Really? 4-5-1 always looks like 4-2-3-1, it’s just a different way of describing it. And if you mean that you find it odd that we’re playing a 4-4-2, I’m with you. We spent a full season learning and getting used to Matías’ 4-5-1 and now we’re going to change that up? Seems an odd choice, but what do I know? I still expect a season of dreck. Go Quakes!! - Mark
Which means our left side will be brutal for anyone playing LB...they'll be outmanned defensively on the counter on that side.... and they won't get the ball back on their overlap runs...drives me crazy, subjecting one of our better players (Lima) to that crap no win situation.
I think he wants more firepower up front and maybe he wants to see if Hoesen and Rios can develop an effective partnership. However, like previously mentioned, it does put more pressure on us defensively.
I think that pressure can be mitigated by making one of the outside backs stay back when the other goes forward. And our guys will have to communicate better, and Vako will have to play more defense. It could throw us off a bit to start the season. Which is part of why I don’t get making this change, especially if we thought that last year showed real improvement. Go Quakes!! - Mark
I really don't think a 4-4-2 is any weaker defensively than a 4-5-1 or whatever minor midfield adjustments you want to make within that. You're still talking about 4 dedicated defenders. So long as everyone in front of them does their defending, it's virtually the same, with the hopeful benefit that you have an extra outlet a little higher up the field to deliver the ball to on transitions. And hopefully you'll add a bit more pressure to the opposing defenders. Granted, I don't really care for a 4-4-2. Three forwards or bust, but on paper I didn't like the previous year's formation, either and was still entertained more than I was over the entirety of Kinnear's reign.
With this 4-4-2 it looks like Judson is the odd man out and I think we will miss his energy and ability to cover ground. There was that heat map that was posted a little while ago that showed the insane amount of field that he covered. Definitely hope to see more happening up front with Rios combining with Hoesen, but, there is definitely a trade off.
Not to pick a fight, but in Almeyda’s 4-5-1, our outside defenders pushed up a lot, sometimes at the same time and Judson dropped back into the defensive line. So we often played like a 3-5-2 (with Magnus as the withdrawn forward). We did not have four dedicated defenders, because TT and whoever was on the left were often both up field at the same time and we got caught in transition. Part of why we gave up so many goals. So in a 4-4-2, one of the outside defenders needs to stay back when the other goes forward. If our midfield is Magnus and Jackson, then Jackson will have a lot of defensive work to do, as will Cristian and Vako. The advantage of this “new” system is that we’ll have two forwards all of the time, and if Magnus stays forward with the them, this will play something like a 4-3-3. If we have to depend on Magnus dropping back to defend, I will predict that our starting lineup changes to Jackson and Judson in the central-mid spots with Magnus on the bench in reserve, which might be really good. Imagine bringing on Magnus as a sub late when we need a goal? And if we change to Jackson and Judson in central mid, it will be the outside mids who push forward in attack and Jackson and Judson will try to control the middle of the pitch and it will play a lot like an empty bucket 4-4-2. Sorry, I’m just a ray of sunshine this morning. Go Quakes!! Fisher OUT!! - Mark
I assume they are hoping the trade off is more possession, and therefore, less work for one player to have to do. Heat maps can make it seem like a player covering a lot of ground is a good thing. I don't really see it that way, at least not in terms of a defensive midfielder. If they are covering that much of the field, it probably means you aren't controlling the ball enough. But what you're really talking about is the team being defensively weaker because it is missing Judson. They could fix that by having him play instead of Yueill or Eriksson. So it's less about the formation and more about who is on the field. That doesn't change the fact that the team was lined up with four defenders. Unless you really don't want to win, I don't think any formation is going to have 4 defenders just sitting on the back line at all times. I really don't see that much of a difference between one outside defender going up at a time or both going with the center mid dropping back. Again, I'd prefer they just line up with more offensive power to put more pressure high in the field and win possession up there rather than make a defender run up and back all day every day. I think we saw the limits of that strategy with Thompson, Lima, and Lopez. None of them were stellar at having to play both sides of the ball all the time. You might as well take advantage of a player's true strengths and put them where those strengths will shine brightest. But I'm not the coach so we just have to live with whatever Almeyda decides is the best approach. His track record speaks for itself, so I'm going to try not to assume anything until I see it.
I think Judson is definitely in the starting 11 doing all the heavy defensive lifting...with Yueill hopefully getting a little further up field...maybe it looks more like a diamond 4-4-2 as a base, but it will completely morph into a 4-5-1 defensively and something entirely different when we have possession moving up field...almost a 2-1-4-3. Last year we were really aggressive with our outside backs getting up field...Vako tucked in at LM and Espinoza generally stayed wide. Our CBs would split and Judson or Jackson would sit above them in the middle.
Yeah, this! What’s the obsession with four defenders? A lot of systems call for four defenders, but the outside backs aren’t really defenders. Just go 3-5-2. It’s more flexible. But yeah, in Matías we trust. Not like we have a lot of choice. Go Quakes!! Fisher OUT!! - Mark
The question for me is: “Can we do better than Magnus?” And really, we could look at our roster position by position and ask: “Can we do better than X player?” And I think that we should make that analysis. Who on our roster do we think is an outstanding player that we think: “He’s as good as it gets.” I’m hoping that JT can take over as our starting GK this season, because Vega isn’t good enough. (Granted, he’s probably better than JT right now, so I’m *hoping* that JT can become good enough to take the starting position.) We need for Lima (or Lopez) to step up and become a much better left back, or failing that, we need a new left back. Flo is great. We need an upgrade for Kashia, I’m hoping that Oswaldo is that upgrade. And so on through the starting roster. So, can we do better than Magnus? I think that we can. I think that upgrading both Magnus and Vako makes us a much better team. (I know, I pick on Vako too much.) I think, I know for a fact, that we need a replacement for Wondo. This is Wondo’s last season, we need to have at least two or three other guys score a bunch of goals for us, so that next season when we no longer have Wondo, we won’t suck. Cool article, and it suggests that Magnus is pretty good, but we need a still better player in that spot. Go Quakes!! Fisher OUT!! - Mark
It seems to me that Magnus is playing the role of backup for both Judson and Rios. Rios had a hot preseason so he stole Magnus' starting position. However Judson is injured and Magnus is filling in for him. That feels like a mistake. Flo should be starting as a CB but unfortunately that doesn't seem to be what's happening. So if Flo isn't playing CB then he should be the one who fills in for Judson.
Agree that Magnus is not a replacement for Judson, but neither is Flo. Flo played the position the year before with mixes results. He is not quick enough in close quarters and didn't have the endurance of Judson. Neither provides much on offense. However, in the end, I'm not sure that there is a better backup than Flo (if he is not starting at CB). Not a real good reason for him starting...
It could be that Flo has a knock, or that Matías just wants to see the other guys because he knows that he's going to start Flo. Same for Wondo. We haven't seen a lot of Wondo in preseason, but you know he's going to start in the home opener. Unless he's hurt. I'm worried about that yet. Go Quakes!! Fisher OUT!! - Mark
I don't think Wondo starting is a sure thing at all. Looks like Matias is leaning toward a Hoesen/Rios partnership up top. My guess is Wondo subs in, about the 73rd minute, earlier if we are behind.
Now that Wondolowski doesn't have the record to break anymore, the only reason to play him is if he provides the best chance of winning games. Considering he's about as known a quantity as one can be in MLS, there would have been little point in playing him during pre-season regardless of whether Almeyda planned to put him on the field a lot or not. I agree that it would make a great deal of sense to use him primarily as a sub at this point, and they'll probably start the season out that way. And once the other forwards fail to deliver, as they almost always do, Wondolowski will be bumped up into a starting role again.
Yep. It seems so obvious. I wonder if there is a bit of sports psychology going into this. The team benefits if there is competition for every starting position. However Hoesen needs to feel like he actually has a chance to start and competing with a club and league legend who hasn’t failed for 10 consecutive years seems like an impossible task. However, if Almeyda just gives the start to Wondo then Hoesen could mentally give up. So give the job to Hoesen and tell him it’s his to lose. Also it means a few less games to wear on Wondo’s 37 year old legs. Of course if Hoesen does do well, or even just the Rios combo does well, we may never see Wondo again. I’m not going to worry about that though.
Yeah, this goes into how I thought Almeyda misused Hoesen last year. There were a couple games where Hosen came off the bench and scored, which indicated he might be an especially useful sub. But we saw his minutes dwindle a lot after that (could be his practice sessions just weren't good, who knows?). But the lack of consistent playing time seemed to really hurt him and he became totally ineffective. Managing players is an extremely difficult job, especially in soccer where you have very limited flexibility into who will actually play in each game. The relatively few positions on the field, and lack of substitution options means you have to keep all those players not regularly seeing the field sharp and prepared for when the time comes that they do get the call. I don't think Almeyda managed the bench players particularly well last year. I'd actually argue he was quite bad at it. That led to some players wearing out since they got virtually no rest in a very challenging MLS season, and some players just never got into the swing of things because they didn't get many opportunities to be part of the team in meaningful matches. Hoesen is the standout example of this, in my mind. At this point, I don't think he's going to be a breakout star and suddenly start scoring more goals. There are issues with his game that are probably too late to fix. However, like you, if Hoesen does perform well enough, then I'd be fine with Wondolowski not seeing the field much. I'm of the opinion that the team no longer needs him on the field. I've argued in past years that him being on the team stunted the development of the rest of the team, and I still believe that. As great as Wondolowski has been, the focus on him from the front office has come at the expense of several players. You could just never shake the feeling that Doyle and even Fioranelli cared more about propping the guy up (while still managing to take advantage of him financially) rather than building a team. Once Wondolowski is retired, they'll be forced to change their mindset, and it's been too long coming. For every step forward the Quakes make as an organization, they take two or more steps back. We saw it play out in real time with the team's performances. I really hope Almeyda recognized his shortcomings as he's claimed to have done, because it'll be a huge waste to watch the team bell curve their way out of the playoffs for a second year in a row.
From my vantage point, Fioranelli has been trying to put Wondo out to pasture from the day he arrived. It ain't that easy, though, when he's a better striker than anybody priced within the budget, even those paid more than twice what Wondo is. Not to mention, Wondo is a legend in these parts -- the greatest player in league history, now or ever. He deserves a street and a statue and whatever accolades he receives. You don't just run him off before he's ready. Ask Bill Belichick about Tom Brady, who he has been trying to unload since 2014. Danny Hoesen sure looked good for the Niners in last year's Super Bowl.
From same reddit source: Here's a better look at the data if it's hard to read (cause some labels are overlapping ugh): Chris Wondolowski (159G, 41A) Landon Donovan (145G, 136A) Jeff Cunningham (134G, 70A) Jaime Moreno (133G, 102A) Kei Kamara (126G, 45A) Ante Razov (114G, 66A) Jason Kreis (108G, 74A) Bradley Wright-Phillips (108G, 28A) Dwayne De Rosario (104G, 77A) Taylor Twellman (101G, 28A) Edson Buddle (100G, 30A) Carlos Ruiz (89G, 17A) Roy Lassiter (88G, 35A) Robbie Keane (83G, 45A) Brian Ching (82G, 34A) Raul Diaz Arce (82G, 29A) Dom Dwyer (81G, 17A) Brian McBride (80G, 52A) Josh Wolff (80G, 49A) Preki (79G, 112A) David Villa (77G, 26A) Josef Martinez (77G, 11A) Steve Ralston (76G, 135A) Diego Valeri (76G, 81A) Kenny Cooper (75G, 20A)
Sorry, Wondo is not even the best Quake - That would be Donovan and DeRo. Wondo is the greatest goal scorer in history.