- Joined
- Dec 31, 2007
- Messages
- 91,702
Do you think most are assuming we are going to spend 160mil on two strikers?
If they are they are in cuckoo land
Only if you take those prices at face value. I guess we will see.
Do you think most are assuming we are going to spend 160mil on two strikers?
If they are they are in cuckoo land
I think we're pretty much in agreement. Our starting LW and RW are prone to shooting, which is fine as long as our starting striker links up well with them. As much as it pains me to say it, that's what made the Salah-Firmino-Mane frontline so effective. That's one of the reasons why I'd prefer Kane over Osimhen as he's a creator as well as a goalscorer. I don't know enough about Hojlund to comment on what his linkup play is like, but I assume Ten Hag knows what he's doing.It's not just about selfish or unselfish mate, it's about skillset there too. Rashford is not a provider, because it's not in his skillset not because he's selfish (although he is a bit of that too). Rashford isn't Grealish and Grealish isn't Rashford.
For example I'm not saying Osimhen is selfish, but he's clearly the kind of striker who shoots on sight and is more adept as the finisher of the team, as opposed to someone who brings others into play like Kane. A striker who likes to play on the shoulder (like Rashford) instead of drop deep, or a striker who's more likely to take a shot than eye a pass, is going to lead to diminished output from Rashford. And it has nothing to do with instagram unfollows and pettiness.
And Rashford scoring less might be all good so long as we're better as a team for it, it's a team sport, but it's not certain. There's no point in transferring Rashford's goals to a #9 if only for Rashford to regress to 5 goals a season again. We'd be back where we were.
Rashford has the same amount of assists as Grealish this season and Rashford doesn’t have Haaland to pass to.It's not just about selfish or unselfish mate, it's about skillset there too. Rashford is not a provider, because it's not in his skillset not because he's selfish (although he is a bit of that too). Rashford isn't Grealish and Grealish isn't Rashford.
For example I'm not saying Osimhen is selfish, but he's clearly the kind of striker who shoots on sight and is more adept as the finisher of the team, as opposed to someone who brings others into play like Kane. A striker who likes to play on the shoulder (like Rashford) instead of drop deep, or a striker who's more likely to take a shot than eye a pass, is going to lead to diminished output from Rashford. And it has nothing to do with instagram unfollows and pettiness.
And Rashford scoring less might be all good so long as we're better as a team for it, it's a team sport, but it's not certain. There's no point in transferring Rashford's goals to a #9 if only for Rashford to regress to 5 goals a season again. We'd be back where we were.
Rashford has the same amount of assists as Grealish this season and Rashford doesn’t have Haaland to pass to.
A CM ,CB and Erik recently said he wants De gea to stay but he may not be number one tells its own story so that is how I see money being spent plus one striker.Well we aren't signing a RB now apparently, and reports seemed to suggest that even CB wasn't much of a priority either so... might not be outside the realms of possibility
I'm being pessimistic but I can already see him being memed to death as the poor man Haaland
True enough.Only if you take those prices at face value. I guess we will see.
Why would you not look at actual assists though? Surely your stat has nothing behind it when Rashford has 30 goals behind his assist number?Another way of looking at it is expected assists per 90, where Grealish is in the 88th percentile and Rashford 13th.
Four actually: Rashford, Martial, Hojlund and I can't name the fourth. I think it will be tough to get anyone to take Martial off our hands, and we could go with these four for this season, and try again for Kane on a free next summer when Martial's contract is up. Then, when Kane is being phased out, we go for another young striker, maybe Ferguson, Sesko, etc. Slightly underwhelming if we don't get Kane + Hojlund this season (and Martial out), but I wouldn't be shocked if Levy holds out...Probably. But he'd still be only one of 3 players that can play CF. You don't rely on any individual one. Least of all your 3rd striker.
Why would you not look at actual assists though? Surely your stat has nothing behind it when Rashford has 30 goals behind his assist number?
Rashford just shoots more because he’s an inside forward and he’s better at it than Jack. The assists record just shows Rashford doesn’t lag behind in those responsibilities as well. We just need a striker who can make a fecking run in the box, show a little bit of movement to turn a so-so ball into a goal.
I’m not getting your point.Bruno has only 8 assists which is less than Maddison. Who is the better creator?
I’m not getting your point.
I’m not saying Rashford is a better creator than Jack, I’m saying he doesn’t lag behind in that department.
Your stat just tells me Maddison is very creative himself which I’m sure everybody knows.
Can we please stop using "games" as some kind of argument? A "game" does not mean that the player has finished 90 minutes. It doesn't mean that he's even started the game. It means that he's had some contribution to the game in terms of minutes. This can be as many as a full game, and as little as a few minutes.
Hojlund has 15 goals and 7 assists from 2,468 minutes across all competitions. If you add up all the minutes played it's the equivalent of just over 27 full matches. That's 22 direct goal contributions in 27 full games. That's not bad for a first season in Serie A.
How does the potential/price combination of Hojlund compare to Evan Ferguson?
Evan Ferguson isn't obtainable this summer so you'd have to pay a PL feck off price which is significantly higher than anywhere else. So you're talking over 80m. Hojlund is probably max 50m.How does the potential/price combination of Hojlund compare to Evan Ferguson?
We obviously wouldn't have signed a young Harry Kane then.Who pissed on your cornflakes this morning? You're on a rampage across the threads.
Why does this logic not work for this signing? If Ten Hag (a top manager) wants him, he must rate him.
Precisely, myself included after watching him play for Millwall!We obviously wouldn't have signed a young Harry Kane then.
Think people don't realise that Haaland is a freak of nature. Not all strikers develop at the same rate.Precisely, myself included after watching him play for Millwall!
very goodRasmus? Will he be operating in the shadows?
And he was far from the only top center forward to have a somewhat underwhelming scoring record at that age.Harry Kane scored 5 goals aged 20.
So in theory it would be this guy plus an experienced striker?
Do we really need two strikers? Especially if you know who comes back into the fold.
Absolutely we need two strikers, look at City with Haaland and Alvarez. Rashford plays his best football cutting in from the left, and Voldermoort played on the right of a front three most of the time if my memory serves correctly. I don't remember seeing him excel as a strikerSo in theory it would be this guy plus an experienced striker?
Do we really need two strikers? Especially if you know who comes back into the fold.
We always had at least 2 strikers under fergie. Obviously that’s because we played 2 upfront. But I think 2 ST is essential so we can rotate depending on form and injuries. Plus they’ll spur each other on to be better. And I think if the person your talking about comes back then he’s better on RW.So in theory it would be this guy plus an experienced striker?
Do we really need two strikers? Especially if you know who comes back into the fold.
i think next season would be a good one for a development striker in our season, if we want to challenge for the title we’d want to be spending 200mil+Exciting talent and a good backup striker for now, but he's not good enough to lead the line for us yet so hopefully he won't be our only striker signing.
realistically can’t see it happening but signing two strikers would be brilliantWe always had at least 2 strikers under fergie. Obviously that’s because we played 2 upfront. But I think 2 ST is essential so we can rotate depending on form and injuries. Plus they’ll spur each other on to be better. And I think if the person your talking about comes back then he’s better on RW.
kids 20...wouldn't say it's terribleIs he a goalscorer? Only 8 league goals for Atalanta this season.
Per 90 stats show a 1 in 2 striker already though, 87th percentile in non pen xG this season in Serie A, got 5 goals in 2 Denmark games this year in his first 2 starts, only recently turned 20. Strikers at his age like him progress quickly. Copenhagen to Sturm Graz to Atalanta and now possibly to United over like 2 years. And just the eye test shows a potential complete, elite striker. Left footed too, dunno why but I always feel like they have a higher top level.And he was far from the only top center forward to have a somewhat underwhelming scoring record at that age.
The prodigious goalscoring exploits of Håland and Mbappé (i.e., historically significant exceptions to the norm) seem to have redefined folks' expectations.
- Højlund (Serie A and Coppa Italia): 9 goals in 1800 minutes
- Eto'o (La Liga and Copa del Rey): 13 goals in 2350 minutes
- Suárez (Eredivisie and KNVB Cup): 11 goals in 2500 minutes
- Ibrahimović (Eredivisie and KNVB Cup): 7 goals in 1400 minutes
- Cavani (Serie A and Coppa Italia): 5 goals in 1900 minutes
Just under 1 in 2 per 90 minutes despite just turning 20 in Feb. Scored 5 in his first 2 Denmark starts this year. He's shown he can score with both feet and with his head already.Is he a goalscorer? Only 8 league goals for Atalanta this season.
Rasmus? Will he be operating in the shadows?