Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Liverpool' started by dcc134, Mar 23, 2012.
Interesting Carroll stats from @dankennett
Interesting stats re: Carroll. Would agree with what the data suggests: start him or sell him. There shouldn't be a £35m man rotting on your bench.
< ^ . .^ >
Been a big supporter of his potential but fck me its getting to be a longish wait.
I couldn't agree more.
He was a 35m player when we bought now he's only worth what we can get for him and he's only costing us his salary and I think we should act accordingly. For me that means giving him time unless he's not putting in the effort during games or parctices or his play is regressing.
His salary as far as we know is minimal for an EPL player. Hell, Jovanovic was almost on double the reported wages. I'd rather keep him on the books, and sell Cole, Aqua man etc first.
Yup. Cost of carrying him is pretty modest. Let's see what we can do with him. We just blew a lot of the Torres windfall on his down payment. Having said that, he's tying up the #9 shirt and I'd move him out of it if the right player came along.
For me this isn't just a financial thing, he is just not good enough and his attitude on the pitch is dragging us down. The financial cost is minimal but it's the cost on the pitch. He just doesn't want to be at LFC in my opinion, move him on for whatever we can get and lets get a number 9 in who gives a damn.
sunderland will most certainly be looking for a striker in the summer. 10m and he is gone back to the northeast. happy for everybody.
when combined with cash for aqua and cole, that would give us a 20m to our summer spending (which should be spent on suarez or munain, or vargas and another creative player).
The fact that we win when he starts, and lose when he doesn't seems like a great reason to keep him.
Well it's at least a reason to do what the data suggests and start him. What frustrates me is it doesn't seem like Dalglish cares much about using data to support his decisions. He seems to be more from the old school "I know it when I see it" type of manager. That approach won't last long with the analytics-obsessed red sox guys (that's why they hired Moneyball disciple Comolli). He is the Grady Little of Liverpool FC (if you're in the mood for hearing an entertaining rant on the value of using data, ask a red sox fan about the Grady Little / Pedro fiasco in 2003...actually don't, it's still painful).
On Carroll, if our goal is to win games, don't use him as a substitute. Based on his career success as a starter in Newcastle and then the numbers at LFC, you either have confidence in him as a starter (he needs this confidence and trust from his staff) or you sell him. It's pretty simple actually.
Exactly. I guess everyone either didn't read the OP or has no comprehension of statistics.
Regardless of whether he is scoring or not, we are winning when he plays and something like 80% of Suarez's goals have come when they are both on the field. He should be starting every game he is fit.
I don't care much for statistics, seems like it hasn't worked that well for us so far has it? Statistic disciples neglect that many other statistics make up every statistic they are quoting to make their point. If you are seriously saying that the single reason LFC won those games is because Carroll started then I would say you'd have been my statistics professors favorite student to pick on.
As for Carroll, my personal opinion is that he is a lazy, unrefined player who does not want to be at Anfield, he said it the first day he started and he has not shown a desire to be at Anfield since then. He is a drunk giraffe in my opinion with no instinct of the game and his lack of effort indicative of his belief that he is entitled to a starting place when his appearances as a substitute testify of his lack of effort to prove himself or his desire.
Not only do I have a low opinion of the player but I grow more frustrated with the other players when he is on the pitch. The 'lob it to Andy' brigade show even more laziness every time they whack it forward knowing that most of the time he will not be the winner in the air, nor can he hold a ball or post up particularly well.
So yeah, statistics can be as much bollocks as fact and the fact that we've been doing the money ball for for nearly two years now and are still having this conversation tells me that no system is fool proof or perfect.
So on the balance of things do I think he's been worth the money? No. Do I think he should be sold? Yes.
We win more games and earn more points with Carroll in the lineup than without.
We score more goals per game without Suarez than we do with in the lineup.
Certainly we can look for reasons to dismiss these stats but there is something in them.
If you care about winning games, Carroll would be in the lineup.
When someone being on the pitch equates directly to us going WWWWW instead of LLLLL on the form charts, that player must be a huge factor. Moneyball is supposed to use statistics that are little noticed or valued. WWWWW versus LLLLL is the most highly valued statistic in soccer. Therefore, this isn't a Moneyball thing.
Obviously it isn't all Andy Carroll. But many of the pieces are directly related to him being on the pitch. When Carroll is on the pitch, we play with two strikers instead of one. When he is on the pitch, he drags defenders out of position. When he is on the pitch, Suarez doesn't have to drop as far back to receive the ball. When he is on the pitch for corners, he is a huge nuisance for the goalkeeper. When he is on the pitch, we get some knock downs that other players can run onto. These things happen much less when he is not on the pitch.
Finally, I believe he's more of an impact as a starter than a sub, because defenders spend so much time throughout a match focusing on where he is, that they become mentally tired. With Suarez, they don't have to worry as much, because much of his threat can be nullified by closing him down quickly with more than one player (which is easy to do when there is only one striker). But size cannot be accounted for, so the CD's have to spend 90 minutes focusing on where he is, quite possibly to the detriment of their other defensive duties.
Yes, clearly I don't care if we win or not. It's all about the participation for me at this level.
Seems pretty simple to me from your point of view Andy Carroll is the answer to all our woes. I disagree, and because you say the word 'statistics' a bunch of times doesn't make you right and yes I realise that the default for all statistics worshipers at this point is to say 'Saying the word doesn't make me right, the facts do'. Well your facts are based on statistics which are easily interpreted either way because guess what? They are made up of other statistics that someone else made up the parameters to report on.
See this is where I disagree, 'a' factor I could say yeah, maybe he's 'a' factor, but a 'huge factor', nope, sorry.
As for the list you give, I don't think I have ever seen him do any of those things. I can only assume that we are watching two different Andy Carroll's. I admit I have never been a fan of his but I have tried to like him and I can say that maybe my glasses are tinted against him slightly, so maybe I don't see any of the good things you claim he does.
I get that it looks like we only win when Andy Carroll is playing but there are so many other factors in this that it is too comical to put it all down to one guy. In those games are we seriously suggesting that there were no other changes other than AC started? Is it the only consistent change? What about the unknown variables? Perhaps the team strategy on the day? The teams we were playing perhaps? We know we play better when we have to rise to the occasion.
The fact for me is that I would rather we had a guy who wanted to be here, wasn't so lazy, and looked like he gave a damn and for the love of God would cut his bloody hair.
Cut his hair? Who are you, Daniel Passarella?
Just curious, what are all these other factors which so clearly indicate the win rate when Carroll starts is meaningless? If we want to get Suarez to score more goals, the evidence suggests you play him alongside Carroll.
He's not the answer to all our problems, but if we win 60% of the games he starts, shouldn't he start more often than not? Why isn't he playing against QPR and Wigan?
But I guess there is no point in going on, your mind is made up, "facts" be damned.
The fact is Suarez needs to play with a lead striker partner. Now right now the only one we have is Carroll. So we do better with him on the pitch. But could we do better with a more deadly and capable player in that role than Carroll? Yes. So we need to get one in the summer but for now Big Andy should play.
Statistics can always be manipulated to suit the one that wants to make a point, so i don't look too much into them.
The problem that i have with Carroll is not only his piss poor first touch (i mean, Kuyt looks like Maradona compared to him), but the fact that 95% of the time he just constantly whines and complaines, instead of getting on with the game.
Ahhh the all winning 'fact' word. Throw it out like it is fact and hey presto it is! Beats all the cards in my hand, genius move, genius.
So you are telling me that:
- There were no other team changes in the games that he started?
- Coaching staff didn't employ a different strategy for those games maybe?
- The teams we played didn't factor into it? The team wasn't more motivated than normal for example?
It is just wild to suggest that the only reason we aren't winning every game is that Andy Carroll isn't starting. If he's such a brilliant player and soooo needed by the club then how come he doesn't take the chance to prove it when he comes on as a sub? How come he sucks when he gets the chance to impress?
You are seriously saying the answer to our problems is Andy Carroll. His mere presence on the pitch makes us win games, wow, that's awesome, he's like a magic bean stalk. Can you name a game where it was universally agreed he played a blinder for Liverpool? I can't think of any.
Andy Carroll may be a factor but the idea that he is THE answer is laughable.
I'm sorry but you jumped on that 'piss poor 1st touch' bandwagon too early. Yes he had a very poor 1st touch but that was a lot to do with injury/fitness/pricetag/nerves/new team tactics etc.
His 1st touch now is up to a more desirable standard and he now looks like a player who enjoys the ball at his feet. Those early days should be disregarded.
What he and Liverpool lack is someone to put a decent delivery from wide, not receiving your bread and butter when all you want to do is impress the boss and fans is going to make even a nun curse.
Downing, Adam and Henderson, three players brought in with their supposed excellent deliveries from wide positions, be it crosses or corners, have simply not delivered on any level at all. This is the crux of the problem with Carroll now.
Suarez, for all his ability is a bigger complainer, diver, cheater than Carroll could ever be. If that guy would just concentrate on playing 100% fair football he could be a much better team player and would probably find himself much cooler headed when faced with goal, instead of the spoilt brat attitude he has as he winds himself up when things don't go his way.
Wait a minute. Weren't you going on earlier in the year about how Suarez doesn't want to be here, doesn't want to play for LFC, will be gone in the summer, mark your words, blah-blah-yackety-blah? And now that it seems Suarez is happy here and wants to continue playing for LFC you've moved on to Andy Carroll? Who will be next after him?
Nail on the head. I'd add Kuyt to the list of poor crossers as well. Carroll would improve by leaps and bounds with good service.
Disagree. Suarez as a diver has been blown way of proportion to what actually transpires on the pitch. There's not been many "dives" this season. If anything, it's more perception than anything. The thing with Suarez this year has been his suspension that's really thrown off his game.
Add me to the list of "play him or ship him" list.