That play alone gets him more minutes from me if I'm coach. A really huge, curious play for a striker. Maybe we need to play with a faaaaalse false 9 where John Brooks steps up into midfield, everyone else bombs forward and Sargent covers for him on D as a roaming stopper? I think, I think that could work. Get A-aron-son buzzing around too and you've got yourself a stew
think play in question shows why sargent will get a lot of chances to rebuild his confidence- he has soccer instincts
Borussia Monchengladbach is reportedly upping its interest in #USMNT striker Josh Sargent this summer following Werder Bremen's relegation. https://t.co/F21vZGf9lA— Larry Henry Jr (@lhenry019) June 7, 2021
The fact that they aren’t in those competitions is why the move might actually happen. And it’s a club with a long history of contributing U.S. players, including Keller, Bradley, and Johnson.
For those using Sarge's xG stat as justification that he's doing fine... please note that Schalke 04 also was dead on with meeting xG last season. Schalke had 24.72 xG and had 25 goals. And they did just fine, as we all know! Anyway, my point? I'm learning more about these different metrics and found this interesting. As others have said here, taking one single stat and "hanging your hat" on it in trying to support an argument is pretty naive. xG taken alone simply provides no context of the big picture.
We had a team from England come to the OC and play a few area teams a couple of years in a row. The 1st year I was very worried before our 1st game as there was a young man on the sideline juggling and doing amazing tricks with the ball. I started speaking with a couple of the Dads from England and said I was worried that we may be over-matched. The first dad told me that the boy had just won a National competition sponsored by David Beckham and was going to be on a tv special when they got back. The second dad chimed in saying not to worry because the boy was terrible at football and could not translate any of his tricks to an actual game. He was correct.
That man never met Jordan. I remain firm in my beliefs. BTW saw some "firm" rumors of Josh to BMG. Hope it's true and hope he crushes it. Seems like a hard-working guy with some skills. Hope he picks up some scoring boots.
Actually, that might work in Josh's favour - and theirs. While they've got a new coach, they've been in group stage European ball in recent seasons - and this season's failure to qualify was a massive disappointment - so there's a squad that's EL or even CL-capable, but with only BL1 and the Pokal to play for. If the team catches fire, the foals could, ahem, canter to a CL place. That'll make it a good place for Josh to land. A good squad and a well-run club that's on the up will generate a good atmosphere and plenty of competition for places, but without the burden of having to carry the attack. Any initial lack of progress or major failures will be away from the spotlight. Let's hope it happens
I'm confused. Doesn't schalke hitting their paltry xG mean that the statistic works? It doesn't mean schalke was good, it means they were expected to score only 25 goals, and they did. Thus, if Sargent was expected to hit 5 goals, and did, it means he didn't overperform or underperform the expectation. I think that would mean he is on schedule, and those arguing he should've scored more than his xG are arguing against accurate statistical forecasting?
I believe that it's been demonstrated that strikers regularly exceed their xG. xG is not adjusted for position, and you would hope that your striker is more clinical. Also, having a paltry xG itself can't be ignored, because good strikers should be getting into better positions and also creating for themselves a bit. I understand the counterargument -- it's Schalke! -- but still...
That's a lot you've posited there. Do you have any links confirming that strikers usually exceed their xG? And I'm not sure addressed my question. If schalke hit their xG, how does that have anything to do with Sargent hitting his xG? Seems the only thing that illustrates is that the xG is accurate... But as you said, if strikers usually outperform xG, that's better proof that Sargent isn't progressing. I don't really believe that without some proof, but certainly open to the stats/research. (edit - looked up some xG stuff on understat, never heard of the site but seems legit. It does seem like the top scorers overperformed their xG. Not sure what that means when considering distribution and St deviation, but I'll accept that it's true more or less.)
The guy could make the ball do whatever he wanted it to do but he either didn't know what he needed to make the ball do, couldn't identify that under pressure, or both.
My other point is that xG itself is an outcome that he should be judged by. If he has a high xG, it means he is getting shots off and those shots are in dangerous areas. A good striker does that by getting into good spots to receive passes, or beating defenders with pace or dribbling, or whatever. Anyone on Schalke will have a bad xG, but you would like his xG to be higher than you would expect for a striker on a team of that quality. No idea if that is true or not.
I guess my point is comparing xG to Goals alone doesn’t say much. The stat needs more context. I mean, Sarge’s goals met his xG bit it feels like to me he should have scored more and created more chances. I can’t find the Kicker article now that had those Bundesliga team xG stats but the headline mentioned that Bayern was third in goals to xG ratio. They won the BL by a mile because the created a ton of goal chances to start with, even if they weren’t the best at converting. Nothing revolutionary here, the point is no single stat tells the story. I’m not saying Sarge had a bad season but just it feels like he should have had a few more goals because I think he is capable for sure. I hope like heck he can land somewhere like BMG to show if he is up to that level. He wasn’t good enough to keep Bremen afloat, but not sure what average or above average BL striker could have? Or is Sarge below average? Time will tell. I’m optimistic on Sarge but have more doubts than 1 year ago.
If he didn't play striker for WB who was terrible, especially towards the end of the season, there is no way BMG will want him. I think he might be BL2. It will be good for his development.
Bulinews (rehashing Bild): "Borussia Mönchengladbach have concrete interest in Josh Sargent, according to Bild. Sargent has just one year left on his contract, so Werder are likely to cash in on him this summer. According to Bild, the U.S international should cost around €7-8 million. ESPN has previously linked him with Eintracht Frankfurt, Bayer Leverkusen and VfB Stuttgart." https://bulinews.com/news/8731/report-gladbach-have-concrete-interest-sargent
Seems to me the Sarge is a good footballer, but not sure he is actually a striker. He offers something even when he isn't scoring, but I expect strikers to score on the regular. An assist from that spot counts in my scorebook. OTOH he offers a lot, and maybe some spot that x/GA's is not the most important metric might be better suited for what he brings to a side.
For the 500th time on this thread - he's 21. For the 500th time on this thread - everyone relax, he's a striker and he's developing fine. Like the move for him, hope it goes through. I also think his versatility should help him get on the field with a better team, since they'll likely have more established striker options. But a step up is the next step in his progression.