I think if you actually read my posts, I rarely extrapolate the future at all in terms of defining a player's future. And in this specific case, I've been super clear I am not interested in banishing Tillman at all. I've probably said it like ten times. So I'm not entirely sure why you are responding to me on this point.
Who could have imagined that Malik Tillman would be the most active topic of discussion among USMNT fans....
Nowhere did I indicate that I was talking about you being one wanting to banish Tillman. It is simply that your post made me think about how closely and critically he is being scrutinized. And how some want him exiled from the US team until he shows that he's not garbage or something. It can often be difficult for a player to live up to high expectations right away, especially in circumstances like this, and maybe we are seeing that to a certain degree with Balogun, Musah, and Cardoso, too. Jedi had a rough go of it there for a bit at a similar point.......
I guess if one only looks at the highs and ignores all the average and low lights then this last game truly was another in a long line of continuous excellence. Huzzah
Adams and Pulisic each have put together more than a seasons worth of above average starter form in top 4 leagues. Malik has two career games with over .2 npxG+xA against top 4 league teams (both teams in the bottom half of the La Liga table). This is why looking at all the things instead of just cherry picking highlights is required.
You're the guy cherry-picking. Jeeez! Look in the damn mirror. I only contend Tillman should continue to receive opportunities based UCL play, not highlights. That is all. Get off the hobby horse.
Checking TM, Tillman's goals from RW mainly came in the Scottish League, in other words, not even at MLS level.
If you look at Malik‘s production in games against teams with left-handed Italian managers and goalkeepers under 6‘4“ tall, those data demonstrate clearly that Malik doesn’t know what the hell he is doing.
Someone was trying to use a particular match as an example of Tillman's supposed crappy play. Not complicated to grasp.
Tillman made UCL Team of the Week. Folks will be disappointed. Champions League Team of the Week: Matchday 4 | UEFA Champions League | UEFA.com
I think its pretty simple: *Distinctly awful performances in limited minutes in the shirt. *Impressive performances with his club in age 20, 21 and 22 seasons at Rangers and PSV. *Consistently improving performances at CL level culminating in a tour de force performance this week, after a pratfall, vividness moment in a defeat against a former league power in the Eredivisie a few days early. *Total lack of clarity on whether and if so how said player can be of use to the team, and whether he should be called up or not based on poor international form, versus largely excellent to good club form. This is a classic case of evidence piling up on both sides of an argument, and short leash vs long leash arguments with regards to youth players with upside but incredibly high volatility in terms of caliber of performances.
Context is important. The US has dropped to 39th on the Elo. That represents a lot of weak play by quite a few players. That's what Tillman is competing against. And too many players in poor club form had been given starts.
I am hoping Tillman turns out like another who got sort of roasted at first - Jedi. I remember lots of arguments about his passing and positioning. Now he's one of the best left backs in the world for both club and country. C'mon Tillman be like Jedi.
I remember about 60% of that Jedi nonsense being the product of getting skinned against Brazil back in '18. It was ridiculous then, ridiculous in 2019, ridiculous period. It always was ridiculous. Not saying he was always elite, or even now is fundamentally elite at all things LB (I think he's pretty hot and cold as an attacking LB, he's either got his "command" so to speak, or can't get the metaphorical ball over the plate, game to game on the attacking side of things), but he was always a high ceiling prospect with a reasonable floor, both of which were better than the crap Berhalter insisted on playing instead early on (and honestly, even if that weren't true, it was patently obvious that Jedi was the only option amongst those '18-'19 era options that had even a scintilla of a chance of being useful against quality sides). Not trying to stir stuff up, but the anti-Jedi stuff back then was always total bull----. I can at least understand the anti-Tillman stance from the viewpoint that he has largely sucked in the shirt, if not with club, and that he's not been able to translate his gifts and could be a little too limited in his specific assets as a player to function effectively as a starter. I can get with all of that, I disagree, kinda, but I can at least understand that argument, even if I dispute elements of it. The Jedi stuff always struck me as complete nonsense. We've historically always been god awful at LB, often forcing CB's to play the position because we had neither startable talent, nor depth there, Jedi was at bare minimum, adequate at the time, and the vividness bias of the mistake against Brazil caused people to get out over their skis on him, and a lot of people simply refuse to backtrack when their take is foolish or flat out wrong. Where I see your analogy fitting with Tillman, is that a good chunk and certainly the most vociferous of the Tillman haters, saw him play an invisible crap debut in Summer '22, and not excel in CL or against Rangers in '22-'23, and wrote him off, and then piled up the Rangers data as further evidence to write him off and are immobile on the issue. I tend to err towards young prospects with ceilings, especially when they play positions where we struggle to produce elite or even adequate prospects, and both Jedi and Tillman play/played those positions since day 1 which is why I've always been on the hype train with both of them, ceilings and floors are simply too high.
Malik Tillman vs Girona (H)Champions League player of the week ⭐️ pic.twitter.com/LJlMPZJQEs— Ardolf Gütler (@PepsiEra) November 7, 2024
Sorry that is a conclusion without any factual support. Average with many examples of upside I could understand but sucked? Do you think that a knowledgeable scout looking at the Jamaica performance would conclude sucked? 2:53 Malik great pressure forces a poor Jamaica pass. 3:05 Malik pressures and wins the ball leading to a 3 v 1 transition that the US should have scored on 3:55 Malik with great vision drops the ball on Puli's foot from a pass from the half way line. With a good touch Puli is in on goal. 4:25 Malik with a great run and one time off a Weah cutback cross. Cleared by Jamaica defender. 5:45 2 chances Reyna deflects off Lowe to Malik to Pili for a shot chance, and Balo to Malik to Reyna for a shot chance.
Yes, because I'd like to think that scouts take in large sample size, and not one performance or two. I am on your side of the debate here, in general, but I prefer to be as reasonable as possible as an interlocuter on the issue by conceding on things that seem largely obvious. For PSV and Rangers, Malik has been solid to generally excellent, for the USMNT he hasn't been, and I couch that as "sucked". I've given him the hockey assist from the last window, and I've nodded to some of your points, but I'm not gonna pretend he's been good when he hasn't been. He's been mostly anonymous, or outright bad, in the shirt. If you disagree, so be it, I just don't think that's a reasonable interpretation of his play in the shirt. With club? Absolutely. For the USMNT? No. He's been largely ineffectual and often worse, for us, though there are plenty of exculpatory factors which can help to explain it to some degree which I've already articulated. Doesn't mean you have to agree w/me, and doesn't mean I'm entirely right on this, or even mostly right, he's one of the most controversial team selections for a reason(s).
He's been one of them, contributing to that 39th ranking, or worse if they all performed at his level, if you're being honest. So it's his job to build trust with us gradually, not to keep giving it extensively out of blind faith, future projections, or recent performance for another team. BTW, you can't call his NT performances over 16 games, & 545 minutes, a small sample. Then call 4 games, and 360 minutes, where he's only come on the last couple games (I'm sure you'd wrongfully dispute that), which is not even for the same team, a big enough one to translate for us.
Hell, Not as much as others given his playing time. Depends the player and the type of conclusions being drawn. A big player gets more time. That's the way the game works. What '4 games'?