Rasmus Højlund | Manchester United Player | Shirt Nr 11

It was crystal clear last season that we are just not scoring enough goals, not even nearly enough.
Preseason is preseason but our goalsscoring does still seem to be a huge issue. We desperately need a good striker in the team to help us there.
To spend huge on a striker now, only to go first 5-6 games without him (maybe more if the club is really careful with him) is not ideal.
Hopefully Rashford can start of the new season as he came back from the world cup last season.
 
Kostov said:
I must admit, back injury does worry me. Rio never really was the same player after his back injuries started. I hope it's nothing serious.
Click to expand...
It's not a back muscle injury like Rio.

It's a weak spot in the bone that will heal good-as-new over time.
 
Kostov said:
I hope it is as you say. Any reliable info on this issue? Or just speculations at this point?
Click to expand...
It's the potential beginnings of a stress fracture, ie. a bone issue:


And it's not a fundamental, ie. neither chronic nor inherent:


In other words, there's nothing that will cause a long term problem the way a soft tissue injury would.

Bone injuries often heal stronger than they originally were. In this case, the injury is so minor he can even play once per week. He'd probably be worse off if he caught the flu.
 
Just saw a random clip on SoMe of Højlund being taken out of a cup game for FC Copenhagen against a second tier side having played only 25 minutes after coming on as a sub. This happened less than two years ago.

It really is a meteoric rise from that to signing for Manchester United. He still has to deliver, of course, but that is some development.
 
Devil You Know said:
It's the potential beginnings of a stress fracture, ie. a bone issue:


And it's not a fundamental, ie. neither chronic nor inherent:


In other words, there's nothing that will cause a long term problem the way a soft tissue injury would.

Bone injuries often heal stronger than they originally were. In this case, the injury is so minor he can even play once per week. He'd probably be worse off if he caught the flu.
Click to expand...

That's very reassuring and good to hear. He'd be in the squad for monday?
 
Ffs, not even played yet and already he's put his back out with the weight of expectation on his shoulders.

Too weak, get the receipt and send him back for a full refund.
 
Champ said:
Hojlund had one of the best goals Vs expected goals ratio when it comes to European strikers, which shows he doesn't need to take random shots in order to score, hence the numbers you are seeing.

Not every striker is the same, Hojlund has already shown at Atalanta how good he is in possession, he would rather play an extra pass to receive in a better position then take an exploratory shot.

Also the trend for Haaland shots per game is still increasing, he is 23.

Also, only ten players had a higher average of shots per game then Hojlund last season, suggesting his shots tally isn't actually that low.

All players are different, stats need to reflect context for them to be viable.
Click to expand...

Don't know where you got the bold stat from but Hojlund was 25th for shots per 90 just within Serie A. Or, 62nd percentile more generally. For a striker signed for the fee he has been that's relatively low.

And I'm not sure what you mean by him having one of the best goals versus expected goals? He's returned 0.44 non penalty goals from 0.47 non-penalty xG per 90 in Serie A, which isn't remarkable in any direction.

Regardless, the point is that while his underlying stats are fine, particularly for a 20 year old, if he's going to develop into a real elite goalscorer then he needs his shot volume to increase because as it stands it's currently simply too low for him to be able to consistently score the requisite goals. And judging whether he will increase that volume enough is tricky compared to judging how well shot monsters like Kane, Haaland, Osimhen, etc. would develop from their early years.
 
Last edited:
Mike Smalling said:
Just saw a random clip on SoMe of Højlund being taken out of a cup game for FC Copenhagen against a second tier side having played only 25 minutes after coming on as a sub. This happened less than two years ago.

It really is a meteoric rise from that to signing for Manchester United. He still has to deliver, of course, but that is some development.
Click to expand...

I think that is an important part of why we decided to sign him: he has been on a continual upward trajectory in his development for the last two years. He scored no goals and started on the bench for Copenhagen in 2021. Then he established himself in Austria and looked good enough to earn a move to Italy the following summer. He was eased into the Atalanta team before the world cup in 2022 but in January 2023 he had really got going (I think 7 or 8 of his league goals came in the last half of the season). I should think United took a good look and decided he would continue taking great strides for a few more seasons (and it seems several other big teams in Europe have the same perspective).
 
sullydnl said:
Don't know where you got the bold stat from but Hojlund was 25th for shots per 90 just within Serie A. Or, 62nd percentile more generally. For a striker signed for the fee he has been that's relatively low.

And I'm not sure what you mean by him having one of the best goals versus expected goals? He's returned 0.44 non penalty goals from 0.47 non-penalty xG per 90 in Serie A, which isn't remarkable in any direction.
Click to expand...
I actually meant his expected goals, rather than shots, that's my bad.

His expected goal return is one of the best, so not sure what you are looking at. His expected goals per 90 is very impressive.
Scored 9 goals from an expected goal return of 9.5, that's damn good.

But the biggest issue with picking up on stats for Hojlund is the very very small sample size.

Stats without context mean very little, and here we have stats being picked upon with little substance or context.

Hojlund would rather not shoot when a pass is the better option, that's been shown in his play so far, yet the stats won't refer to this.
 
Champ said:
Hojlund had one of the best goals Vs expected goals ratio when it comes to European strikers, which shows he doesn't need to take random shots in order to score, hence the numbers you are seeing.

Not every striker is the same, Hojlund has already shown at Atalanta how good he is in possession, he would rather play an extra pass to receive in a better position then take an exploratory shot.

Also the trend for Haaland shots per game is still increasing, he is 23.

Also, only ten players had a higher average of shots per game then Hojlund last season, suggesting his shots tally isn't actually that low.

All players are different, stats need to reflect context for them to be viable.
Click to expand...

Oh what it could have been. Now the poor lad's a paraplegic in a wheelchair, drinking his isotonic drink through a straw.
 
sullydnl said:
Listening to an episode of the Double Pivot Podcast (an analytics-focused football podcast) about Hojlund from a few months ago where they broke down his stats profile.

They made the point that the typical pattern of development for top strikers is to begin their careers with high shot volumes and for that to almost linearly decline as they get older, with the striker typically getting better quality shots to compensate. So normally you're looking for high shot volumes from a young striker as you know they will likely decrease over time.

Whereas the question mark over Hojlund is that he is currently the opposite of that, a low shot production, high-xG per shot striker. Which means we're essentially betting on his shot volume increasing as he ages, against the normal trend of it decreasing. And while there's nothing to say that can't happen, it means his development path is less predictable than it was for players like Haaland, Kane, etc. because it would be a lot less common. Added to that, Atalanta play an unusual system which requires the striker to behave slightly differently than they would in other teams, so anyone buying him would have to apply good subjective judgment in terms of how his skillset will translate to their team.

However against those two concerns, they thought the rest of his profile was positive as he's generally good at everything else. Passing, dribbling, getting on the ball, actually adding value in general play when on the ball, being a good progressive pass receiver (i.e. a focal point up front), etc. Plus his obvious athleticism.

Comparing him to other strikers, they noted that while his basic underlying stats weren't as impressive as someone like Ferguson's due to being a few years older, he offered a broader range of skills than Ferguson or Balogun. And if someone bought him for what Juve played for Vlahovic (€70m + €10) they'd be a lot more positive about it than they were about Vlahovic, because Vlahovic had a more limited profile and was older at the time.
Click to expand...

Interesting stuff. I think he touches on that himself here:



And for what it's worth, according to FBref.com his shots per 90 mins stats are significantly higher for Denmark than in Serie A for Atalanta (3.56 vs 2.65). Obviously it's a tiny sample size and the standard of opposition in his brief national team career has been much lower, but it might suggest that his low-ish shooting volume is partly due to his role in Atalanta's system.
 
Makes sense as to why the reveal was delayed and medical took so long. They clearly came across this injury.
 
B@gger it - I was hoping the Wolves game would be perfect to him up and running with a goal or two to boost his confidence: I've got Wolves earmarked for relegation this season (said same last year and only some other piss-poor teams saved them)
 
Rashford and Sancho can share the (false) #9 burden for a few games. It's not the end of the world.

If Atalanta had drawn out the transfer saga to the end of the window, he'd have been available at roughly the same time. Just imagine that that's what happened instead.
 
Seems like it’s not as some in the media are portraying but as usual people read the sensationalist headline and assume the worst and it’s panic stations. Hopefully see him in a couple of weeks.
 
Antony scored on his debut vs Arsenal last season.... Hojlund to do the same?
 
So in the long term, this won't be a problem (if managed correctly), but it fecks us over for the start of the PL.

Need to keep our fingers crossed that Rashy can hit the season hot, cos unless Sancho has turned a corner and Antony has suddenly become vaguely productive, we're fecked for goals.

Should throw Levy a loan offer for Kane just for bantz.
 
Champ said:
I actually meant his expected goals, rather than shots, that's my bad.

His expected goal return is one of the best, so not sure what you are looking at. His expected goals per 90 is very impressive.
Scored 9 goals from an expected goal return of 9.5, that's damn good.

But the biggest issue with picking up on stats for Hojlund is the very very small sample size.

Stats without context mean very little, and here we have stats being picked upon with little substance or context.

Hojlund would rather not shoot when a pass is the better option, that's been shown in his play so far, yet the stats won't refer to this.
Click to expand...

His acual npxG per 90 is strong, particularly for a 20 year old.

But for him to keep developing from here and score more goals than he currently does, he obviously needs to either a) take more shots, b) take better shots or c) start consistently finishing well above his expected stats. Given what we know about the reliability of finishing over time, we can park option C. And given he's currently 62nd percentile for shots and 95th percentile for npxG/shot, his shot volume is clearly what we would need to see increase.

And generally speaking that development path is less clear than it would be if those percentiles were reverse. Because (as mentioned) the typical pattern for strikers is for their volume to peak early and then decline in a way their shot quality doesn't.

In this case the one season sample size is irrelevant, because they're not saying this is what he is and will forever be. They're saying that this is how his stats profile needs to change over time, whether it be through the effect of increased minutes, change of system or player development. Regardless of why his shot volume stats are low, that's still what needs to improve.
 
Last edited:
The Daily Mail and Truth are not exactly constant bedfellows. I trust our medical staff more than dodgy journalists
 
Guy is recovering and probably wont be over-exerted for a few weeks.. How has this become such a news story?

Its no different than signing him at the end of the window and letting him bed in for a couple of weeks.. If anything, its better.. we oversee how he recovers/trains.
 
Pat_Mustard said:
Interesting stuff. I think he touches on that himself here:



And for what it's worth, according to FBref.com his shots per 90 mins stats are significantly higher for Denmark than in Serie A for Atalanta (3.56 vs 2.65). Obviously it's a tiny sample size and the standard of opposition in his brief national team career has been much lower, but it might suggest that his low-ish shooting volume is partly due to his role in Atalanta's system.
Click to expand...


Aye, I heard some other podcast mention that his role for Demark was quite different and more orthodox than his role for Atalanta, so that may well be the case.
 
sullydnl said:
His acual npxG per 90 is strong, particularly for a 20 year old.

But for him to keep developing from here and score more goals than he currently does, he obviously needs to either a) take more shots, b) take better shots or c) start consistently finishing well above his expected stats. Given what we know about the reliability of finishing over time, we can park option C. And given he's currently 62nd percentile for shots and 95th percentile for npxG/shot, his shot volume is clearly what we would need to see increase.

And generally speaking that development path is less clear than it would be if those percentiles were reverse. Because (as mentioned) the typical pattern for strikers is for their volume to peak early and then decline in a way their shot quality doesn't.

In this case the one season sample size is irrelevant, because they're not saying this is what he is and will forever be. They're saying that this is how his stats profile needs to change over time, whether it be through the effect of increased minutes, change of system or player development. Regardless of why his shot volume stats are low, they still need to get better.
Click to expand...
In comparison to whom though? Does every striker show these consistent reduced shot ratios?
Haaland currently isn't, Callum Wilson isn't, Antonio isn't, Rashford isn't.

Every striker is different and will display different metrics.
To say he needs to take more shots is irrelevant, as in a team such as Atalanta who don't seem to favour taking risky shots in the past season. .that doesn't mean he won't when it comes to playing for United, again another reason that stats without context are rather meaningless.

We have seen from Hojlund so far that he does have a decent stike on him and has had shots from all different angles, so it stands to reason with a different tactical approach, rather than Gasperinis recent pragmatism, his shot output will change anyhow.
 
Pat_Mustard said:
Interesting stuff. I think he touches on that himself here:



And for what it's worth, according to FBref.com his shots per 90 mins stats are significantly higher for Denmark than in Serie A for Atalanta (3.56 vs 2.65). Obviously it's a tiny sample size and the standard of opposition in his brief national team career has been much lower, but it might suggest that his low-ish shooting volume is partly due to his role in Atalanta's system.
Click to expand...

100% it is down to Atalanta's style of play.
 
Not everything needs a back and forth. On its face what is in that tweet would raise worries in the mind of any right thinking person. What you can say is to give the medical team the benefit of the doubt. They made a call and have advised the club there's nothing to worry about long term. Make no mistake however there's nothing wrong with people who might be worried, some clubs don't even sign injured players period. For us, we feel we're in a unique situation that makes those concerns irrelevant. It's just one of those where isn't actually any right or wrong before we see how things play out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.