The best strikers in the game have a conversion rate of something like 1 in 4, and Owen is probably there or thereabouts. I agree that he isn't as good as he once was and losing his pace is probably the biggest reason why, and he wouldn't be worth the insane salary he would have wanted, but he is still a clever and effective striker. To state that he isn't good enough because he doesn't score on every chance is silly because by that demand you deem every strikers as poor. Of the five top scorers this season Drogba had third best shots/goals ratio of 20%, Rooney had 13% and Ronaldo 12%, while McCarthy and Viduka was best with 29% and 27% respectively.
Some fair points. Wages we agree on. 100% is aggerated yes, but for me a player in the Michael 'I dont do anything but score' Owen mould must score 80% of chances. By this I dont mean shots to goals, I mean like the actual chances that come his way. When Van Horseface was in his prime anything that fell his way in the box would be in the net 8 times out of 10. Brazilian fat ronaldo has a career average of 4 goals in 5 games, thats what someone who does nothing but score should have; earlier in his career he was much more at barca etc, but in final year at madrid he was just a goal poacher.
Id disagree that he is an effective striker, as has become clear in various games; I mean it is hard to guage this as he hasnt played for years but for example Euro 2004: Did nothing, one goal in 5 games ( i think, group games, 2nd round, quarters?), dispite playing with Rooney who was absolutley on fire. WC 2006, did nothing ,didnt score, heaved around looking slow and unfit, got injured as he does. Recent Eng B game against albania, did diddly squit, missed one good chance. Poor. Harsh I know he hasnt played for a while but its in my head.
In conclusion, not for villa thanks!