An Analysis of Three Formations (Summary at bottom if too long to read) 4-4-2 Diamond Lets start with this one. It is being recommended by many for a good reason - it gives us a creative CAM in Donovan. But there is another, better way to do this I believe which I will suggest later. But first lets look at the set up and why I'm not a fan: --------------------------------Keane------Zardes------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------Donovan------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------Husidic/Sarvas---------------------------------Ishi/Sarvas---------- -------------------------------------Juninho------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------Rogers-------------Opare/Meyer---Omar---------Gargan------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------Penedo--------------------------------- The disadvantages: The first problem with this formation is that it's too crowded in the middle up top. Keane, Zardes, and Donovan are too close together, tend to make similar runs, and get in each others way. It isn't a strong formation for wide play given our personnel. Neither Sarvas nor Husidic are good as wingers. This lineup doesn't take advantage of Zardes strengths. He is much better with space in front of him to work in and use his athleticism. This formation means his only space is for over the top balls which are very hard to execute and usually just end up in loss of possession. This formation also doesn't allow Zardes to do the defensive work which is a strength of his due again his athleticism and his run-all-day motor. This lineup also means Donovan has to do more defensive work since we have two players up top. He is also easier to mark out of the game because when we have this lineup the opposing defense will tend to stay close to the center where all of our main offensive weapons are. It puts Sarvas out wide which isn't a great position for this workhorse. He needs to be in the center so that he can use his motor to roam and do all the defensive work he does so well. And it doesn't take advantage of the understanding that Sarvas and Juninho have developed for alternately going forward and covering for each other. It leaves us with one defensive midfielder which doesn't allow us to control midfield or be as strong defensively. 4-4-2, Non-Diamond The formation that we most often use: --------------------------------Keane------LD/Zardes-------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------Zardes/LD-----------------------------------------Ishi------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------Sarvas------------Juninho----------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------Rogers-------------Opare/Meyer---Omar---------Gargan------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------Penedo--------------------------------- Disadvantages: If LD is up top it doesn't allow him to be a playmaker nor does it give him as much freedom to roam. If Zardes is up top it has the same problems mentioned previously of not playing to Zardes strengths. Worse it most often moves LD to left mid, away from the action, where he disappears and is in a poor position for him to be a playmaker. LD is not a winger, and especially not from the left. He is not great at winning midfield balls, playing pressure defense, and so left mid is just a waste of his talents overall. There really is no playmaker at all in this formation. It's good defensively because of the dual defensive midfielders but weak offensively as we've seen in the first half of several games. 4-2-3-1, with Donovan in the middle behind Keane. Someone else may have suggested this (SoCal?) but the more I think about it the more I realize that it is the best formation given our personnel: -----------------------------------------Keane---------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------LD------------------------------------ -------------Zardes---------------------------------------------Ishi------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------Sarvas------------Juninho----------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------Rogers-------------Opare/Meyer---Omar---------Gargan------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------Penedo---------------------------------- The advantages: Keanovan is always a good to have in your arsenal. But this formation doesn't depend on that combo like it tends to do when both are up top in a 4-4-2. Allows LD more freedom to do what he does best and where he helps the team the most. LD is in the center of the field, the spine where you want your best players. It allows LD to be very mobile postionally and flexible functionally. He can serve as either a CAM or a forward as the game conditions change, playing behind or on either side of Keane. He can hit Keane with passes centrally or Zardes and Ishi as they make runs giving us the width we need. It also relieves him of defensive duties which tend to wear him out. Plays to Zardes strengths. Gives him space in front to both take on players and to make wide or secondary runs into the box. For example if Ishi, Gargan, or Sarvas work the down the right side of the field and get a cross off or a centering pass, the space is perfect for Zardes can make the far post run into. This formation allows Zardes to do defensive work, winning loose balls, fighting for headers in midfield, all strengths of his. Sarvas and Juninho play their best positions (Sarvas isn't a wide midfielder). We control the midfield better when we don't have just one defensive midfielder. It is a very good counterattacking formation because there is a lot of space out wide for Zardes, Ishi, and Gargan to run into. Ishi likes to cut in toward the middle which is perfect because it leaves room for Gargan to make his runs up the right side. A final argument in it's favor is a quote I read in Wikipedia: "More recently, commentators have noted that at the highest level, the 4–4–2 is being phased out in favour of formations such as the 4–2–3–1.[11] In 2010, none of the winners of the Spanish, English and Italian leagues, as well as the Champions League, relied on the 4–4–2. Following England's elimination at the 2010 World Cup by a 4–2–3–1 Germany side, England National Team coach Fabio Capello (who was notably successful with the 4–4–2 at Milan in the 1990s) was criticised for playing an "increasingly outdated" 4–4–2 formation.[12]" Summary: 4-4-2, flat or diamond, just doesn't fit our personnel. It is forcing square pegs into round holes, like putting Sarvas out wide or forcing Zardes to be an up-top striker. It often doesn't get our best 11 on the field pushing Bruce to start Husidic. In the flat form it is strong defensively but weak offensively. In the diamond form it often buries Landon at left mid, robs us of our dual defensive mids that have worked so well for us, and tends to cede control of the midfield to our opponents. The 4-2-3-1 formation solves most of the issues we all have lamented about this season: It gives us the playmaker we need in LD while also allowing him to move up into the attack. It relieves him of defensive work that his 32 yo body doesn't need to be doing. It gives us more width in attack. It gives Zardes space to move in and attack out wide, helps him avoid duplicating Landon and Keane's runs that tend to congest the play and make it easier on the opposing defense, allows him to make secondary runs into the box which have been effective for him, and allows him to use his motor as a box to box offense/defense player. It gives us a solid defensive foundation with dual defensive mids Sarvas and Juninho while allowing them to also take turns pushing forward, puts Ishi in a good spot to either go wide or go inside to open up a channel for Gargan who likes to get forward. And finally it keeps Keanovan intact but makes it more dynamic, making it harder for a defense to shut them down because LD is more free to roam, play multiple roles, and our opponents have to worry about wide attacks as well. What do you think? Agree, disagree, alternatives?
With Keanovan up top we never really played in a flat 4-4-2, because Juni and Sarvas haven't a lot of creativity and it forces Donovan to drop back to CAM to feed Keane (or sometimes it was Robbie who fed Landon). The "flat 4-4-2" was just a theorical formation for the Galaxy the past two years when we were without Becks. We have a good back line but our offense is lacking something. Don't know if it's a CAM to create chances for Keanovan to allow them to concentrate only on finishing this chances, maybe it's a pure striker like Klose... Reminds me a little bit of our 2009, 2010 and 2011 seasons : good defense for the playoffs but we can be a lot better in the final third.
PS - I realize that formations morph during games and sometimes Landon and Keane play the flat 4-4-2 like a 4-2-3-1 with Landon or Keane dropping back and the other staying forward. But I still think the mindset is different in the two formations. In the 4-2-3-1 I was suggesting Landon's primary function is as a playmaker and Zardes and Ishi are expected to get into the attack alongside Keane. Very seldom should Landon be playing a striker role alongside Keane in this formation, which happens a lot when he is a forward in the flat 4-4-2. Edit: haha, I was writing this at the same time you posted on the same theme Lem-Lag. Landon (or Keane) being forced to drop back to get the ball isn't the same as starting out by design with LD as a playmaker behind Keane. Also in a 4-2-3-1 you tend to use different personnel - since Landon is seen as primarily a playmaker you will expect your wide midfielders to be faster wing players who can get into the attack and score. Traditional midfielders like Husidic don't fit this role; neither does Sarvas. Zardes and to a lesser extent Ishi do fit this mold.
I agree with most of your analysis, but I am not sure I agree with the solution. Your recommended formation, reminds me of an empty bucket formation, Bob Bradley used in 2010. I agree that it is a great counter attacking formation. However, I don't see Ishizaki and Gargan providing us with a counter attacking capability nor do I see anyone in the forward positions who will be capable of outjumping any defender over 5' 5" on a cross . I would rather get the personnel right and then work to the formation. From a personnel standpoint, I want to have AJDLG on the pitch (preferably at right back or center), I also have seen enough of Husidic at left wing to see that he is not the answer to solving the Galaxy's offensive woes. My solution rather than use Sarves there, is to put BJIV on the field (I thought on the left wing , but perhaps the right). I have mixed emotions about Zardes relative to his position. I agree with your analysis about ability to attack defenders on the wing with his pace. I believe he and BJIV would make great wings. IMO, the problem is that both Keane and Donovan are better at the withdrawn forward position than as a 1 on. Neither are great at winning the ball in the air and work best when they get the ball at their feet. IMO, their failure to consistently score (especially Landon) has been our biggest problem over a year. This would seem to call for a target forward, who could occupy a defender and let Robbie and Landon do what they do best. I think Bruce wanted to use Friend and Samuel for this purpose, unfortunately that move has failed. There are, however, other possibilities. The most obvious is McBean who seemed to play great at that position at the beggining of last year before he broke his collar bone. While I would like to see him get a second chance eventually, what little I have seen of him playing with Los Dos (often not in the target foward position) makes me think that this is not his year. Given the current roster, this leaves us with some out of the box candidates that I believe might work. My three candidates are: Izhizaki, Opare and perhaps Sarvas. Opare is the biggest of the 3 and probably has the most speed. I have noticed that when his is in the game (obviously as a defender), Bruce often has him stay forward after corner kicks and deep throw-ins to look for the play-in of a cleared ball. That implies he has some scoring skills, but I don't know if he has anything else. Ishizaki and Sarvas while not big (5' 11" and 5' 10" respectively), both have excellent vision and seem to know where to run to either receive the ball or pass it a player making a cut (Robbie and Landon's skill set). Given this, my recommendation, would be a 4-3-3 or actually a 4-1-2-2-1 arranged as follows: -----------------------------Ishizaki/Sarvas------------------------------- -------------------Keane------------------------Donovan----------------- -BJIV--------------------------------------------------------------Zardes- --------------------------------Juninho------------------------------------- Rodgers----------AJDLG/Meyer----------Gonzalez---------Gargan/AJ
First, I want to thank those who contributed to this discussion. It was very educational. I mean that seriously, since I played very little and never with a coach. Second, I agree that AJDLG needs to be on the pitch. Now, here's my off the wall suggestion regarding the target forward position. We have seen that Koffi can fill in for Omar on the back line. Omar was converted from striker to defender. Why not try him up front? Can't be any worse than Samuel or Friend have been.
I like the 4-2-3-1, but I don't think we have the right player for the most important position, the 1. What's been happening is the Keane doesn't push up to the offside line, he pulls back to help out with possession. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------Keane------------LD----------------------------- -------------Zardes---------------------------------------------Ishi------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------Sarvas------------Juninho----------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------Rogers-------------Opare/Meyer---Omar---------Gargan------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------Penedo---------------------------------- If the defense plays with a saggy back four and a dedicated dmid, Keane and LD get bottled up, and Zardes and Ishizaki aren't able to do something really creative to break things down. Overlaps from th backs don't help because we've got no one sitting in the box for headers. It works if the other team gives Keane and LD space to operate, or it's late in the game and the defenders are tired, then they'll get their chances, but smart teams should be able to clog the back middle and defend this. I'm not convinced by Zardes as a midfielder either. He has speed on the counterattack but he doesn't help with the possession and he's not that creative.
This is true. Honestly, it might be worth a shot, although Zardes has been playing well enough that I might want to see if he can keep the momentum going.
My belief is that Bruce likes the "twin 6's" and that's how he built the team. My changes above ^. It leaves a gap in the middle (the empty bucket) but the idea is that you can push your wide mids into the middle rather than having them play up and down the touch line. The problem is that all three of target forwards (Samuel, Friend and McBean) aren't doing the job and so we're stuck.
If Husidic and Sarvas don't seem like wingers it's because they aren't supposed to be. In the 4-4-2 diamond, neither of the "outside" midfielders are expected to get up and down field or deliver crosses the way a touchline-hugging wing player would. The wide play comes almost exclusively from the wingbacks while the mids on either side behave more like traditional CMs, but will drift over to double-team on occasion. Players in this position need to be able to control the ball well in a crowded midfield, win balls and find and outlet quickly, and combine/dribble out of pressure. Husidic and Sarvas are among our best players at this. I am partial to the diamond because it plays to our strengths. We don't have a ton of young, speedy guys that can press the attack all day, nor do we have the aerial threats that allow us to play direct. We do have lots of technical players that can combine with finesse and like to get passes to the feet and the diamond allows us to advance the ball quickly through the midfield with combo play rather than pacy carriage or longballs. And since we don't have the personnel to press man-to-man everywhere on the pitch, the diamond allows us to defend in zones by clogging up the midfield and leaving holes where we want the opposition to go. The last reason I like it may seem strange, but it moves Keane and Donovan away from each other, which makes stopping both of them a bit harder. I'm fond of the 4-2-3-1 skydog proposes, but for the wing-forwards (Zardes and Ish...or perhaps Rogers or BJIV ) in the position to be effective, they need space to cut in and run at defenses while the wingback overlaps. The problem is few MLS teams give us the space to do that. Quite often we face teams that surrender the midfield and organize in front of the 18, meaning you'll have guys cutting in to shoot at a wall of defenders or getting behind to cross into a wall of defenders. We've seen a lot of this over the past couple seasons. I would use this formation when teams play us straight up, as SKC did, but when they bunker, the diamond will be more useful. To understand why, listen to Riquelme: sometimes you must go backwards to go forwards. Since each player in the diamond can possess the ball well and make good passes, they are each interchangeable, which leaves the defenses guessing. Instead of forcing the play through the wings, which is usually unsuccessful and leads to turnovers, when facing an organized defense, we can drop back to midfield and set-up again. In the sequence leading to Zardes goal against SJ, Keane drops into midfield and Sarvas takes his place holding SJ's defensive line. Landon drifts deeper, too. SJ have to decide what to do and open up to press LD and Keane and...we know the rest.
SUPER great thread. @skydog - thanks for creating it. Summarizes the discussion we've been having in the gameday threads @The Cadaver - loved your suggestion about Omar. Stranger things have happened. Folks raise some great points here and I'm honestly not sure of the answer. The rationales were so good I just don't know. Could see them all. Another question - why do folks think we've ended up playing like this? ----------------Zardes------ -----Keane------------------ ------------------------Ishizaki/Sarvas Husidic------LD-------------- -------------Juninho--------- Back 4 Penedo Husidic doesn't get forward? Why Husidic in the first place? LD not pushing forward because he's dropping deep to transition from defense to attack? Sarvas not being available for awhile? Bruce playing D first? This seems like the formation we'd least recommend, and yet, we've been playing it. Why?
My take on answering the why question. 1) Of the players who have played the 1/Target Forward position, Zardes has been the most effective and is actually capable of jumping and heading in a goal. 2) I think MPNumber9 has this pegged and Husidic is really a central mid not a wing. However, since he is more a defensive mid by inclination, and not very pacy, the Galaxy get almost no wide play and a defense fist mentality. I think Bruce is more than fine with that if the Galaxy score first. 3) I think LD drops so far back because, unless he does, the ball very seldom gets forward in an effective manner. On the left Robbie gets forward some (and sometimes deep), but not enough because Husidic isn't fast enough to provide cover. Its worse when AJ is on the left because frankly he isn't fast enough without a dependable cover. On the right I believe the situation is similar. Gargan only seems to get deep when he and Ishizaki are working a two man game. Otherwise he seems to stop around the top of the 18 (or before) and put is a high hopeful cross. To top it off, if the fullbacks do go deep and cross, its effectively a turn-over, so the only reliable way to get the ball forward is to use Landon as the ball carrier or distribution passer like Pirlo (note, I am not saying Landon passes or has the vision of Pirlo).
I just don't buy the idea of the "target forward" any more. It makes sense in theory, not so much in practice. The idea is for them to flick on balls to teammates, score on crosses, hold up the ball with their back to the goal so teammates can get into the play, right? But in practice, not so much. We've seen now for years that when LA goes long ball to target forwards (and that's what teams do when they have target forwards) it's just another term for "turnover." It's not a coincidence that so many of the top teams in the WC mostly went without true target forwards. Plus there is plenty of research in soccer now showing that teams that rely on crossing the ball for headers tend to not do that well. You will see that the weaker teams in EPL tend to go the target forward route and cross the ball a lot, while the better teams tend to keep the ball on the ground, make penetrating runs, and killer passes behind the defense for teammates to run onto. Suarez, Van Persie, Aguero, Rooney were all leading scorers in EPL last season. Not one of them played as a target forward. Even Sturridge, who is 6'2" and at least tall enough to play the target role, instead tends to withdraw or go wide, pulling the defense out to give him space to run into. My own observations are the usual crosses to your usual forwards are cleared easily by the bigger and better defenders we tend to see as time goes on in MLS. The times where the defense has problems though are when secondary runners are sent in - they often aren't tracked and they end up with wide open headers on goal. I believe Zardes scored one this way recently and I know we've been scored on this way. And I think Zardes is the perfect guy to make these secondary runs because of his ability to cover a lot of ground quickly. The Galaxy have gone through their share of traditional target forwards in the past (Jaqua, Gordon, Christman, Barrett) and the most recent version, the mighty Friend. Everyone would have to be classified as a long-term failure, with Barrett the best of the bunch. Not only were none of these players very good scorers, none of them were good assist men either. Zardes is similar - he does nothing with long high balls from the back. Get the ball to his feet and give him some room to work - then he starts to be effective.
Why do we have to play 4 in the back? Would a 5-3-2/3-5-2 hybrid not work with our personnel? Just a thought... I've always admired the formation, and some clubs can play it easier when they have the means to acquire the talent necessary... but as far as in MLS play... could it work? ----------------------Keane ----- Zardes--------- -------------------------------LD----------------- --------------------Sarvas-----------Juninho----- -----Rogers-----------------------------------------AJ/Gargan ------------------Opare------Omar-----Aj/meyer----------- -----------------------------Penedo---------------------------
This message, was supposed to part of my reply to Skydog (error on my part). First I was just answer the why question, I didn't say I agreed with it. However, I believe our use of the target forward fails for exactly the reasons you mentioned. You didn't mention it as a failure, but we also failed when Bruce tried to use Buddle as a target forward paired with Keane. If I am seemingly speaking out of both sides of my mouth here (in that I advocated a target of possibly Ishizaki, Sarvas, Opare and repped Cadaver's suggestion of trying Omar there); frankly its because I am. I hate the target position the way you accurately described the Galaxy as using now with Friend and in the past (lumping in a long ball that the opponents CB's pick off 9 times out of 10). The dilemma that I am trying to address, is that (IMO) both Keane and Landon function best as withdrawn forwards and that both like to come back for the ball and initiate an attack from the center (and yes I know Robbie also likes to drift to the left and Landon kinds of plays all over). What I think the Galaxy need is a third forward (Izhisaki or Sarvas) who isn't static (a non-target target), but who can see where Robbie and Landon are moving, move to an opening (possibly pulling a defender with them) and if they get a pass, have a chance to play it to where they are running to or potentially one of the wings (BJIV and Zardes). I am less optimistic about the more traditional target suggestions of Opare and Gonzalez because I don't think they will be the capable passers the Galaxy need. Bottom line, I am suggesting some sort of 4-3-3. Do I think Bruce will ever play it, no. By the way in 2010, I think we got close to this with Magee playing as a kind of third striker and Buddle as the non-target target.
The reason Cristman et all. weren't effective is because they were relatively poor, not necessarily because target forwards are obsolete. The position has evolved but target forwards are still effective in some top teams: RVP for NED, Benzema for France, even Germany ended up relying on Klose. Plus, we can't forget how ridiculous Buddle was for us as a target forward in 2009/2010. Having said that, I agree with some of the reservations of using Zardes in that role. But he's been effective as the mobile striker who can drift wide to provide an outlet to a much greater extent than Friend and Samuel to-date. He's not the best at bringing down long balls, but we don't usually play that way out of the back to begin with. He has been scoring from headers in the box, though. I'm okay with him there as long as we don't play long balls or crosses to his head in the box as a primary tactic (and it doesn't seem we are).
@73Bruin think your answers are spot on. Thanks for taking the time to answer. I am super duper curious as to how we line up on Monday. I suspect Landon is going to be in the center to counteract Clint much like he sat on Kyle Berkerman. My guess? Zardes up top, Landon in the center due to Clint. The question is who we play out left. In order to negate Seattle's attack I bet Bruce goes with Baggio. Which bums me out.
It's the most annoying part about Bruce. He doesn't have good enough pcs for his boring 442. So we will just be mediocre. The 3 back system is actually a great fit for this team.
lots of good stuff in this thread. honestly don't think we're that far away offensively. regardless of formation, i just want to see one thing. we need to recognize when something is on and commit to the attack with a 4th and 5th guy in the final third. this year, way too many times i've seen Keane/LD look up and just not have options. it manifests itself with Robbie dribbling into 2.5 guys and Landon recycling play with a big semi-backwards switch. we're not gonna swim in goals if robbie, landon and gyasi are the only three guys within 30 yards of opposing goal. how do we do this? max two of baggio / marcelo / juni at one time. make one of the outside backs consistently push up (used to be Franklin's job, now it looks like Rogers) but most of all, use our freaking subs. sub 1 at 60, sub 2 at 70.
Here's something to consider: we're leading the league in both chances created and big chances created. From Matt Doyle: TeamChances Created from Open PlayBig Chance CreatedPasses, Final ThirdPassing Accuracy, Final ThirdLA Galaxy18522216469Houston Dynamo17413222063Columbus Crew17110253270Colorado Rapids1698228661Portland Timbers1689238166New York Red Bulls16719243267New England Revolution1679265263Philadelphia Union16615245764Vancouver Whitecaps16317216965Seattle Sounders FC16019215667Sporting Kansas City15215242765Real Salt Lake14815224665 In the last 8 regular season games of 2013, the Galaxy scored 11 goals (although 5 of those goals came in a rout of Chivas USA). In the 8 games before that, we scored 15 goals. Somewhere around the beginning of September, leading into the playoff push, teams begin to figure out how to shut Keanovan down. From Sep 7th onward, the only team that Keane or Donovan scored against that wasn't DC or Chivas was 1 goal away to Seattle, which came from a nice volley from Keane after a scrum in the box; something from nothing really. Our other goals during this period were a wonderstrike from Juninho against Seattle, a rebound from Opare after a corner against Montral and a wonderstrike from Franklin against RSL. We had been pretty effectively bottled up. The diamond seems to address this by allowing more players to become danger men which makes the attack to less predictable. Notice our creation of big chances has improved since last season. With Landon playing enganche, players can run off of him to create chances as he's closed down in the middle. We're creating better chances and they're getting finished at a good rate as well. I'm confused that we don't have more final 3rd possession, though. One of the things from last year that made us look more dominant even when we struggled to score is that when defenses sat in, we often attacked in waves and waves. I've seen less of that this season. This isn't a system that presses attack relentlessly from midfield as last season (we used streaking wingers on the wing). It's more about methodical build-up, passing thru the opponent's midfield and a killer final pass. I like it, personally--I think it's a pretty progressive step for Bruce, but there are some kinks to work out.
Here's the piece that Sean Steffen wrote on LD's role in the formation with number crunching. If you play the numbers, the answer is obvious (play him at forward), but Matt Doyle raised an interesting point about Zardes's development. Worth a read: http://cornerofthegalaxy.com/2014/0...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer It also shows how much of a chance creator Landon is, something that should probably be valued more than his scoring ability (and something that will always piss me off about the World Cup). EDIT: And more... Sean Steffen @SeanSteffen · 4h Here are Keane's radars for this year and last, courtesy of @tempofreesoccer. Note the drop in chance creation. pic.twitter.com/v4tyeolY3d Sean Steffen @SeanSteffen · 7h @Brians_Myth @GalaxyPodcast A false 9 requires a vacated 9 space between Cbs. Gyasi is in that space right now Sean Steffen @SeanSteffen · 7h @Brians_Myth @GalaxyPodcast Although against NE he was forced wider second half. Again, RK drifts left. No one in box pic.twitter.com/NwX2Sv3dHv Sean Steffen @SeanSteffen · 8h @GalaxyPodcast @Brians_Myth Essentially, you get alot of this when they are paired. Drives defenders nuts. pic.twitter.com/sSBjzu660n
I think I'm more with Doyle than Steffen. IMO, Landon's best position is a playmaking forward, a trequartista. Wikipedia has a nice description The problem is, Keane is also pushing back into that area. They can play off each other, but who else are they playing to? We end up with an Alphonse and Gaston attack. Unfortunately, pushing Donovan back into the midfield seems to push him far enough back that he's out of the playermaker's role. He isn't at the tip of the diamond, and he's not a regista (those are not his skills), he's a linking player. As Doyle tweets: Ball circulation - making the pass to the guy who makes the final pass. I think he's great at it but it's a waste of his skills. I still think I would rather see Donovan at the tip of a diamond rather than playing Keanovan, but maybe he just can't play the position that way. In any case, I see why he is creating fewer chances in the midfield, but I still think we need a true forward. Maybe target forward is the wrong word because we immediately think of someone like Friend. What I'm thinking of is someone like Obafemi Martins who see's himself as a goalscorer first and a creator second (or third or fourth) Steffen ends with an uncomfortable thought: This isn't a transition year, this is a win-now year. Donovan and Keane probably have another year left in them. This can't be about bringing Zardes slowly along as a forward. He needs to figure it out by the playoffs. If he can't then we really have no option but playing for the 1-0 wins and trusting to luck.
I find myself repping people with widely differing opinions on this thread. I guess I am super-impressed by the degree of thoughtfulness and lucid analysis shown here. Rare for BigSoccer, and a pleasure to read.
Good find Berks. My summary of what you found: DATA SUPPORTS LD AT FORWARD, NOT AT CAM: Sean's stats are backing up what I've been saying. LD at CAM sounds good in theory - who wouldn't want someone of his skill behind the forwards making passes, right? - but it's not so good in practice. At least not the way we play it. Sean showed that LD creates fewer scoring opportunities at CAM than he does at forward and the difference isn't small: .035/min at forward, 0.016 at CAM. Over 90 min that is 3.15 vs 1.44. So over twice as many chances created per game at forward. THE COUNTER-ARGUMENT: Doyle and others are saying that yes, we create more chances with LD up top but still even though that lineup is currently our best it still isn't good enough, so we need Zardes up top so he can develop and maybe we will become a more dangerous team. THE COUNTER TO THE COUNTER-ARGUMENT: The problem with this argument is that it in no way addresses the problem of LD not creating chances at CAM. Zardes might improve as a forward but someone still needs to make the killer passes. Another issue is that when we play LD at top of diamond we switch to a single defensive mid and the stats and observations of recent games suggest that we spend less time in the opponents final third when we go to a single dmid. It's counter-intuitive but we are a more offensive team in terms of field position when we have two dmids. Also there is no reason Zardes can't be getting into the attack a lot even if he is a midfielder. He can make the wide runs, the secondary runs, and be on the end of attacking passes and crosses. He has the speed and stamina to play and offense/defense style. Plus imo (others disagree) his athleticism seems to benefit us more in midfield than at forward. ALTERNATIVES: We tried the diamond with Ishi up top a couple of times and it seemed to work pretty well. Ishi seems to get more involved at CAM than LD does. Plus Ishi does have a decent shot and getting him closer to the goal should be a good thing. Doesn't solve the issue of controlling midfield with a single dmid though. We could add a real CAM to the team. Bruce? We also need another good forward in the Obafemi Martins style as Baysider points out. We could try the 4-2-3-1 I suggested. I think this would make LD more of a combo CAM/forward, open up space for Zardes and Ishi and Gargan to get into the attack and would keep our tandem dmids doing what they do best - controlling the midfield.
I think Doyle is seeing the bigger picture a bit more. I called Landon an enganche because even though it's technically the same thing as a CAM, he's playing a lot more like an old school South American playmaker rather than a modern CAM. He's more like Zidane or Riquelme than Ozil or Rooney right now. We downplayed the win over RSL, but we negated them effectively with Donovan in midfield, while still creating good chances the other way. The intent of the diamond is to kill of games while scoring efficiently (making the most of a few big chances). A comprehensive analysis would involve who we played, opposing big chances created, state of the game (are we winning, losing etc.) and goals against with LD at both positions.