Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Holmowl said:

Interesting that many seem to think a new striker allows us to play 442 more often.

 

Have you looked at the comparison between us playing 442 and 443 this season? Our 442 results have been awful.

 

I’d rather we succeed on grass rather than look attacking on paper.

 

It's about options though, isn't it?

 

Of course, there's going to be games when we opt for a more solid looking 4-3-3, but there will also be games and times in games, when a switch to 4-4-2 is necessary.

 

At the minute, it seems the only pairing Monk is happy with, in a front two, is Fletcher and Nuhiu, and it has been more effective that many would have thought. However, there's no doubt what we're missing from a striking point of view. Pace and the ability to run in behind and stretch defences. 

 

Nobody is saying that it's to allow us to play 4-4-2 more often, but it gives us another attacking dimension for when we do play it. 

 

Just like, I think equally as important as a striker with pace, is a wide player who can score goals for when we play 4-3-3. It might be possible to bring in a player who ticks both of those boxes, if so, happy days. 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, frastheowl said:

 

It's about options though, isn't it?

 

Of course, there's going to be games when we opt for a more solid looking 4-3-3, but there will also be games and times in games, when a switch to 4-4-2 is necessary.

 

At the minute, it seems the only pairing Monk is happy with, in a front two, is Fletcher and Nuhiu, and it has been more effective that many would have thought. However, there's no doubt what we're missing from a striking point of view. Pace and the ability to run in behind and stretch defences. 

 

Nobody is saying that it's to allow us to play 4-4-2 more often, but it gives us another attacking dimension for when we do play it. 

 

Just like, I think equally as important as a striker with pace, is a wide player who can score goals for when we play 4-3-3. It might be possible to bring in a player who ticks both of those boxes, if so, happy days. 

To successfully play 4-3-3, you cannot have a striker who doesn’t score, flanked by two wingers who don’t score. Was that always Bruce’s plan, or was he planning to replace Fletcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, dfoster said:

 

We don't always play one up front do we? Leeds, Boro and Swansea (off the top of my head) we played Adthe and Fletch and played well every time 


that’s only three games when we wanted to change it. If Gayle came here we’d need to play him every week which would mean he dictates the formation 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

To successfully play 4-3-3, you cannot have a striker who doesn’t score, flanked by two wingers who don’t score. Was that always Bruce’s plan, or was he planning to replace Fletcher


he wanted Joao and Rhodes out and Hugill in 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Bluesteel said:


he wanted Joao and Rhodes out and Hugill in 

I saw an article this morning about him wanting to bring Samatta of Genk to Hillsborough. That his value has now soared to £10m, that may not have been realistic. I do agree though, he was probably looking for someone more mobile than Fletcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think it’s that simple as bringing in a striker TBH. The supply line probably needs to be looked into just as much?

 

That said I’d like us to bring in a pacy mobile striker not too unlike Joao but to do this we may have to unload first and I can’t see us getting rid of Winnall or Rhodes anytime soon? 

 

It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if we weren’t as busy in January as much as some expect us to be? :sad:

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Great Big Galaa said:

I don’t think it’s that simple as bringing in a striker TBH. The supply line probably needs to be looked into just as much?

 

That said I’d like us to bring in a pacy mobile striker not too unlike Joao but to do this we may have to unload first and I can’t see us getting rid of Winnall or Rhodes anytime soon? 

 

It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if we weren’t as busy in January as much as some expect us to be? :sad:

We do need to supplement our midfield options, but surely Bannan and Luongo can spot a pass? The problem, for me at least, is there is no movement ahead of them. Who is showing for that pass, or making darting runs down the side of the centre backs. We have the midfield who can supply the ammunition, just not the movement ahead of them

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, gurujuan said:

To successfully play 4-3-3, you cannot have a striker who doesn’t score, flanked by two wingers who don’t score. Was that always Bruce’s plan, or was he planning to replace Fletcher

 

I don't disagree, which is why I said the priority in January, other than a striker with pace, is a wide man that can score goals. 

 

Of course, there are plenty of strikers who are capable of playing both such roles. 

 

Fletcher is an ideal lone striker, in a side with goal-scorers in wide positions and from midfield. Unfortunately, Forestieri aside, we are solely reliant on Fletcher to score goals.

 

Like some have said, if rumours were true, Bruce very much wanted Hugill here. A player who can play the lone forward role, and score goals. There aren't many of those players about, and they tend to cost a lot of money. Our failure to land him (probably dictated by our inability to move out Joao, Rhodes or Winnall earlier enough), could be the difference between a successful season and not...with or without Bruce at the helm.

 

You certainly aren't going to find a striker in the Hugill mould in January...without paying top dollar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bluesteel said:


that’s only three games when we wanted to change it. If Gayle came here we’d need to play him every week which would mean he dictates the formation 

 

That won't become an issue.

 

Because there is no chance in hell of Gayle a Wednesday shirt this season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, frastheowl said:

 

I don't disagree, which is why I said the priority in January, other than a striker with pace, is a wide man that can score goals. 

 

Of course, there are plenty of strikers who are capable of playing both such roles. 

 

Fletcher is an ideal lone striker, in a side with goal-scorers in wide positions and from midfield. Unfortunately, Forestieri aside, we are solely reliant on Fletcher to score goals.

 

Like some have said, if rumours were true, Bruce very much wanted Hugill here. A player who can play the lone forward role, and score goals. There aren't many of those players about, and they tend to cost a lot of money. Our failure to land him (probably dictated by our inability to move out Joao, Rhodes or Winnall earlier enough), could be the difference between a successful season and not...with or without Bruce at the helm.

 

You certainly aren't going to find a striker in the Hugill mould in January...without paying top dollar. 

Yes, if we have a striker who will only get you 10-15 goals, then you need a similar output from both wide men. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, gurujuan said:

Yes, if we have a striker who will only get you 10-15 goals, then you need a similar output from both wide men. 

 

Or from midfield. 

 

And neither Bannan, Lee and Hutchinson are going to supplement that. 

 

Luongo has started well goal-wise, but I'm not convinced he's a midfielder who'll score 10 goals a season on a consistent basis. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, frastheowl said:

 

Or from midfield. 

 

And neither Bannan, Lee and Hutchinson are going to supplement that. 

 

Luongo has started well goal-wise, but I'm not convinced he's a midfielder who'll score 10 goals a season on a consistent basis. 

True, although if your front players are hitting their targets, that’s less important Obviously not comparing the two clubs, but Liverpool get relatively few goals from their midfield. As you say, Luongo could be the answer, if he can stay fit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

True, although if your front players are hitting their targets, that’s less important Obviously not comparing the two clubs, but Liverpool get relatively few goals from their midfield. As you say, Luongo could be the answer, if he can stay fit

 

There's no template for a 4-3-3.

 

But, there's a certain amount of goals a team needs to score to be successful. 

 

And currently, I reckon we have between 40-58 (with 58 been a high estimate) goals between our most regular attacking players. 

 

Fletcher - 10-12

Nuhiu - 5-7

Forestieri - 5-7

Luongo - 4-6

Lee - 3-5

Bannan - 1-3

Reach - 4-6

Harris - 4-6

Murphy - 4-6

 

Given that only three out of the last 30 teams to have finished in the top six have scored less than 65 goals, it's clear where our problems are going to lie. And given that if we continue to score at the same rate we have done in the first 16 games, we'll score 60 goals this season, it further strengthens the argument, where our issues lie. 

 

Liverpool essentially play with three strikers, all who play narrow and look to score goals, with their full backs providing any width, the emphasis on Liverpool's midfield is to restore, and recycle possession, and they do it magnificently. Of course, Wednesday could play a 4-3-3 similar to that...but they'll need to buy at least two new strikers and two new full backs. 

 

For Wednesday to get a 4-3-3 functioning efficiently as possible, our best bet is to supplement those goalscoring figures with a genuine goal threat from wide areas. While ever we have so many regulars lacking the ability to get goals, we won't become a high scoring side. So Monk's job is about adding a little bit of magic, whilst maintaining our ability to keep things tight and ourselves in games. 

 

Even if we somehow sign a Dwight Gayle in January, the chances of us breaking 75 goals (the average number of goals scored by top six sides in the last 5 years) is still highly unlikely. 

  • Agree 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Great Big Galaa said:

I don’t think it’s that simple as bringing in a striker TBH. The supply line probably needs to be looked into just as much?

 

That said I’d like us to bring in a pacy mobile striker not too unlike Joao but to do this we may have to unload first and I can’t see us getting rid of Winnall or Rhodes anytime soon? 

 

It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if we weren’t as busy in January as much as some expect us to be? :sad:

You're right that it's not as simple as that, but the supply line overall isn't too bad, we are creating chances most weeks, our strikers just aren't finishing well enough on most occasions.

 

If we had an on form striker we would probably be at least 6 points better off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Spookone said:

You're right that it's not as simple as that, but the supply line overall isn't too bad, we are creating chances most weeks, our strikers just aren't finishing well enough on most occasions.

 

If we had an on form striker we would probably be at least 6 points better off.

 

Not true actually.

 

We've created a Non-Penalty xG of 20.99 (21.76xG if you include the penalties), and we've scored 21 goals. 

 

We are scoring exactly at the rate you'd expect us to, given the chances we are creating. 

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, gurujuan said:

I saw an article this morning about him wanting to bring Samatta of Genk to Hillsborough. That his value has now soared to £10m, that may not have been realistic. I do agree though, he was probably looking for someone more mobile than Fletcher

 

Another Brucie spot.

 

He had a great eye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, frastheowl said:

 

Not true actually.

 

We've created a Non-Penalty xG of 20.99 (21.76xG if you include the penalties), and we've scored 21 goals. 

 

We are scoring exactly at the rate you'd expect us to, given the chances we are creating. 


That’s interesting info. Where did you find this please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, frastheowl said:

 

Not true actually.

 

We've created a Non-Penalty xG of 20.99 (21.76xG if you include the penalties), and we've scored 21 goals. 

 

We are scoring exactly at the rate you'd expect us to, given the chances we are creating. 

The stats may say that, but watching week in week out we are without doubt missing a lot of chances, so I stand by my point and if we were scoring at a higher rate than the stats say is to be expected, we wouldn't be 8th lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mr Farrell said:

 

Another Brucie spot.

 

He had a great eye.

Or the recruitment team he brought in do..? Here's hoping they can unearth some more gems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, SettleForADraw said:

Or the recruitment team he brought in do..? Here's hoping they can unearth some more gems

Yes, although Samatta is now, well out of our price range, it’s pleasing to see that we were looking for a different type of target man. As effective as Fletcher can be, his limitations present more problems than they solve

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...