theHotHead wrote:EliteKiller wrote:theHotHead wrote:EliteKiller wrote:GoonerAlexis wrote:And when you read it, Lacazette is far better than Giroud. And younger.
Quite probably true .... both decent goal scorers and absolute crap at creating.... one is 26 the other 30 .... my point was that after 5 years of Giroud why buy a carbon copy? and why are we buying second tier players? Lacca, Xhaka, Mustafi wouldn't get in the starting line ups of any of our rivals .... yet we buy them as starters .... they are all bench players at best ....
How are Giroud and Laca carbon copies of each other ? They are complete opposites. Giroud offers aerial threat and physical strength (sometimes). Lacazette offers deadly finishing and movement off the ball.
Look at end results ..... it's a bit like the EPL table .... playing tippy-tappy - park the bus - 5 strikers that all might be different but in the final analysis it's only points that matter ...
Same goes for strikers it's goals and assists that count .... (FYI chances are based on KP's)
Thats an oversimplification that does not work !! You cannot ignore the rest of the game because if all you do is manage by numbers half the players playing football would not have a career. Some players are good foils for others, other players are complementary to a system or to other players, if you look purely at numbers some players would look like utter dog shit. Hleb's numbers were shit but he was vitally important for Arsenal because he was so good at keeping the ball and he won so many free kicks we kept possession, for example.
Except we're not talking about Hleb .... we're talking about strikers who's role is to score and create goals .... as far as i know you measure strikers on goals not on tackles, ball control and interceptions .... but you use whatever works for you ....
See the French manager picked his favourite again last night .... and he scored .... 29th goal in 69 internationals feckin' rubbish player ....
