Redcafe Sheep Draft - Balu vs Polaroid

[Moby]

So when he gets the ball Reuter, Ziege, Effenberg, Muller and Scholl just punt it to Klinsmann because they are too busy worried about the defending? Doesn't sound very likely TBH.

Balu has admitted that Reuter isn't gonna venture much. It's not that Muller and Klinsi wouldn't be good in counter, they would be great, but due to concerns at the back it would be problematic either way for the wingbacks to operate, precisely the reason 3-5-2 was often countered with a 4-2-3-1 with threatening flanks. The wings are the difference between a well functioning and otherwise 3-5-2/5-3-2 and if you overload them it sucks the life out of it.

Also one another thing, Rio is one of the best CBs against counters, we usually played an insanely high line throughout his peak.

 

[sajeev]

balu's team is getting under-rated here. the defence and midfield would dominate the play, and attacking threat is almost as good if you were to compare individuals. so given the set-up balu should win this match.

 

[Balu]

@Gio wanted to know more about him earlier, so I'm happy to start talking about him:

A bit more about Guido Buchwald. He could have easily played a part in the world cup draft as well, imo, but I couldn't pick him because of the restrictions and sadly no one else did .

He's one of the few brilliant German defenders, who didn't move to Italy in the 80's/90's, but his Stuttgart side was quality and maybe went largely unnoticed abroad? He played centerback with Sammer as the libero/DM in Stuttgart's title win in 1992 and he captained Stuttgart in their brilliant UEFA cup run in 1988/89, when he faced Maradona for the first time in the final.

In the first tie away at Napoli, Stuttgart took the lead early, then Maradona played the ball with his hand on the goalline to prevent a goal, which should have seen him sent off and a penalty awarded to Stuttgart. Of course he got away with it, as usually. He later got awarded an irregular penalty to equalise and Buchwald saw a yellow card which meant he was suspended for the return leg. Napoli won at home 2-1 and drew away 3-3 to win the UEFA cup. Klinsmann missed the first leg but scored in the second. The referee was suspended and then retired after that scandolous first leg, never refereeing a game again. So the hand of god cheated Napoli to the UEFA cup title, but Maradona would face Buchwald soon enough again.

One year later in training for the worldcup, Jürgen Kohler nicknamed Buchwald 'Diego' after a training match in which the defender showed a brilliant piece of skill. That became public after his brilliant assist for Klinsmann's goal against the Netherlands.



In the world cup final, he would face Maradona again. He played a brilliant game and kept him quiet and became a crucial part of the worldcup winning team. Guido Buchwald is still often refered to as 'Diego' in Germany.

Interesting as well, Stuttgart beat Dynamo Dresden in the UEFA cup semifinal that season with Matthias Sammer playing an important part in Dresden's best ever performance in a European Competition. One year and the reunification later, Sammer moved from Dresden to Stuttgart.

 

[antohan]

Also one another thing, Rio is one of the best CBs against counters, we usually played an insanely high line throughout his peak.

Rio is playing in an insane high line with Hummels next to him? Oh boy, someone's getting sent off here.

 

[Balu]

Balu has admitted that Reuter isn't gonna venture much. It's not that Muller and Klinsi wouldn't be good in counter, they would be great, but due to concerns at the back it would be problematic either way for the wingbacks to operate, precisely the reason 3-5-2 was often countered with a 4-2-3-1 with threatening flanks. The wings are the difference between a well functioning and otherwise 3-5-2/5-3-2 and if you overload them it sucks the life out of it.

Again, that makes no sense. 4231 and 433 play with crazy attacking fullbacks in the game today all the time and it usually is covered by a holding midfielders dropping between the centerbacks to play temporarily a back 3. Can you imagine a better back 3 as Buchwald Sammer Kohler to cover that? And it really depends on the players you have if you can counter that 3-5-2 as easily as you say. You argue in stereotypes and not by looking at the players and how they fulfill their roles in this game.

 

[Moby]

Nice one, Balu.

You are right, that he's not rated as much as you seem to rate him outside Germany, at least in the circles I have been both online and in person. His man marking of Diego is quite famous but not much apart from that is known.

 

[Theon]

balu's team is getting under-rated here. the defence and midfield would dominate the play, and attacking threat is almost as good if you were to compare individuals. so given the set-up balu should win this match.

I agree it's getting slightly underrated (Balu is actually winning though) but I dont t see any way that the midfield would dominate here. Really none.

I think Redondo has quite a comfortable control on this game, with Balu sitting deeper and countering.

 

[Moby]

Again, that makes no sense. 4231 and 433 play with crazy attacking fullbacks in the game today all the time and it usually is covered by a holding midfielders dropping between the centerbacks to play temporarily a back 3. Can you imagine a better back 3 as Buchwald Sammer Kohler to cover that? And it really depends on the players you have if you can counter that 3-5-2 as easily as you say. You argue in stereotypes and not by looking at the players and how they fulfill their roles in this game.

It was just a small, trivia if you wanna call it that, I didn't have that in mind at all while making the judgement for this game.

Which should be obvious with the amount of times I have banged on the role Redondo and Zizou will play here and their importance. In fact I would have simply voted for you if Redondo wasn't there, with the exact same two setups.

 

[sajeev]

I think Redondo has quite a comfortable control on this game, with Balu sitting deeper and countering.

Redondo is a great player but i think he is over-rated on this board because of his performance against us in 2000

 

[Moby]

Redondo is a great player but i think he is over-rated on this board because of his performance against us in 2000

You can go to any other board to verify how he is rated, I have and he is rated higher outside this board than he is here.

 

[antohan]

I blame his Panini stickers, looked way too friendly and a bit of a soft lad for a German defender.

 

[Balu]

I blame his Panini stickers, looked way too friendly and a bit of a soft lad for a German defender.

True

He had his moments though:

 

[Theon]

Redondo is a great player but i think he is over-rated on this board because of his performance against us in 2000

It isn't actually just Redondo though - I actually think Balu needs to play that way. If you look at the pace in Polaroids front three I just can't see the defence or midfield pushing up and dominating the game because a Pol counter would be lethal with Bale, Eto'o etc being supplied by Zidane.

Of course Redondo is good enough to take control of the game anyway.

 

[Polaroid]

Thank you all for the great discussion with solid contributions from so many
I have to sign out now and will be back in 10 hrs or so, I know I am losing but it has been enjoyable hearing everyone's tactical insights and player discussions

 

[Balu]

It was just a small, trivia if you wanna call it that, I didn't have that in mind at all while making the judgement for this game.

Which should be obvious with the amount of times I have banged on the role Redondo and Zizou will play here and their importance. In fact I would have simply voted for you if Redondo wasn't there, with the exact same two setups.

Well, yeah, I don't disagree with that. But it's not because of my formation, it's simply because you rate those two so incredibly high - nothing wrong with that.

Would anyone question a 3 man midfield with Effenberg - Sammer - Kroos against any team in the world? Then with Buchwald - Kohler in defense as well? That's not a particularly attacking setup at all. Yet, the moment, you don't use Sammer as a man-marker for the opposing AM, it all falls apart? That makes no sense, not the slightest. I play 2 CMs with high workrate and one of the greatest DMs/sweepers of all time, but it's not defensive enough? I don't get it, really. The difference between my 532 and a modern 433 is simply in the movement. Players who drift wide instead of wingers who drift inside. A libero moving forward instead of a DM dropping deep. There were several articles about the return of the sweeper, because modern fullbacks are all about attacking and you need that DM to drop in defense again. The 4231 is a classic example for a formation that wants to get the fullbacks involved again.

For example:
http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2009/sep/22/football-tactics-trends

And there are countless more. The tactics are going back to these type of games, we just paint it differently in the formation graph, big deal, look at the players and their roles, that's always the key.

 

[Balu]

Thank you all for the great discussion with solid contributions from so many
I have to sign out now and will be back in 10 hrs or so, I know I am losing but it has been enjoyable hearing everyone's tactical insights and player discussions

It was a fun ride, and I'm happy to get a break as well . I'll tell a few stories about my players, but won't bang on about your team until you're back. Cheers mate.

 

[antohan]

There were several articles about the return of the sweeper, because modern fullbacks are all about attacking and you need that DM to drop in defense again.

I was a pioneer mate, a PIONEER. In my first draft (70s) I made the rookie mistake of picking Carsten Ramelow ridiculously early to perform that role. Got lambasted for it Not sure if people didn't get the point or just didn't rate Ramelow, mind.

 

[Balu]

I was a pioneer mate, a PIONEER. In my first draft (70s) I made the rookie mistake of picking Carsten Ramelow ridiculously early to perform that role. Got lambasted for it Not sure if people didn't get the point or just didn't rate Ramelow, mind.

I discussed him with Annah and would have picked him, if Sammer was blocked. He was my only back up for Sammer, amazing player. The whole tactic discussion is the main reason, why I sticked with my 532. I could have easily changed it to a 433, but it isn't necessary, both work if the players are able to play their roles.

 

[Gio]

The biggest danger on the pitch is clearly Zidane who really is a level above, but I'm not sure a 3-5-2 would be the best way to combat him. I think I would prefer a dedicated DM to try and limit his influence.

Zidane was at his effervescent peak at Euro 2000 but it was in the final against Italy's 3-5-1-1 that he was largely anonymous.

 

[Gio]

I am also curious if people here rate Brian Laudrup. Euro 92 was memorable for that Danish fairy tale. Last minute replacements... who would have thought they would win it, especially without Michael

The boy was nothing short of amazing. He's a diamond in a draft like this where he can switch flanks to terrorise a weaker full-back. His performances at Euro 92, Euro 96 and France 98 were impeccable.

 

[Balu]

I'd love to talk more about the connections in my team, I already mentioned several of them, especially the ones in defense. But there's a pretty obvious one, that might be underrated on here, but is imo crucial for the success of my team in this game. Toni Kroos and Thomas Müller are two of the brilliant young German players who took at first the league, then also the CL by storm and Thomas Müller added a golden boot at the worldcup to that list (the youngest winner since Pele, if I'm not mistaken). Their careers took slightly different turns when Kroos went on loan to Leverkusen and van Gaal started to use Thomas Müller regularly. But only one season later, they were united again and instantly connected. Thomas Müller scored the first goal of the new season after an amazing one-two with Kroos and a - as always clumsy looking but - brilliant finish in the season opener against Wolfsburg:



And it was just the start of a successful story. Sadly Kroos' career was interrupted with injuries twice, but whenever they play together you can see that almost telepathic understanding. I expect Kroos to pick out Müller's runs better than anyone else and create something dangerous time and time again. Those two work beautiful together. It doesn't necessarily have to be assist and goal, just a smart run with a wonderful pass that unlocks the defense and helps one of their teammates to get a quality shot on goal will do. Here are highlight videos for those two players, I'm sure you find a few of these moments in there:

 

[NM]

I can't actually pick a side. Not going to vote.

 

[crappycraperson]

This is only my second draft but I followed some others without ever posting. I must say that there are some players that are draft superman on here. Redondo for one. I rate him a lot as well but he gets too much credit on here to change any game. Interesting that Balu is leading this right now BTW.. I thought people will see Zidane + Redondo and that will be that.

I am with anto.. overall Balu's team is better. I don't rate Pol's defense bar Ferdinand. Gallas at RB is meh, Alaba can be exposed defensively easily and Hummels is not top class yet as well. Having Petit and Redondo there helps though. As far as attack goes, Etoo while being one of the best in his prime can be handled by Balu's CBs for me. The decisive issue is the role of Zidane. As good as Sammer may be, it is asking too much of him to both play the sweeper and take care of Zidane. I think Balu should have simply played him as a DM here. Taking out Zidane is a huge plus. It would have also freed Kroos and Effenberg who would have seen to Redondo making any forward runs.

 

[Balu]

This is only my second draft but I followed some others without ever posting. I must say that there are some players that are draft superman on here. Redondo for one. I rate him a lot as well but he gets too much credit on here to change any game. Interesting that Balu is leading this right now BTW.. I thought people will see Zidane + Redondo and that will be that.

I am with anto.. overall Balu's team is better. I don't rate Pol's defense bar Ferdinand. Gallas at RB is meh, Alaba can be exposed defensively easily and Hummels is not top class yet as well. Having Petit and Redondo there helps though. As far as attack goes, Etoo while being one of the best in his prime can be handled by Balu's CBs for me. The decisive issue is the role of Zidane. As good as Sammer may be, it is asking too much of him to both play the sweeper and take care of Zidane. I think Balu should have simply played him as a DM here. Taking out Zidane is a huge plus. It would have also freed Kroos and Effenberg who would have seen to Redondo making any forward runs.

He's positioned (slightly) ahead of the 2 centerbacks, called a libero who's moving into midfield to contain Zidane several times and at no point did I ever say, he's going to sweep behind the defense. Why should he ever do that with only one striker in the box?

 

[crappycraperson]

Ok. I just don't understand why you are so hesitant to play him just as a DM in a 3 man midfield and push the other two CMs slightly more upfield. I don't think that will limit his influence necessarily. No need to man mark Zidane at all. On a side note, this notion that whenever Zidane had a bad game he was not at his best is very tedious. Gives no credit to opposing team's strategy to take him out of the game.

 

[Balu]

Ok. I just don't understand why you are so hesitant to play him just as a DM in a 3 man midfield and push the other two CMs slightly more upfield. I don't think that will limit his influence necessarily. No need to man mark Zidane at all. On a side note, this notion that whenever Zidane had a bad game he was not at his best is very tedious. Gives no credit to opposing team's strategy to take him out of the game.

Because I wanted to show the flexibility of that 532 formation with someone like Sammer in that libero role . But whatever I describe about the roles of all the players seems to be less important than their theoretical starting position on the teamsheet.

/edit:
Do you think that this team, when defending against Pol, would look any different than the one in the op? It is different in possession imo, but in defense?

 

[antohan]

It does, the three attacking players are now in midfield

No, seriously, the big deal really isn't whether he is deeper with an arrow or at DM, the big deal is whether Sammer is dedicated to Zidane.

Considering he is the most influential player on the park, I would commit him myself. I can see the logic in relying on such a tightly knit side to share the burden and the flexibility that comes with that... but I would prioritise taking Zidane out of the game. Everything else, every other "battle", suddenly becomes much easier.

 

[Balu]

It's Zidane, not Maradona. I honestly believe that it's not necessary. The guy lost as many finals as he has won and it wasn't because he was playing for the underdog all the time. I agree with crappy, that he's really overrated here because of a few games and not because he constantly delivered and controled games on his own. Don't get me wrong, he is the best player on the pitch, no doubt about that, he deserves and has the attention of my midfielders (including Sammer). But the idea that he will definitely punish an opponent, the moment he isn't man-marked out of the game by a super defender is simply not true, not at all.

Anyway, if I choose to mark him out of the game, that surely should be Buchwald's job with Sammer playing centerback next to Kohler, right? Which would mean Kohler sticking to Eto'o, Sammer free to help out wherever he wants and actually able to move forward quite a bit. Sammer doing a man-marking job on Zidane is pretty much Beckenbauer/Charlton and Matthäus/Maradona all over again, it's just wrong, you don't do that with your best player on the pitch.

 

[antohan]

But the idea that he will definitely punish an opponent, the moment he isn't man-marked out of the game by a super defender is simply not true, not at all.

I agree, I would just be far more comfortable and think many others would as well.

Anyway, if I choose to mark him out of the game, that surely should be Buchwald's job with Sammer playing centerback next to Kohler, right? Which would mean Kohler sticking to Eto'o, Sammer free to help out wherever he wants and actually able to move forward quite a bit. Sammer doing a man-marking job on Zidane is pretty much Beckenbauer/Charlton and Matthäus/Maradona all over again, it's just wrong, you don't do that with your best player on the pitch.

That's fair.

 

[Balu]

I agree, I would just be far more comfortable and think many others would as well.

It's not like I let him run riot without giving him 'special' attention here, not at all. But I take away the flexibility of my defense, if I man-mark him. It all of a sudden becomes all about individual battles all over the pitch instead about what team works better as a unit. I don't think that helps me here overall and marking Zidane doesn't take him out of the game, he still will get his touches, he's a brilliant player after all, while I loose one player completely. Now, if I had chosen a even more defensive setup - like Frings instead of Kroos - it would make sense, but then my attack would all of a sudden look pretty much toothless.

Now Pol has all kind of things to worry about. Who's at Kroos when I win the ball back for example - no love for my Kroos + Müller story above btw? That goal vs Wolfsburg is - , who's with Effenberg? Who covers for Alaba on one of his runs, who helps out against Klinsmann, when Müller drags Hummels out wide? Then there's Scholl, I haven't talked enough about him, but the Scholl - Ziege connection really is a threat here. Is Brian Laudrup tracking Ziege all the way? It might not be individual brilliance, but it's been successful in the league, in Europe and for the nationalteam. It's simple and direct, but it needs attention.

 

[Gandalf Greyhame]

This is my first time in draft football, and I find the assumption of all players playing at their peaks really annoying.
I know its supposed to even things out, but I feel it actually makes things unbalanced simply because of the vast difference in the definitions of "peaks".

For example, Nani at his 'peak' is definitely world-class. He'll take on his man and beat him every time, deliver pin-point crosses and through balls, and make any striker look like Messi with his assists. His peak consists of individually brilliant performances - a straight 10 in a series of 5s and 6s.Whereas for someone like Walcott, the peak signifies a series of brilliant performance - 8s and 9s in a row. You could say Nani's peak is arguably better than Walcott's peak. Which is completely against the lopsided answer that the question "Nani or Walcott?" will elicit. Same for Berbatov, Balotelli, Townsend and the likes.

My point is - in the lineups above, Polaroid's team clearly has most of the '10' players. We've assumed that they will be at their peaks, so it means that this is a game when Eto'o will be in a hat-trick mood; Bale will have two assists; and let fly 3 from outside the box; Zidane will score 2 and assist 4; Redondo will get 2 and set up 1 and Petit will chip in, too. From set-pieces, Rio and Hummel will get a goal each.
Kahn at his best will stop half of those all by himself, and Balu's defence may stop half of the remaining. Crudely speaking, Polaroid's team will still have a minimum of three goals. Lets call it a 3 goal/attack team.

For Balu, his attacking players' peaks will be mostly in the 8s and the 9s. Muller and Kroos will set up 2 each and score two each. Klinsmann gets a hat-trick, and Scholl gets two. An assist each from Ziege and Effenberg. That's it. Even though Pol's defence is relatively weaker, Balu has at max a 2.5 goal/attack team.

And since we've already established that Polaroid will have majority possesion, we can assume that he will have more attacks and win by outscoring Balu. Balu's team might do a truly magnificent job containing Pol's attack most of the time but it still won't be enough.



Perhaps I was tired of thinking of all the mini-battles involved, and simplified it down too much. Anyway, I think I need more 'XP' in these drafts. So though I think it should be Polaroid winning it, I dislike my approach to the conclusion, and so I won't vote.

So much for my efforts and arguments. It was fun, nonetheless.

 

[crappycraperson]

This is my first time in draft football, and I find the assumption of all players playing at their peaks really annoying.
I know its supposed to even things out, but I feel it actually makes things unbalanced simply because of the vast difference in the definitions of "peaks".

For example, Nani at his 'peak' is definitely world-class. He'll take on his man and beat him every time, deliver pin-point crosses and through balls, and make any striker look like Messi with his assists. His peak consists of individually brilliant performances - a straight 10 in a series of 5s and 6s.Whereas for someone like Walcott, the peak signifies a series of brilliant performance - 8s and 9s in a row. You could say Nani's peak is arguably better than Walcott's peak. Which is completely against the lopsided answer that the question "Nani or Walcott?" will elicit. Same for Berbatov, Balotelli, Townsend and the likes.

My point is - in the lineups above, Polaroid's team clearly has most of the '10' players. We've assumed that they will be at their peaks, so it means that this is a game when Eto'o will be in a hat-trick mood; Bale will have two assists; and let fly 3 from outside the box; Zidane will score 2 and assist 4; Redondo will get 2 and set up 1 and Petit will chip in, too. From set-pieces, Rio and Hummel will get a goal each.
Kahn at his best will stop half of those all by himself, and Balu's defence may stop half of the remaining. Crudely speaking, Polaroid's team will still have a minimum of three goals. Lets call it a 3 goal/attack team.

For Balu, his attacking players' peaks will be mostly in the 8s and the 9s. Muller and Kroos will set up 2 each and score two each. Klinsmann gets a hat-trick, and Scholl gets two. An assist each from Ziege and Effenberg. That's it. Even though Pol's defence is relatively weaker, Balu has at max a 2.5 goal/attack team.

And since we've already established that Polaroid will have majority possesion, we can assume that he will have more attacks and win by outscoring Balu. Balu's team might do a truly magnificent job containing Pol's attack most of the time but it still won't be enough.



Perhaps I was tired of thinking of all the mini-battles involved, and simplified it down too much. Anyway, I think I need more 'XP' in these drafts. So though I think it should be Polaroid winning it, I dislike my approach to the conclusion, and so I won't vote.

So much for my efforts and arguments. It was fun, nonetheless.

Very interesting take on the whole thing.

I disagree with you on the peak thing. I think you are free to use your own definition of peak. In your own example I would average out Nani's 10 with other mediocre performances. For me the frequency of a player performing at his best also matters here. For example I do not rate someone like Robben as highly as others in this draft for this very reason.

 

[Gandalf Greyhame]

Very interesting take on the whole thing.

I disagree with you on the peak thing. I think you are free to use your own definition of peak. In your own example I would average out Nani's 10 with other mediocre performances. For me the frequency of a player performing at his best also matters here. For example I do not rate someone like Robben as highly as others in this draft for this very reason.

Am I? Then the whole issue boils down to the simple act of persuasion. If Balu is the more persuasive talker, he will find means of convincing us that his defence will contain Polaroid, and somehow outscore the latter. If Polaroid is more convincing in his arguments, then we will end up thinking 'it's Zinedine Zidane, Gareth Bale, Fernando Redondo and Samuel Eto'o at their best against 5 mere mortals. Is this poll a joke?'

Okay, I exaggerated. But you get my point. And when that happens, isn't the whole point of the draft lost?
Or, perhaps, I've had the wrong idea of the 'whole point' itself.

 

[antohan]

This is my first time in draft football, and I find the assumption of all players playing at their peaks really annoying.
I know its supposed to even things out, but I feel it actually makes things unbalanced simply because of the vast difference in the definitions of "peaks".

By peak we mean career peak, not the best possible performance they could produce. That is, at least a season and ideally three. E.g. peak Valencia would be the one from 2010-12 (roughly) and would most likely be a better player than Nani or Walcott because, while able to produce better performances, they rarely did.

 

[Balu]

This is my first time in draft football, and I find the assumption of all players playing at their peaks really annoying.
I know its supposed to even things out, but I feel it actually makes things unbalanced simply because of the vast difference in the definitions of "peaks".

For example, Nani at his 'peak' is definitely world-class. He'll take on his man and beat him every time, deliver pin-point crosses and through balls, and make any striker look like Messi with his assists. His peak consists of individually brilliant performances - a straight 10 in a series of 5s and 6s.Whereas for someone like Walcott, the peak signifies a series of brilliant performance - 8s and 9s in a row. You could say Nani's peak is arguably better than Walcott's peak. Which is completely against the lopsided answer that the question "Nani or Walcott?" will elicit. Same for Berbatov, Balotelli, Townsend and the likes.

My point is - in the lineups above, Polaroid's team clearly has most of the '10' players. We've assumed that they will be at their peaks, so it means that this is a game when Eto'o will be in a hat-trick mood; Bale will have two assists; and let fly 3 from outside the box; Zidane will score 2 and assist 4; Redondo will get 2 and set up 1 and Petit will chip in, too. From set-pieces, Rio and Hummel will get a goal each.
Kahn at his best will stop half of those all by himself, and Balu's defence may stop half of the remaining. Crudely speaking, Polaroid's team will still have a minimum of three goals. Lets call it a 3 goal/attack team.

For Balu, his attacking players' peaks will be mostly in the 8s and the 9s. Muller and Kroos will set up 2 each and score two each. Klinsmann gets a hat-trick, and Scholl gets two. An assist each from Ziege and Effenberg. That's it. Even though Pol's defence is relatively weaker, Balu has at max a 2.5 goal/attack team.

And since we've already established that Polaroid will have majority possesion, we can assume that he will have more attacks and win by outscoring Balu. Balu's team might do a truly magnificent job containing Pol's attack most of the time but it still won't be enough.



Perhaps I was tired of thinking of all the mini-battles involved, and simplified it down too much. Anyway, I think I need more 'XP' in these drafts. So though I think it should be Polaroid winning it, I dislike my approach to the conclusion, and so I won't vote.

So much for my efforts and arguments. It was fun, nonetheless.

Interesting post. Great that you took the time to share your opinion. I think you need to come up with a way to decide for yourself, you'll always find others who disagree. The whole peak thing is impossible to make 100% clear for everyone. Some players had different peaks in different positions, others played brilliantly for 2 seasons and were shit before and ofter while some were incredibly consistent for more than a decade. Weigh those things in a bit, let's say someone showed up in 50% of the big games, then his peak performance won't show up every time. Players who only had one or two great seasons weren't necessarily great but maybe were only on a great run unless there's a great explanation like injuries. Have a look at the tactics as well, are players out of position, do they complement each other well. There are so many things you can consider and weigh differently. If you try to count possible goals the way you did, you probably go crazy. Just try to get a feeling for how the game would play out and if you believe one team is more likely to win, vote. No one will bite your head off for disagreeing.

I often end up not voting at all, because I can't make up mind, nothing wrong with that. In the end it's really just a game, enjoy the ride.

 

[antohan]

Am I? Then the whole issue boils down to the simple act of persuasion. If Balu is the more persuasive talker, he will find means of convincing us that his defence will contain Polaroid, and somehow outscore the latter. If Polaroid is more convincing in his arguments, then we will end up thinking 'it's Zinedine Zidane, Gareth Bale, Fernando Redondo and Samuel Eto'o at their best against 5 mere mortals. Is this poll a joke?'

Okay, I exaggerated. But you get my point. And when that happens, isn't the whole point of the draft lost?
Or, perhaps, I've had the wrong idea of the 'whole point' itself.

Yeah, ultimately it's persuasion. See crappy there re: Robben? Many would agree Robben has been one of the best wingers around for quite some time!

It's not expected to be an exact science. Football never is.

 

[Gandalf Greyhame]

By peak we mean career peak, not the best possible performance they could produce. That is, at least a season and ideally three. E.g. peak Valencia would be the one from 2010-12 (roughly) and would most likely be a better player than Nani or Walcott because, while able to produce better performances, they rarely did.

Interesting post. Great that you took the time to share your opinion. I think you need to come up with a way to decide for yourself, you'll always find others who disagree. The whole peak thing is impossible to make 100% clear for everyone. Some players had different peaks in different positions, others played brilliantly for 2 seasons and were shit before and ofter while some were incredibly consistent for more than a decade. Weigh those things in a bit, let's say someone showed up in 50% of the big games, then his peak performance won't show up every time. Players who only had one or two great seasons weren't necessarily great but maybe were only on a great run unless there's a great explanation like injuries. Have a look at the tactics as well, are players out of position, do they complement each other well. There are so many things you can consider and weigh differently. If you try to count possible goals the way you did, you probably go crazy. Just try to get a feeling for how the game would play out and if you believe one team is more likely to win, vote. No one will bite your head off for disagreeing.

I often end up not voting at all, because I can't make up mind, nothing wrong with that. In the end it's really just a game, enjoy the ride.

Thanks. I'll try to be more open-minded next time, and take all those pointers into consideration.

Yeah, ultimately it's persuasion. See crappy there re: Robben? Many would agree Robben has been one of the best wingers around for quite some time!

It's not expected to be an exact science. Football never is.

Yep, I agree.

And you can't persuade me into thinking that Robben is up there with the best. He's just in good form now, I remember times when he just didn't turn up.

 

[antohan]

Thanks. I'll try to be more open-minded next time, and take all those pointers into consideration.




Yep, I agree.

And you can't persuade me into thinking that Robben is up there with the best. He's just in good form now, I remember times when he just didn't turn up.

Have you seen who is in scope though? No Figo, no Dinho, no CR7... Is Bale bettet then? I remember times when he had the awesome record of Spurs never winning when he played...

 

[Moby]

This is only my second draft but I followed some others without ever posting. I must say that there are some players that are draft superman on here. Redondo for one. I rate him a lot as well but he gets too much credit on here to change any game. Interesting that Balu is leading this right now BTW.. I thought people will see Zidane + Redondo and that will be that.

I am with anto.. overall Balu's team is better. I don't rate Pol's defense bar Ferdinand. Gallas at RB is meh, Alaba can be exposed defensively easily and Hummels is not top class yet as well. Having Petit and Redondo there helps though. As far as attack goes, Etoo while being one of the best in his prime can be handled by Balu's CBs for me. The decisive issue is the role of Zidane. As good as Sammer may be, it is asking too much of him to both play the sweeper and take care of Zidane. I think Balu should have simply played him as a DM here. Taking out Zidane is a huge plus. It would have also freed Kroos and Effenberg who would have seen to Redondo making any forward runs.

Not really crappy, how many times has he made to the final or even the latter stages? I don't remember him much in winning teams here. It's usually Rijkaard who is actually a superhero and no matter which AM he is up against the voter simply think he would stop him. I took advantage of that fact in the last all time one where I picked him up first, then I faced the likes of Sir Bobby and Zidane and all of them were supposedly taken out by him, which is a bit silly as it's not like they were average players.

I might be forgetting it but I don't remember Redondo being a superhero here. Even in this game, he's losing despite being the best CM on the pitch.

It's just me who absolutely loves him and I very clearly admitted earlier that I easily get romantic when it comes to him, we all have those players we don't look past. Laudrup for anto, for example. I'd have Redondo's babies if I could, the man was football porn for me.

 

[Moby]

Very interesting take on the whole thing.

I disagree with you on the peak thing. I think you are free to use your own definition of peak. In your own example I would average out Nani's 10 with other mediocre performances. For me the frequency of a player performing at his best also matters here. For example I do not rate someone like Robben as highly as others in this draft for this very reason.

Same here, for me it is always a question of which Robben will show up. Whichever period you take as his peak he will always have those performances in between where he's just wasteful the whole time and is detrimental to the team rather than the other way.

Obviously not as much as someone like Nani and the fact the Robben has done at a lot of big games also goes in his favour but consistency is something I wouldn't say is his best attribute. But then players like that are worthy to gamble for, because you know if they being their best they will win you the game. You know, if I had to take an equivalent of sorts, I'd say Sehwag for India. We always knew that he would never go 10 games in a row without making a fool for himself but at his peak dropping him was out of question just for those few games where he would destroy the other team minutes after the game had started. Robben does that more frequently than him though but you get the point.