Klaas-Jan Huntelaar

Anduin said:
Of course I'm exaggerating, Bent isn't United quality either, that goes without saying. But Vucinic has done feck all in his career, I've no idea why we're even linked with him. Besides he is not what we need.
Click to expand...

Urm.. He is a great impact player.. Has been known to score goals off the bench.. And would be a terrific back-up player for Rooney & Berbatov other than that I agree with you he is completely useless!

*Its not like we are going to sign him anyway.. He just signed a new contract..
 
Longsden_7 said:
You kidding ?
Click to expand...

He is right. Vucinic was so crap upfront that Roma had to move him on the flanks. He is decent there though.

Its ironic to prefer Vucinic over Huntelaar since Roma themselves are interested in the Dutch striker.
 
Anduin said:
I agree, he basically combines Park's work rate with a decent goalscoring record. And seeing how many caftards rate Park I'd say it's ridiculous to refuse to give Kuyt any credit, no matter the team he plays for.
Click to expand...

Park's pretty average too.

Kuyt's more productive but a lot less technical, and I'd have them on the same level. Park has a much better first touch, is a better dribbler at speed, better close control...just better all around technically.
 
fact is guys, our attack is in need of an overhaul - dont try to deny it. Losing Ronaldo and Tevez, and having the rather slower, more relaxed Berbatov in their place is inevitably going to mean we attack in a different way next season.

People talking about our great counterattacking style are living in a dreamworld because you can only counterattack if the other team is actually prepared to open up and attack you a bit in the first place! When 75% of teams at OT, and about 33% away are parking the bus against us, counterattacks are bloody useless, and i think that showed last season.

I think SAF wants us to adopt a slightly more controlled, built up attacking style next season, something that will allow us to better break down stubborn defences whilst retaining some of its speed and tempo.

If we are meant to be building the team around Rooney, we need a "proper" #9 for him to play off, because everyone knows that that is how he functions best. Rooney/Huntelaar could become an extremely lethal partnership up front, we simply need to add some wingers to the equation who will put regular crosses into the box rather than predictably cutting inside.


datura said:
Walrus will be getting a chubby at these Huntelaar reports.
Click to expand...

:drool:
if i hadnt already had sex this morning my cock would soon be out.
 
I can think of plenty of better partners for Rooney than Huntelaar, purely based on style of play rather than ability.

He holds the ball up fine, although it's not his strength. Plenty of others do it better. Because of this I don't think he bring others in to play well, and that's always something you'd look for in a great partner going forward.

He doesn't have a quick brain, or just doesn't have the ability to match it, and as a partner I think that's essential for Rooney. Rooney's best pieces of play generally come when there's plenty of interchanging and quick one-twos or quick passing movements going on around him, whether he's at the hear of it or at the end of it.
 
What I've struggled to understand is, I've seen plenty of sites who claimed Huntelaar was linked with us. By whom? Where?
 
Brwned said:
I can think of plenty of better partners for Rooney than Huntelaar, purely based on style of play rather than ability.
Click to expand...

certainly, but by "style of play" are you also meaning "out and out strikers"? Because personally i dont want to see another Rooney/x partnership consisting of two deep playing strikers, neither of which will simply get forward and attack the box enough.
fact is, the traditional CF seems to be a dying breed. I dont want to sound over-dramatic here, but Huntelaar is one of the only good #9's around right now who isnt 30+.

Rooney will function to his best when playing off a traditional striker, Huntelaar is one of the few traditional strikers around. Who else is there? Eto'o? Villa maybe? Benzema is a decent shout, but i do think that having any of those three plus Berbatov/Rooney at the club would cause some rotation headaches, especially if Macheda and Welbeck are to be given much matchtime.


Brwned said:
He holds the ball up fine, although it's not his strength. Plenty of others do it better. Because of this I don't think he bring others in to play well, and that's always something you'd look for in a great partner going forward.
Click to expand...

Bringing others into play may not be his strength, but similarly to the holdup play i think he does an OK job here. Remember that without Ronaldo, it is entirely possible that our wingers will be cutting in less and staying wide more, meaning that the primary linkup partner will simply be the other striker (Rooney).
I also think that if he was at the club, Huntelaar could and would improve on his all-round game, especially the areas of creativity and providing. He is 25, he can still learn and improve and under SAF i can imagine him being one of the best strikers around in a couple of years.


Brwned said:
He doesn't have a quick brain, or just doesn't have the ability to match it, and as a partner I think that's essential for Rooney. Rooney's best pieces of play generally come when there's plenty of interchanging and quick one-twos or quick passing movements going on around him, whether he's at the hear of it or at the end of it.
Click to expand...

I agree, but realistically where are we going to find this perfect partner for Rooney? I cant think of any remotely realistic signings that would match all the criteria you have listed in this post, and then couple it with some other essentials such as a good goalscoring rate, staying high up the pitch, offering an aerial threat etc.
Im not arguing that Huntelaar is a complete player by any means (though nor do i think he is nearly as one-dimensional as some of the caf' members seem to think), and whilst he isnt going to be the perfect partner for Rooney, the two of them could still very easily forge a brilliant strike team, and in addition, Huntelaar simply adds a lot of qualities to the team as a whole that we are missing.


When you factor in the non-football reasons such as price and availability, i think Huntelaar comes up tops. You might argue that "we are Man Utd, we never settle for second best!" but lets be realistic, we have a debt to service and a business to maintain, if SAF has a choice to make i think he will have to factor in price, availability, potential future "dreamer" affairs and so forth.

Now im off to get some bacon.
 
Walrus said:
certainly, but by "style of play" are you also meaning "out and out strikers"? Because personally i dont want to see another Rooney/x partnership consisting of two deep playing strikers, neither of which will simply get forward and attack the box enough.

fact is, the traditional CF seems to be a dying breed. I dont want to sound over-dramatic here, but Huntelaar is one of the only good #9's around right now who isnt 30+.

Rooney will function to his best when playing off a traditional striker, Huntelaar is one of the few traditional strikers around. Who else is there? Eto'o? Villa maybe? Benzema is a decent shout, but i do think that having any of those three plus Berbatov/Rooney at the club would cause some rotation headaches, especially if Macheda and Welbeck are to be given much matchtime.

Bringing others into play may not be his strength, but similarly to the holdup play i think he does an OK job here. Remember that without Ronaldo, it is entirely possible that our wingers will be cutting in less and staying wide more, meaning that the primary linkup partner will simply be the other striker (Rooney).

I also think that if he was at the club, Huntelaar could and would improve on his all-round game, especially the areas of creativity and providing. He is 25, he can still learn and improve and under SAF i can imagine him being one of the best strikers around in a couple of years.

I agree, but realistically where are we going to find this perfect partner for Rooney? I cant think of any remotely realistic signings that would match all the criteria you have listed in this post, and then couple it with some other essentials such as a good goalscoring rate, staying high up the pitch, offering an aerial threat etc.

Im not arguing that Huntelaar is a complete player by any means (though nor do i think he is nearly as one-dimensional as some of the caf' members seem to think), and whilst he isnt going to be the perfect partner for Rooney, the two of them could still very easily forge a brilliant strike team, and in addition, Huntelaar simply adds a lot of qualities to the team as a whole.

When you factor in the non-football reasons such as price and availability, i think Huntelaar comes up tops. You might argue that "we are Man Utd, we never settle for second best!" but lets be realistic, we have a debt to service and a business to maintain, if SAF has a choice to make i think he will have to factor in price, availability, potential future "dreamer" affairs and so forth.

Now im off to get some bacon.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Huntelaar's one of a dying breed indeed, but then there's a reason for that. I understand where you're coming from with not wanting another deep lying striker brought in instead of a No. 9, and for the most part I'd agree with that, but then I don't think Huntelaar right type of No. 9, assuming there's variations.

For example Ronaldo, the phenomenon, Fernando Torres and Huntelaar all could be, and have been, called a No. 9 yet are all very different in style. I think one more like Torres is the ideal one for our team.

I know you rate Huntelaar highly, and I'd be surprised if he didn't do well for us individually, but I just don't think a striker of his ilk is right for our team.

I rate Welbeck highly, and really I think he could turn into a much more ideal striker for Rooney in a couple of years.

I don't think I'll ever come round to your way of thinking, but you're a very persuasive poster and you argue very well, so who knows. Maybe some day.
 
Brwned said:
Yeah, Huntelaar's one of a dying breed indeed, but then there's a reason for that. I understand where you're coming from with not wanting another deep lying striker brought in instead of a No. 9, and for the most part I'd agree with that, but then I don't think Huntelaar right type of No. 9, assuming there's variations.

For example Ronaldo, the phenomenon, Fernando Torres and Huntelaar all could be, and have been, called a No. 9 yet are all very different in style. I think one more like Torres is the ideal one for our team.

I know you rate Huntelaar highly, and I'd be surprised if he didn't do well for us individually, but I just don't think a striker of his ilk is right for our team.

I rate Welbeck highly, and really I think he could turn into a much more ideal striker for Rooney in a couple of years.

I don't think I'll ever come round to your way of thinking, but you're a very persuasive poster and you argue very well, so who knows. Maybe some day.
Click to expand...

Doesnt everyone? :devil:


A Torres would be ridiculously good for us, as would a more-striker less-winger Ronaldo. Unfortunately we have neither of those, and we dont currently stand much chance of getting one right now, the best bet is as you said, letting Welbeck and Macheda develop and hopefully turn into world class players.

As i have said in other threads though, we are something of a crossroad in our team - regarding whether to buy or whether to trust in youth. SAF is treading a very, very fine line and i dont envy his position right now - buying in a Benzema or a Ribery would almost undoubtedly block the development of the youngsters for years to come. On the other side of the coin though, do we really want to risk our short term success by leaving ourselves reliant on the youngsters if Rooney or Berbatov get injured? I feel we do need a proven replacement, and I suggested on a few other threads that perhaps getting an "ok" striker on a one-year loan could buy us some time for the youngsters to break into the first team - the likes of Yakubu or even Owen could make good loan options in that respect.

Back to Huntelaar though, I understand why you say you dont think he would fit us - he is (allegedly) one dimensional, fairly slow paced and lacks creativity. Personally, I think that his strengths outweigh his weaknesses, and he would give us some much needed firepower up top. I honestly think if we dont sign someone with a proven goalscoring record then we can forget about winning the league next season. Ronaldo's goals have carried us from time to time, and whilst we can hope that Rooney/Berbatov/Midfield all improve their tally, its still going to take a lot of work to make up for Ronaldo's contribution, and we could easily find ourselves without a genuine goalscoring threat if we arent careful.

For now we will all just have to wait and see, im looking forward to seeing how our team lines up next season with or without Huntelaar.
 
Brwned said:
Yeah, Huntelaar's one of a dying breed indeed, but then there's a reason for that. I understand where you're coming from with not wanting another deep lying striker brought in instead of a No. 9, and for the most part I'd agree with that, but then I don't think Huntelaar right type of No. 9, assuming there's variations.

For example Ronaldo, the phenomenon, Fernando Torres and Huntelaar all could be, and have been, called a No. 9 yet are all very different in style. I think one more like Torres is the ideal one for our team.

I know you rate Huntelaar highly, and I'd be surprised if he didn't do well for us individually, but I just don't think a striker of his ilk is right for our team.

I rate Welbeck highly, and really I think he could turn into a much more ideal striker for Rooney in a couple of years.

I don't think I'll ever come round to your way of thinking, but you're a very persuasive poster and you argue very well, so who knows. Maybe some day.
Click to expand...

Thats Brwned's way of saying he likes you ;)
 
devilish said:
He is right. Vucinic was so crap upfront that Roma had to move him on the flanks. He is decent there though.

Its ironic to prefer Vucinic over Huntelaar since Roma themselves are interested in the Dutch striker.
Click to expand...

They are pretty much opposites.

Vucinic is clearly a good player, makes things happen, can beat a man, can score goals etc... The concern is his record. Its not that impressive. Clearly a player who can blow hot and cold.

On the other hand Huntelaar is an average player but with excellent finishing, so his record will always be decent.

He will always score goals. Just, how many is enough to justify doing absolutely nothing else for 90 minutes?

8/20 isnt in my opinion. Not when Villa, Forlan and Eto'o were scoring a goal a game whilst providing 3 times as much else per game.

Brwned said:
Park's pretty average too.

Kuyt's more productive but a lot less technical, and I'd have them on the same level. Park has a much better first touch, is a better dribbler at speed, better close control...just better all around technically.
Click to expand...

Park definately doesnt have a better first touch.

Kuyt is twice as physical and thats his style with the ball. Not as good a dribbler, no, but he tends to still force his way past an opponent and get his shot away.
 
Walrus said:
fact is guys, our attack is in need of an overhaul - dont try to deny it. Losing Ronaldo and Tevez, and having the rather slower, more relaxed Berbatov in their place is inevitably going to mean we attack in a different way next season.

People talking about our great counterattacking style are living in a dreamworld because you can only counterattack if the other team is actually prepared to open up and attack you a bit in the first place! When 75% of teams at OT, and about 33% away are parking the bus against us, counterattacks are bloody useless, and i think that showed last season.

I think SAF wants us to adopt a slightly more controlled, built up attacking style next season, something that will allow us to better break down stubborn defences whilst retaining some of its speed and tempo.

If we are meant to be building the team around Rooney, we need a "proper" #9 for him to play off, because everyone knows that that is how he functions best. Rooney/Huntelaar could become an extremely lethal partnership up front, we simply need to add some wingers to the equation who will put regular crosses into the box rather than predictably cutting inside.




:drool:
if i hadnt already had sex this morning my cock would soon be out.
Click to expand...

The reason teams sat back last season is because of what we were doing the season before with Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney - picking everyone off with great counter attacking football. With 2 of those players gone, teams will attack us next season no question.
 
Ekeke said:
The reason teams sat back last season is because of what we were doing the season before with Ronaldo, Tevez and Rooney - picking everyone off with great counter attacking football. With 2 of those players gone, teams will attack us next season no question.
Click to expand...

And Valencia, Benzema and Rooney will hurt them, yee haawwwwww!

Sorry..:rolleyes:
 
marcus agrippa in another thread said:
wrong.

when SAF was asked recently what teams he fancied for the CL, he cited the English teams, and Barca. the one reason he gave for Madrid not being able to challenge in the CL was the fact that they lacked pace in forward areas. i daresay it is one of the attributes he looks for in a player in these positions.

i cannot see him abandoning the counter-attacking blueprint that he's worked so hard to build in the years post-2000.

we can break down massed defences in the Prem, but in Europe we counter-attack. that's just the way it is.
Click to expand...

that bolded bit is the key to the argument imo. I dont think we can reliably break down defenses with our current setup, especially not without Ronaldo who was normally the one who could break the stalemate. Without him and his match winning qualities, we will struggle against teams that are parking the bus if we simply want to try to play on the counterattack, as was the case last season.

pace is a great attribute to have, but it is not the be-all and end-all, and it certainly didnt stop us from signing (and many caftards wanking over) Berbatov, who is slower than Huntelaar if anything (Huntelaar isnt that slow - he isnt fast either, he is just...normal). We can still adopt a counterattacking style by playing Rooney as lone striker, supported by Giggs, Nani and probably Valencia - signing an out-and-out striker is not the same as expecting him to play every single game, we can adapt to the situations accordingly. Huntelaar makes up for a lack of pace by having great anticipation and movement as well, which has the same effect in a built up attack.
 
Walrus said:
that bolded bit is the key to the argument imo. I dont think we can reliably break down defenses with our current setup, especially not without Ronaldo who was normally the one who could break the stalemate. Without him and his match winning qualities, we will struggle against teams that are parking the bus if we simply want to try to play on the counterattack, as was the case last season.

pace is a great attribute to have, but it is not the be-all and end-all, and it certainly didnt stop us from signing (and many caftards wanking over) Berbatov, who is slower than Huntelaar if anything (Huntelaar isnt that slow - he isnt fast either, he is just...normal). We can still adopt a counterattacking style by playing Rooney as lone striker, supported by Giggs, Nani and probably Valencia - signing an out-and-out striker is not the same as expecting him to play every single game, we can adapt to the situations accordingly. Huntelaar makes up for a lack of pace by having great anticipation and movement as well, which has the same effect in a built up attack.
Click to expand...

Well that's very pessimistic.
 
Brwned said:
Well that's very pessimistic.
Click to expand...

more just realistic i think, we struggled last seasons against teams that simply parked the bus - we normally managed a last minute goal and scrappy 1-0 win, often with Ronaldo playing a big part.
 
Huntelaar is imo the best finisher in the game, he is Solskjaer-like at finding the net, he is a good footballer, good control, football brain, movement and can handle himself physically, I really wanted us to sign him for a long time, everyone loves a clinical striker. But at the minute we have this fluid, pacey 3 pronged attack that is serving us very well in Europe and KJH would not fit into that system, that is if we are to continue with that system now ronaldo has gone, things might change. I just think that if we had our eye on him, we would have got him as part of the ronaldo deal and that did not happen. If he would come and agree to be 3rd choice or at least rotated a lot, I would snap him up, there are plenty of occasions where he would be invaluable, particularly at home when the bus is parked, in fact he would fit very well in any game where we are not playing on the counter, and there would be a lot of those. Perhaps he is on the list of targets, he might just be a bit down the order though. You can be sure SAF knows everything about him and what he has to offer, but I think the team has evolved from the one dimensional approach we had with RVN and I doubt we will go back to that if at all possible.
 
mattsville said:
the one dimensional approach we had with RVN and I doubt we will go back to that if at all possible.
Click to expand...

just a general point here really, a lot of folk on the caf seem to be assuming that by playing with a RVN or a Huntelaar style striker, that it necessitates playing some one-dimensional football relying on that one player for all the goals. playing with an out-and-out striker does not automatically mean going back to the way we played in the RVN days.
 
Walrus said:
just a general point here really, a lot of folk on the caf seem to be assuming that by playing with a RVN or a Huntelaar style striker, that it necessitates playing some one-dimensional football relying on that one player for all the goals. playing with an out-and-out striker does not automatically mean going back to the way we played in the RVN days.
Click to expand...

Can you think of any current teams that play with a striker as one dimensional as Huntelaar and yet play good football at the same time?

I can't.
 
Brwned said:
Can you think of any current teams that play with a striker as one dimensional as Huntelaar and yet play good football at the same time?

I can't.
Click to expand...

I cant think of many top class teams that play with an out-and-out striker of Huntelaar's mould full stop - you admitted yourself he is pretty much the last in the dying breed of traditional #9s. There is no rule that says that a target striker must limit the way you play, I know you dont rate Huntelaar's overall game very highly at all, but his linkup play isnt as bad as you suggest, in my opinion. He has been wrongly and underutilised and Real, and with players around him of the calibre of Rooney etc, as well as the tuition of SAF, this would be the perfect part of his game to improve on whilst here. He is never going to be a Rooney or Berbatov, but my point stands that playing with a Huntelaar or RVN style striker does not have to limit the way we play our football. Huntelaar would be there to take advantage of our attacking play, not to change it.
 
Walrus said:
just a general point here really, a lot of folk on the caf seem to be assuming that by playing with a RVN or a Huntelaar style striker, that it necessitates playing some one-dimensional football relying on that one player for all the goals. playing with an out-and-out striker does not automatically mean going back to the way we played in the RVN days.
Click to expand...

It is just the way it is now, we would not have got to 2 CL finals in a row with RVN as the main attacking focal point. RVN does well for himself but over all the team does not. Having said that, I think we can still score more goals than last year, I think we lack a natural finisher in the club, KJH would be more than welcome to play his part when called upon in certain games, last season we did'nt kill off enough games and those 1-0 wins are not good for the nerves. Personally I would love to sign him as an Ole type striker, but I don't think he would entertain that.
 
mattsville said:
It is just the way it is now, we would not have got to 2 CL finals in a row with RVN as the main attacking focal point. RVN does well for himself but over all the team does not. Having said that, I think we can still score more goals than last year, I think we lack a natural finisher in the club, KJH would be more than welcome to play his part when called upon in certain games, last season we did'nt kill off enough games and those 1-0 wins are not good for the nerves. Personally I would love to sign him as an Ole type striker, but I don't think he would entertain that.
Click to expand...

nobody can say whether we would have reached the CL finals with RVN.
personally, i think a lot of people here underestimate the contribution Ruud made to the team. Back when he left, we were in a transition phase - Rooney and Ronaldo were emerging, Giggs, Scholes and Neville were starting to be on the decline a bit...the team was changing a lot. Add to that the whole "dressing room disharmony" thing and its fair to say that RVN was not simply sold solely for footballing reasons.

I can honestly say that with the creative attacking players we have had for the last 2 seasons (ie Ronaldo and Rooney primarily, but also brilliant FBs, a fairly established midfield combo etc), RVN could well have proven a huge success. you cannot look at a player in isolation, you have to look at the team he was a part of, and our creative talent and "assisting" in our team is probably at an all time high, if anything we have simply lacked that cutting egde, that lethal finish. The typical argument that "we went away from RVN and improved so drastically, we dont want to go back to that" doesnt hold water for me - the team as a whole has changed, it was never as simple as simply getting rid of RVN and the entire team magically improving overnight.


speaking of change and transition, with Ronaldo and Tevez gone i cannot see us orchestrating our attack in the same way as we have done for the past 2 seasons. Our style will change and adapt, personally i think we will see a more built up attacking play rather than relying on quick counterattacks.
 
There was nothing wrong with the Ruud of the first 2-3 seasons. He showed many abilities and was more than just a box-man. We were only a matter of away goals away from the European final. But in his last couple of seasons he did seem like a more limited player and it did limit us. That does not mean a player like that would always be a problem.
 
Devil_forever said:
Should we get Aguero because quite clearly what we lack is another player who plays a more deeper role.
Click to expand...

Yes, soon enough SAF's masterplan will come into effect and we will have hordes of midgets running around between midfield and the strikers we may have lost the ugliest midget possible, but Rooney, Aguero and the possibility of pushing Scholes forward a step or two presents a midget-wall, of ferocious tackles, tongues and passes (sadly to no-one upfront)
 
AdZzUtd said:
Yes, soon enough SAF's masterplan will come into effect and we will have hordes of midgets running around between midfield and the strikers we may have lost the ugliest midget possible, but Rooney, Aguero and the possibility of pushing Scholes forward a step or two presents a midget-wall, of ferocious tackles, tongues and passes (sadly to no-one upfront)
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
I find it funny as hell that people think Huntelaar doesn't have a quick football brain. You don't get into the type of goal scoring positions he gets into without one. especially when you don't rely on pace.
Click to expand...

completely agree, and its not like Huntelaar is slower than Berbatov or even rooney for that matter

he has decent pace, just not ronladoesque
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
I find it funny as hell that people think Huntelaar doesn't have a quick football brain. You don't get into the type of goal scoring positions he gets into without one. especially when you don't rely on pace.
Click to expand...

But you also don't release the ball as slowly as he does with one.

Works both ways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.