to is Hulk

 

[Roman Bellic]

He's more of a wide forward if you ask me or even a number 10, very similar game to a young Rooney and current player id compare him to is Hulk

Pretty much, he seems to thrive when he is given lots of space...just like Hulk, something the EPL doesn't offer.

 

[NL Max]

@Invictus

I haven't seen much of Lacazette at all, but your description of his weak points pretty much rules him out as a van Gaal striker. He might have other qualities like dribbling and multifunctionality but if he can't dramatically improve on those mentioned points which are more important I can't see van Gaal going for him. He would be asked to play a game which isn't suited to him, similar to Falcao last season. His ability to play as a winger wouldn't really improve his sights of gametime much either as we don't lack numbers out wide (ofcourse he could keep his spot there with good performances).

 

[Invictus]

@Invictus

I haven't seen much of Lacazette at all, but your description of his weak points pretty much rules him out as a van Gaal striker. He might have other qualities like dribbling and multifunctionality but if he can't dramatically improve on those mentioned points which are more important I can't see van Gaal going for him. He would be asked to play a game which isn't suited to him, similar to Falcao last season. His ability to play as a winger wouldn't really improve his sights of gametime much either as we don't lack numbers out wide (ofcourse he could keep his spot there with good performances).

Yep, that's the impression I got from watching Lacazette too. For all the talk of a dearth of quality in central defensive position throughout Europe, the current market for strikers (specifically classic #9s) throws up a minor conundrum. The established ones are already at big clubs and unlikely to move - Lewandowski, Benzema, maybe even Cavani and so forth. From the younger lot, there were/ are some players with genuine talent in Lacazette, Vietto (even though he signed for Atletico), Paco, Dybala but none of them are ideally suited to Van Gaal's vision, which effectively slashes down our list of targets by half.

From the others that might be available and can grow into prototypical Van Gaal #9s, Kane is quality but will cost an eye-watering amount of money and doesn't have a lot of experience, Morata is unlikely to move from Juventus, and the likes Milik, Berardi, and Mitrovic are still quite raw. In a sense Mourinho and Chelsea got really lucky last season, because there's no Diego Costa type of proven (relatively) striker available in the market who can come in and start from day 1 at a high level. Someone like that would have been an almost perfect fit profile wise for United under Van Gaal given his tactical intelligence, workrate, stature, hold up ability and strike rate.

 

[Rozay]

@Invictus

I haven't seen much of Lacazette at all, but your description of his weak points pretty much rules him out as a van Gaal striker. He might have other qualities like dribbling and multifunctionality but if he can't dramatically improve on those mentioned points which are more important I can't see van Gaal going for him. He would be asked to play a game which isn't suited to him, similar to Falcao last season. His ability to play as a winger wouldn't really improve his sights of gametime much either as we don't lack numbers out wide (ofcourse he could keep his spot there with good performances).

Wayne Rooney is not good at the things you mention either, and is a similar style to Lacazette perhaps.

 

[IhabX7]

Why isn't he a proper #9?

Because he can do things other than score, obviously.

 

[Ringo 07]

Can't see it happening....I think one of Benteke Sakho or berahino will be the answer for 1 season at least

 

[OGkush]

not gonna give up until the end of the window, however unlikely it may seem. I just feel the move would make a lot of sense, though given the type of strikers we seem to be linked with doesn't fill me with much confidence.

 

[Roman Bellic]

not gonna give up until the end of the window, however unlikely it may seem. I just feel the move would make a lot of sense, though given the type of strikers we seem to be linked with doesn't fill me with much confidence.

Why would it make a lot of sense?

 

[Ødegaard]

Has he signed yet?
Whats taking so long, woody?

 

[IwatUwat]

Lacazette or Benteke are they similar who would people want more?

Havent seen Lacazette play, on what I've read he sounds great but dunno if one season wonder, or the real deal. Is he better than Benteke (similar price prem proven?)

Does he have a higher potential, from what I've read this would be one of the benefits, that his top level could be better still.

 

[crimsonife]

Lacazette or Benteke are they similar who would people want more?

Havent seen Lacazette play, on what I've read he sounds great but dunno if one season wonder, or the real deal. Is he better than Benteke (similar price prem proven?)

Does he have a higher potential, from what I've read this would be one of the benefits, that his top level could be better still.

Completely different in style. Lacazette is less physical, with a smaller build and is very quick. Benteke relies on his powerful frame to barge through defenders and score headers so they're totally opposite.

Pretty much everyone would want Lacazette over Benteke at this point, last season Benteke only caught fire later on. Lacazette has the higher potential to become one of the best. Can't see the move happening though, not much interest shown from us so far.

 

[OGkush]

Why would it make a lot of sense?

cause he's young, showing steady improvement, is versatile enough to be able to play more than just the striker role, wouldn't command a starting place from the off, but would be more than capable of holding his own when asked to lead the line, and would get minutes either way without causing much disruption.
Plus personaly I think we could use a type of striker that he is, and there aren't many around, even less of a high caliber and even less presumably available.

 

[Roman Bellic]

cause he's young, showing steady improvement, is versatile enough to be able to play more than just the striker role, wouldn't command a starting place, but would be more than capable of holding his own when asked to lead the line, and would get minutes either way without causing much disruption.
Plus personaly I think we could use a type of striker that he is, and there aren't many around, even less of a high caliber and even less presumably available.

Heard he was overly emotional with a temper doesn't seem like the type of guy who would want to play second fiddle, but i agree with everything you said about his positive attributes, he is a fine striker.

 

[JPRouve]

Heard he was overly emotional with a temper doesn't seem like the type of guy who would want to play second fiddle, but i agree with everything you said about his positive attributes, he is a fine striker.

Lacazette? By french or dutch standards he is an angel, no particular temper.

 

[Roman Bellic]

Lacazette? By french or dutch standards he is an angel, no particular temper.

Oh thats fine then, although i think i read about him being overly emotional somewhere on this thread.

 

[JPRouve]

Oh thats fine then, although i think i read about him being overly emotional somewhere on this thread.

It depends on what they mean.

 

[Roman Bellic]

It depends on what they mean.

3. Can become overly emotional and has flashes of temper (eg. he accumulated 3 yellow cards in the last 7 games for Lyon) which adversely affects his decision making on the pitch at times. Strikers need to maintain the composure because under Van Gaal they might touch the ball only 10 or 15 times per match, and have only 1 or 2 goalscoring opportunities. That necessitates 110% concentration at all times, and they can't be wasteful.

The wise one broke it down.

 

[JPRouve]

The wise one broke it down.

In that context, yes. He can be 'intense' but nothing particularly worrying.

 

[Robbie Boy]

Have we even been properly linked with him yet? I mean other then some tenuous links, there has been nothing concrete.

 

[kouroux]

He's absolutely fine when it comes to controlling his emotions.

 

[Roman Bellic]

Have we even been properly linked with him yet? I mean other then some tenuous links, there has been nothing concrete.

Nope, but its still July.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

Have we even been properly linked with him yet? I mean other then some tenuous links, there has been nothing concrete.

No don't think so - its just a signing that would make sense. Mind you, didn't the Schneiderlin thread start out that way?

 

[Roman Bellic]

No don't think so - its just a signing that would make sense. Mind you, didn't the Schneiderlin thread start out that way?

Woody signed Falcao without any prior links.

 

[Lash]

Was this not mentioned though? He's probably a stick on for Arse, as much as i'd like to see him here.

Edit: anyone who cant see tweets:

Alexandre Lacazette favourites tweet saying he's joining Arsenal amid growing rumours: http://metro.co.uk/2015/07/12/transfer-hint-alexandre-lacazette-favourites-arsenal-move-tweet-5291689/ …

 

[Robbie Boy]

No don't think so - its just a signing that would make sense. Mind you, didn't the Schneiderlin thread start out that way?

Woody signed Falcao without any prior links.

Just as I thought alright. No there doesn't have to be concrete links but I just feel there has been nothing in this one whatsoever. I can't really comment on the player as I've never seen him live.

 

[AngeloHenriquez]

He should be our next signing, dont think hed cost the world either..

 

[bucky]

Was this not mentioned though? He's probably a stick on for Arse, as much as i'd like to see him here.

Edit: anyone who cant see tweets:

Alexandre Lacazette favourites tweet saying he's joining Arsenal amid growing rumours: http://metro.co.uk/2015/07/12/transfer-hint-alexandre-lacazette-favourites-arsenal-move-tweet-5291689/ …

Would honestly not see the point of him joining Arsenal and they already have that kind of forward at the club with Walcott. Sure, he's been good in the French league, but so was Giroud and it's not given that he'd be an improvement over Giroud.

 

[Lash]

Would honestly not see the point of him joining Arsenal and they already have that kind of forward at the club with Walcott. Sure, he's been good in the French league, but so was Giroud and it's not given that he'd be an improvement over Giroud.

Yeah, good points. Although, I think he is a bit more clinical than Walcott from what I've seen (and I have been saying for years Walcott is much better suited as a striker). Another good point, but I think just watching Lacazette, he just looks a better player IMO and that he has another gear in him. Probably stupid biases in style, I dunno.

 

[bucky]

Yeah, good points. Although, I think he is a bit more clinical than Walcott from what I've seen (and I have been saying for years Walcott is much better suited as a striker). Another good point, but I think just watching Lacazette, he just looks a better player IMO and that he has another gear in him. Probably stupid biases in style, I dunno.

That he's potentially better than Giroud I agree with, but I am not sure if it would be a good move for Lacazette. Walcott when fit and starting regularly has really good numbers, unfortunately for him he's often injured. If they were to replace Lacazette with Walcott it would make sense.