Luongo backing Rhodes

[DJMortimer]

Aside from that remarkable first half in Nottingham, Rhodes is currently on a run for Wednesday of 17+14 appearances and 1 goal (away at Hull).

 

[myHero]

13 hours ago, Holmowl said:

Adam Reach. 
 

Best crosser on our books. Left-footed. Great engine. Hundreds of games at LW. Fifty games at LB.

 

But we use him on RW or CM, and even striker.

 

Sheesh. 

Likes to pull out of challenges on the edge of our area though. More chance of Reach playing LWB than Bannan I guess. Still think Bannan is a better crosser, but I accept Reach is in our top two crossers of the ball. I'm assuming Izzy is going to pitch in with assists. 

 

Just looking at the Kachunga goals for Huddersfield, and I think he's also going to have the same problem as Rhodes with lack of quality crosses, so let's hope Monk and Beattie have a plan. 

[Jeffjohnsonmyhero]

If only we could get him scoring .

[cookeh]

16 hours ago, DJMortimer said:

156 appearances.

32 goals in all competitions.

 

Yeah! How dare he not score in all those appearances...

 

[cookeh]

12 hours ago, Ozymandias Owl said:

Just looking at the Kachunga goals for Huddersfield, and I think he's also going to have the same problem as Rhodes with lack of quality crosses, so let's hope Monk and Beattie have a plan. 

 

I was thinking exactly the same.. a 6 yard box striker who scores mostly headers.
Good luck to Kachunga. I don't see where the supply is coming from tho.

[DJMortimer]

13 minutes ago, cookeh said:

 

Yeah! How dare he not score in all those appearances...

 

 

I referred to 156 appearances dating back five years, not 12 from a few carefully chosen weeks.

 

Aside from that remarkable first half treble in Nottingham, and dating back to the end of 2017, Rhodes is currently on a run for Wednesday of 17+14 appearances and 1 goal (away at Hull).

 

[cookeh]

2 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

I referred to 156 appearances dating back five years, not 12 from a few carefully chosen weeks.

 

 

Whats the average minutes played for those 156? Is it more than 45?

[DJMortimer]

1 minute ago, cookeh said:

 

Whats the average minutes played for those 156? Is it more than 45?

 

The fact that he's made just 85 starts at 4 clubs, under 9 managers and during 2 periods when our resources were severely stretched in the last 5 years is illustrative in itself.

 

Let me remind you again, he's currently on a run for us of 18+14 appearances and 4 goals.

[cookeh]

6 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

The fact that he's made just 85 starts at 4 clubs, under 9 managers and during 2 periods when our resources were severely stretched in the last 5 years is illustrative in itself.

 

Let me remind you again, he's currently on a run for us of 18+14 appearances and 4 goals.

 

I could probbly go thru all those manager as talk about why, but i've done it before and cant really be bothered again.

you keep just saying the same thing and not answering the question. very boris johnson-esque.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, cookeh said:

 

Whats the average minutes played for those 156? Is it more than 45?

 

Jordan Rhodes has played 3647 minutes of League football for us, in this time he has scored 11 goals.

That is a goal every 332 minutes, or one in every 3.5 full games, which for someone who offers absolutely nothing else, other than his "goalscoring", is a dreadful record.

Edited September 3, 2020 by Guest

[shandypants]

On 01/09/2020 at 13:00, cookeh said:

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/sport/football/news/jordan-rhodes-sheffield-wednesday-goals-18856651

 

"Through the downs, as much he had his downs, he's one of the most professional players I've come across."

"I think strikers can go games without scoring. But he'll run and cover the most ground, and defend more than any other striker I've worked with."

"There are things I see, because I play with him every day so he does that without recognition."
"I know, whether he scores or not, he's definitely valuable to the team. The Jordan Rhodes everyone knows of, he's still here. I've seen him in training and he's deadly."

Wow. I feel that’s quite damning on Rhodes if he can’t transfer what he does in training to a match. There appears to be something amiss because Rhodes is little more than a passenger in games. 

[Holmowl]

10 minutes ago, fingyfop said:

 

Jordan Rhodes has played 3647 minutes of League football for us, in this time he has scored 11 goals.

That is a goal every 332 minutes, or one in every 3.5 full games, which for someone who offers absolutely nothing else, other than his "goalscoring", is a dreadful record.

Would you agree that the most recent two seasons is a more appropriate period to consider?

 

9 goals

1694 minutes

goal every 188 minutes

 

Includes no penalties. Way better than Fletcher and Forestieri.

 

I mean “better” in goal scoring. Both the other two are better footballers. IMO.

 

Edited September 3, 2020 by Holmowl

[cookeh]

 

14 minutes ago, fingyfop said:

 

Jordan Rhodes has played 3647 minutes of League football for us, in this time he has scored 11 goals.

That is a goal every 332 minutes, or one in every 3.5 full games, which for someone who offers absolutely nothing else, other than his "goalscoring", is a dreadful record.

 

So Bannan played nearly 4000 minutes last season, about what a first team regular should.

With that awful strike rate of one every 332 minutes.. Rhodes playing 4000 minutes would score 12 goals in the season.
1 less than Fletch got.

 

Based on a strike rate in games where he was in and out of the side and never got to build a partnership with anyone.

If he were given a run in the side and was able to build a partnership, is it unreasonable to say he might score more goals?

Would he be pushing 20? And if he'd be pushing 20.. why isnt he in the side?

 

EDIT:
At the 188 minute strike rate, Rhodes gets 21 for the season. Rubbish!

Edited September 3, 2020 by cookeh

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Would you agree that the most recent two seasons is a more appropriate period to consider?

 

9 goals

1694 minutes

goal every 188 minutes

 

Includes no penalties. Way better than Fletcher and Forestieri.

 

I mean “better” in goal scoring. Both the other two are better footballers. IMO.

 

 

Sort of, although it includes him playing in a very very good Norwich side, with Premier League class players like Buendia to supply him.

I'm not sure it's very representative of how he's played or will play with us, I'd back someone like Winnall (who wasn't particularly good for us either) to have scored more in that Norwich team

[DJMortimer]

2 minutes ago, cookeh said:

 

 

So Bannan played nearly 4000 minutes last season, about what a first team regular should.

With that awful strike rate of one every 332 minutes.. Rhodes playing 4000 minutes would score 12 goals in the season.
1 less than Fletch got.

 

Based on a strike rate in games where he was in and out of the side and never got to build a partnership with anyone.

If he were given a run in the side and was able to build a partnership, is it unreasonable to say he might score more goals?

Would he be pushing 20? And if he'd be pushing 20.. why isnt he in the side?

 

That would be 1 goal less than Fletcher who played almost half as many minutes as your magic 4,000 ? Regardless of that, 12 goals is not what you pay the thick end of ten million for, especially when he offers pretty much nothing else.

 

The contortions you are going through to desperately 'prove' that white is really black if only you look closely enough are sadly comical.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, cookeh said:

 

 

So Bannan played nearly 4000 minutes last season, about what a first team regular should.

With that awful strike rate of one every 332 minutes.. Rhodes playing 4000 minutes would score 12 goals in the season.
1 less than Fletch got.

 

Based on a strike rate in games where he was in and out of the side and never got to build a partnership with anyone.

If he were given a run in the side and was able to build a partnership, is it unreasonable to say he might score more goals?

Would he be pushing 20? And if he'd be pushing 20.. why isnt he in the side?

 

Yes, which is a very bad record for someone who offers nothing else going forward, possibly holding the ball up 3 or 4 times a match if he has a "good" game, it's much harder to create things in attacking positions when you have one of your strikers incapable of contributing to build up play at all.

 

Nuhiu has a goal every 304 minutes in the Championship for us to put Rhodes's 332 in perspective.

[alanharper]

20 minutes ago, shandypants said:

Wow. I feel that’s quite damning on Rhodes if he can’t transfer what he does in training to a match. There appears to be something amiss because Rhodes is little more than a passenger in games. 

 

In training he's playing against our defence and keeper so it's a lot easier to score. 

[cookeh]

7 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

The contortions you are going through to desperately 'prove' that white is really black if only you look closely enough are sadly comical.

 

The "contorttion" of taking what someone says is an awful strike rate and applying it to the number of minutes our main striker should be playing in a season?

 

Aye.. bonkers that.

[cookeh]

8 minutes ago, fingyfop said:

Yes, which is a very bad record for someone who offers nothing else going forward, possibly holding the ball up 3 or 4 times a match if he has a "good" game, it's much harder to create things in attacking positions when you have one of your strikers incapable of contributing to build up play at all.

 

I posted in antoher thread all of Rhodes significant contributions in the Leicester game.

It doesn't tally up with your claim of 'does nothing'.

Reality obviously has a pro-Rhodes bias.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, cookeh said:

 

I posted in antoher thread all of Rhodes significant contributions in the Leicester game.

It doesn't tally up with your claim of 'does nothing'.

Reality obviously has a pro-Rhodes bias.

 

I haven't seen your thread or the Leicester match, I'm judging on more than one pre-season friendly at a training ground, but if you want to do that then fair enough.