Striker stats - are all these linked players REALLY any better?

[brasil_spur]

Ok, i'm getting a bit annoyed by comments from people saying how Pav is crap and Chamakh would be better for us than Bent etc...

I know that assists count for something, as does link up play and tracking back. But IMO the most vital stat by far for a striker is their goal to game ratio.

Put simply, if a striker scores a goal every game for you, you wouldn't give a crap what else he did or didn't do on the pitch, he'd be your most valuable player.

So with that in mind, i'd like to point out our current striker's goal to games stats, versus those we're being linked with, i've also added Berbatov's stats in there, seeing as how we sold him for £30m to Utd last season, gives us a good benchmark to go by.

Berbatov
Leverkusen - 90 goals in 200 games = 0.45 goals per game ratio
Spurs - 46 goals in 102 games = 0.45 goals per game ratio



Keane
Spurs - 112 goals in 268 games = 0.42 goals per game ration

Pavlyuchenko
Spartak - 87 goals in 188 games = 0.46 goals per game ratio
Spurs - 14 goals in 32 games = 0.44 goals per game ratio

Defoe
Spurs - 46 goals in 147 games = 0.31 goals per game ratio
Pompey - 14 goals in 30 games = 0.47 goals per game ratio

Bent
Charlton - 37 goals in 79 games = 0.47 goals per game ratio
Spurs - 24 goals in 77 games = 0.31 goals per game ratio



Crouch
Liverpool - 42 goals in 124 games = 0.34 goals per game ratio
Pompey - 16 goals in 41 games = 0.39 goals per game ratio

Huntelaar
Ajax - 105 goals in 136 games = 0.77 goals per game ratio
Real Madrid - 8 goals in 20 games = 0.4 goals per game ratio

Negredo
Almeria - 32 goals in 73 games = 0.44 goals per game ratio

Chamakh
Bordeaux - 53 goals in 223 games = 0.24 goals per game ratio



So in a quick summary:

• Keane and Pavlyuchenko have similar goal to game ratios as Berbatov.
• Both Defoe and Bent also have similar goal to game ratios at other premier league teams, but haven't managed to replicate this to the same effect at Spurs.
• Crouch might be marginally better than Bent.
• Negredo might be better than Bent and on a par with Pavlyuchenko.
• Chamkh is pants.
• Huntelaar is the feckin nuts and should be our main target.

 

[Hoowl]

Strikers aren't solely rated on their individual goalscoring prowess. How players work together and what else they offer to the team are also important factors to consider.

 

[brasil_spur]

Strikers aren't solely rated on their individual goalscoring prowess. How players work together and what else they offer to the team are also important factors to consider.

I did mention that, but i just don't think it factors in that highly. It's pretty rare that a player has a goal to game ratio of 0.45 and above and doesn't contribute elsewhere on the pitch. Berbatov was probably an example of someone who had an ok allround contribution and decent goal to game ratio and was our best striker for many years according to some.

Likewise, i can see that players like Heskey contribute as strikers with hold up play and physical presence, but i can't think of a single striker with a goal ratio as low as Heskey's that i woudl want in our team above the 4 that we already have.

 

[Hoowl]

Even in Goal/Game ratios you need to put them into context by looking at the league/competition etc. Pavlyuchenkos goals last year were largely in the cup against weakened teams. Huntelaar played in the defensively poor Dutch league. Bents first seasons at Spurs were in and out of the team. Negredo and Chamakh haven't shown it outside their own leagues.

 

[brasil_spur]

Yeh true, but i just feel that people get carried away in this tide of transfer speculation and sometimes don't bother to stop and access the situation properly.

The discussions today about Chamakh prove this, how anyone can think he's a better option that what we have right now is amazing.

 

[Hoowl]

The things about a new signing is that it's exciting, especially if it's a player you've never seen before. We've seen enough of Bent/Defoe/Keane/Pavlyuchenko to know their bad points and the grass always seems greener on the other side of the fence. Although he's not our player, Crouch probably fits into this category too. However most people don't know alot about Huntelaar, Negredo or Chamakh so signing any of them gives us a chance to dream that they will be the next Berbatov/Klinsmann/Panacea that will solve our striker problems. This is especially true nowadays because of the hype generated by youtube highlights and Football Manager.

 

[brasil_spur]

It's a shame really, as i'd like to see some consistency in our striking options for once. Perhaps Bent out and Crouch in would be the most sensible all round, as no doubt Bent has something to offer, just not to us in the way our team is set-up, whereas Crouch could bring that something extra to our attacking options.

BTW - i like how this thread has just turned into the two of us having a chat, you'd have thought everyone on here's come down with swine flu today the way it's been quiet. :shrug:

 

[Hoowl]

Everyone's in the transfer forum.

I like the idea of consistency. I've been advocating selling no-one who made a big contribution to the first team last season and then signing a 2-3 players who are a ste-up on what we've got. Personally, I think Pavlyuchenko is the weakest of our four strikers and he'd be the first that I'd let go but I have faith that Harry knows better than myself. I haven't seen a lot of Huntelaar. I was initially concerned that he's a goalscorer and nothing more (as Bent has been accused of) so wouldn't really offer us enough but I've been brought around by friends telling me how classy he is. I don't mind the idea of Crouch signing as he's technically pretty good and will offer a physical presence. I've no idea about Negredo but If Perez want to keep a Spanish flavour at Real you'd think he might want to keep him. I don't know much about Chamakh either.

 

[chrissivad]

BTW - i like how this thread has just turned into the two of us having a chat, you'd have thought everyone on here's come down with swine flu today the way it's been quiet. :shrug:

I wasn't getting involved as i think there are far too much to consider when looking at these stats.

The main one being time on the pitch, that can range from a few mins to 90mins but still gets chalked up as 1 apperance.

Then you have others like who it was against and the team around them.

At the moment they way i see our striker situation is that we have 4 good/verygood strikers individually, but not ones that really complement each other on the pitch

 

[brasil_spur]

I personally think Pav has more potential than Bent, i think we've seen all that Bent has to offer, in that he didn't have to adjust to the league and language when he joined us, and he's had two seasons to make some kind of impact, whereas Pav i think did as well as Bent last season and under much harder circumstances.

 

[Hoowl]

I personally think Pav has more potential than Bent, i think we've seen all that Bent has to offer, in that he didn't have to adjust to the league and language when he joined us, and he's had two seasons to make some kind of impact, whereas Pav i think did as well as Bent last season and under much harder circumstances.

I don't think Pav did anywhere near as well as Bent last year. I think you're using the fact that Pav hadn't had a rest and had to adapt to a new league to cover over all his cracks. I don't doubt Pav will improve but there were so many simple things he was bad at, some of which I wouldn't have thought would be solved simply by a bit more match fitness. We'll just have to wait and see but if he's still here in August, I expect him to be our last choice striker.

 

[brasil_spur]

I'm definitley not advocating that we make Pav first choice, but for me in a straight decision between keeping him or Bent, i would keep him for now. I may well be proved wrong by January, but i think he could have more to show us this season, whereas i don't think Bent has anything new he can bring which he already hasn't.

Oh and damn you chrissviad for messing up mine and howls thread :grin::grin::grin:

But seriously i know sats can be misleading if looked at too carefully. It's just i think even with their faults they can be a fairly accurate benchmark, as it's rare that a player only ever plays and scores against crappy teams whilst another plays only the last 5 mins of every game and doesn't score.

 

[Bobishism]

Even in Goal/Game ratios you need to put them into context by looking at the league/competition etc. Pavlyuchenkos goals last year were largely in the cup against weakened teams. Huntelaar played in the defensively poor Dutch league. Bents first seasons at Spurs were in and out of the team. Negredo and Chamakh haven't shown it outside their own leagues.

How were they against weakened teams?

Newcastle. Liverpool. Wigan. Burnley, I think. Utd.

Anyway, every game he's scored in we've gone on to win, bar two, I believe. Both being Utd.

 

[trevor_spanner]

boring statto

it means nothing

 

[THOWIG]

God I miss Berbatov

 

[deselina]

for everyone saying huntelaar scored a lot of goals in the defensively weak eredivisie. go to his wikipedia site and you will see that he has scored

19 out of 32 in eufa cup and champions league

which means his european goals per game ratio is 0.59

for holland u21 he has a goals per game ratio of 0.82 (18 in 22)

and for oranje 0.62 (13 in 21)

his total stats for the dutch squad are amazing, 31 in 43 is a goals per game ratio of 0.72

 

[TheBoy]

Does anyone know what the stats were for Defoe and Crouch at Portsmouth when they played in a partnership? I'm curious to know how it compares to our current options.

 

[TheBoy]

I worked it out for myself:

20 games (includes Defoe as sub twice)

Defoe 8 goals
Crouch 7 goals

Total 15 goals in 20 games

 

[michaelden]

I want a Berb Pav Modric front 3

*me ray:
*god answers
*me :clap: :dance: :beer: :virginsacrifice:

 

[muffwah]

I did mention that, but i just don't think it factors in that highly. It's pretty rare that a player has a goal to game ratio of 0.45 and above and doesn't contribute elsewhere on the pitch. Berbatov was probably an example of someone who had an ok allround contribution and decent goal to game ratio and was our best striker for many years according to some.

Likewise, i can see that players like Heskey contribute as strikers with hold up play and physical presence, but i can't think of a single striker with a goal ratio as low as Heskey's that i woudl want in our team above the 4 that we already have.

thats where you are wrong really mate. That would be like saying Bent is better than Rooney just because he scores more.