Post-match: San Jose Earthquakes - Colorado Rapids (Saturday, 4/19) postgame (R)

That's one inaccurate claim ... care to name another? As for the physical stuff, I'm glad the DC is cracking down on A-hole behavior whether it involves Quakes players (as it often does) or otherwise.

 

So "outmatched" yet we got a shutout

 

If score lines are how you judge teams performances, why bother watching games?

 

I was referring to the "outmatched". We had the best chance of the game when Gordon hit the crossbar. My point is that we were not outmatched.

 

I guess my question is reading this and other posts in different threads is, why should we be satisfied with a 0-0 tie in Colorado? Two years ago if the team played that poorly against what we all know is an average MLS team, we'd shrug our shoulders and say it was an anomaly.

That it's seen as a good thing speaks as to how the mighty have fallen.

 

I cant speak for everyone, but I think its acceptable given our current injury situation.

 

When you have on older team, and play a physical style, you have more injuries. We've been plagued by the injury bug since playoffs 2012. Apparently haven't learned from it.

 

What about Djalo?

 

What about him? He's an unknown entity that hasn't had any consistent PT for several years, which is why we were able to sign him - on loan. Apparently he hasn't played awhile for a reason and the long term absence may have taken a toll. We shall see. He certainly looks like an exciting talent. But.

He's injured.

We've signed yet another international player who is not in shape and injured. What was the name of the Brazilian "DP" type signing. The fiasco. I can't even remember his name.

 

just look at their heat maps man.

here is the colorado match... check wondo's heat map... he only gets 2 or 3 actions in the box and most of his actions are around the center circle or behind it: http://www.mlssoccer.com/matchcenter/2014-04-19-COL-v-SJ/chalkboard



here is the 3-3 draw against RSL from the home opener... he only has 3 or 4 actions behind the center circle and has over a dozen actions in and around the box: http://www.mlssoccer.com/matchcenter/2014-03-15-SJ-v-RSL/chalkboard



let the Colorado match be the first and last time we play 4-5-1 this season and especially at playing wondo in the midfield. dude is a striker, get him in the f***ing box!

 

Whoa, you're going to compare a 0-0 grinder on the road where the team even went a man down late, with a wide open home game where the Quakes went down 2 goals and got desperate to push the issue offensively? That's crazy. A better point of comparison would the 1-0 loss at KC (playing on the road, scoreless for at least much of the game). Looks like Wondo has only one touch in the box the whole game, as a forward!.

You said that the Quakes issues with the offense against CO because the 5-man midfield "prevents you from attacking with numbers. Wondo was MIA on a lot of our crosses against Colorado". I showed in painstaking detail, at least for the first 15 minutes or so, that the Quakes were able to attack in numbers. That was not the problem. It was execution in the final 3rd. Heck they had trouble even getting crosses off period during the run of play in that time period, and that was purely an execution problem. Failing to hold onto the ball in wide positions in the final 3rd, Salinas hitting crosses into defenders, etc.

The 1st half is where the teams are playing on even terms and you can really see the relative effectiveness. The Quakes played roughly even with CO in the 1st half, on the road (and Dangerfield even said that he thought the Quakes had the better of the run of play), whereas they were overrun in the 1st half the last two home games. So the CO game was a big improvement. Long live the Quakes 5-man midfield!

As for Wondo, again, history shows that it doesn't tend to matter all that much where he plays. He scores anyway. And if you want to compare those two apple and oranges games above, I would prefer to have my DP making almost 30% more touches, as he had in the CO game. And if you make the more apples - apples comparison, SJ-CO to SJ-KC, Wondo had 60% more touches in the CO game.

 

here is his heat map in the 2-1 home loss to NE:

Sure he can pick a pass but he is the best finisher in the league so we need to get him in the f***ing box. AC Milan didn't play Inzaghi in the midfield.

 

View attachment 27191

Once again, it has been shown that Wondo scores from midfield positions at a comparable rate. He is a unique player that finds ways to get in position to score from multiple positions on the field. He is not "Inzaghi". And once again, let's do apples to apples. Here is KC-SJ, road game, scoreless for much of the game, not the Quakes pressing from behind and going nuts to try to get a home win. Wondo, as a forward, one touch in the box.

 

Jazzy - you can't really be arguing that it's better to have our striker play midfield, can you? I mean, given a choice, do you want him in the midfield or up top. One or the other, no waffling.

 

All else equal I'd rather have him at forward. But he does just fine, and in fact is quite productive as a goal scorer from midfield positions. But that's not my argument. Don't try to pull these lawyer shenanigans on me. It won't work :--).

My argument is that the Quakes are better off playing a 5-man midfield right now. It leads to better movement thru midfield and better play overall. And I think the CO game showed that. Go back and read my analysis of the Quakes offensive forays in the first 15 minutes or so of the game. The problem wasn't "lack of forwards". There was some pretty good movement thru midfield and numbers forward, Wondo of course among them, but their execution / final pass let them down.

If the Quakes had a great 4-man midfield that was raking, I'd be happy with that, and Wondo as a forward. But it's clear that the 4-man midfield wasn't cutting it. It is quite possible, if the 4-man midfield is not cutting it, that Wondo will get less chances than he would functioning more as a midfielder in a 5-man midfield, and the KC vs. CO game comparison is a case in point.

Chris Dangerfield probably has more soccer knowledge embedded in his pinkie finger than the rest of us put together. And it's clear from his comments that he felt the 4-man midfield was not getting it done, whereas he was generally positive about the Quakes play in CO, especially in the 1st half.

 

I don't know what game you were watching, Jazzy, but we were TERRIBLE against CO. Remember that we had no shots on goal? Our offense sucked? Sure, sticking Wondo in the midfield puts another body back there, but it's a stupid move if you're actually trying to score. Your contention that Wondo scores at a decent rate from midfield is one I disagree with. The usual case is Wondo disappears and his chances on goal drops significantly. Exactly how many goals has he scored while in midfield? It's a waste to put Wondo back there. It's the main gripe every time Yallop/Watson did so - it takes our best scorer out of the game.

 

Ask Chris Dangerfield what game he was watching when he said that he thought that the Quakes had the better run of play in the 1st half of the game, and at the same time he was not shy about saying that the midfield was not getting it done in the last few previous games. Remember also this is a road game. Home teams normally control games in parity-ridden MLS. That's the way it is. In that light, Quakes did reasonably well on balance, whereas they were pretty solidly outplayed the last few home games.

I don't have the stats on Wondo's scoring rate as a midfielder. But one year where he played a lot of midfield (I think it was 2010) he scored a lot, including some multiple goal games and possibly even a hat trick.

 

The actual statistics on Wondo scoring from midfield are key to your argument, even though 2010 is a long time ago with an almost completely different team.

Sorry Jazzy, but your argument boils down to:

"Wondo can be effective as a scorer from a midfield position because I vaguely remember him scoring from there a lot in 2010, but I can't be bothered to look up the actual statistics."

"Chris Dangerfield says so."

"I re-watched the first 15 minutes of the Colorado match, and SJ would have had shots on goal or more scoring chances if they had better players."

 

Again, this is not so much about Wondo, but my argument is that the Quakes are better off playing a 5-man midfield right now. Play Wondo as the "1" if you're concerned about getting him closer to the goal.

Feel free to look up Wondo's scoring rate as a midfielder if you want to refute my point. It wasn't just me noticing. There was a comment from Yallop at the time that it didn't seem to matter where Wondo played - he was going to score.

As for the "re-watching", I'm looking at flow, are the Quakes getting the ball into dangerous positions with numbers, and the answer was "yes", at least during the time that I watched. Of course you can always use better players, but the players you have need to make plays. That's a given regardless of formation. If you are getting into good positions with some numbers with some frequency, the goals will come, even with mediocre players. Salinas is often poor with his final ball, but he still gets a number of assists because he gets in good positions a lot (and also, he takes most of the dead ball kicks).

 

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, even JazzyJ himself admits Wondo should be playing forward. If they agree with us, you must find in favor of my client . . . "

 

there's no point to having more possession and stringing more passes together if Wondo is not in the box to get on the end of them

 

Actually, the way debates or discussions work is that the person making the argument is supposed to provide the evidence. Nice try, though. Of course, Frank Yallop said what he did. No one would expect him to say, "I played Wondo out of position because I'm a bad manager," or something to that effect.

In any case, 2010 and 2012 are too far past for any of us or especially team management to continue to make meals from those years.

 

And at the same time, if your midfield is so ineffectual that you are run over and you are not get the ball into dangerous positions on the field, it doesn't matter where Wondo is. Case in point, the KC match. As a mid, Wondo will get to the box. He will just get there by running forward instead of standing there (or he will be standing there because it is a set piece).

 

OK, then I'll wait for SJTillIDie to support his argument that the Quakes should never play a 5-man midfield again, because that's the argument I have been responding to.

I've provided plenty of evidence, from detailed game analysis to heat maps, numbers of touches, etc. Only thing missing is a hard number on Wondo's scoring rate from midfield but I'd be surprised if it wasn't pretty good. Feel free to ding me on that technicality if it floats your boat. Wondo typically gets a couple of good chances a game. Even in the last game he had a header from relatively close range that he popped over the bar and a volley that he shanked. But again, Wondo in midfield is not core to my argument. Play him as the 1 on top of a 5-man midfield. I'd be fine with that.