DCJonah Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 I think you've got to look at a lot. I've not said I dismissed then, once again you must be bored and just itching for an online argument. I've said numerous times lack of finances is a factor that needs to be taken into consideration, along with many others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Those tables have 15 teams in them, and we have finished 16th, 15th and 15th. Why are any of you surprised? Absolutely nothing to talk about there. If it was cut off at 6 teams it makes grim reading for Liverpool. Stick a total player wages and net transfer spend next to the team names in the chart and see what you find. As has been said before spending is not the ultimate way to judge this. Gabby, grealish, guzan, delph, Cole, Richardson all available to Lambert for the grand total of 0 pounds spent on transfer fees. Are they all shit and useless because of that? So you'll only look at certain statistics to suit your side of the argument and you'll ignore everything else? He didn't say anything about it being the ultimate way of judging a manager, all he did was highlight additional areas that should be acknowledged that aren't shown up in that chart. .. And all DCJonah did was highlight some players that would be used to counter the 'no money to spend' area of this imaginary chart. And 'ignore everything else'? Where does Jonah say he'd ignore everything else? It looked like he was just replying to a post made by mole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 I think you've got to look at a lot. I've not said I dismissed then, once again you must be bored and just itching for an online argument. I've said numerous times lack of finances is a factor that needs to be taken into consideration, along with many others. I'm not looking for an argument at all, sorry if you took it that way. All i'm saying is that the statistics shown only show one side. Admittedly they are pretty damning in a lot of areas. Honestly what i'd like to see is all of the statistics that people think are relevant side by side. So what other stats would you add to the list? Would things like injuries etc be added? I personally think stats are useful to look at but only when they are shown in their entirety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a m ole Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Those tables have 15 teams in them, and we have finished 16th, 15th and 15th. Why are any of you surprised? Absolutely nothing to talk about there. If it was cut off at 6 teams it makes grim reading for Liverpool. Stick a total player wages and net transfer spend next to the team names in the chart and see what you find. As has been said before spending is not the ultimate way to judge this. Gabby, grealish, guzan, delph, Cole, Richardson all available to Lambert for the grand total of 0 pounds spent on transfer fees. Are they all shit and useless because of that? No, but we're also not the only team that can benefit from youth development and free transfers. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Those tables have 15 teams in them, and we have finished 16th, 15th and 15th. Why are any of you surprised? Absolutely nothing to talk about there. If it was cut off at 6 teams it makes grim reading for Liverpool. Stick a total player wages and net transfer spend next to the team names in the chart and see what you find. As has been said before spending is not the ultimate way to judge this. Gabby, grealish, guzan, delph, Cole, Richardson all available to Lambert for the grand total of 0 pounds spent on transfer fees. Are they all shit and useless because of that? No, but we're also not the only team that can benefit from youth development and free transfers. Seriously. It's not that a player that costs more is automatically better, as we can all think of cases where this isn't true. The point is clearly that on the whole you get what you pay for. Sure you might find the odd gem for cheap and vice versa, but on average, if you spend a lot you should expect be up there and if you spend the 15th/16th most out of the teams you shouldn't be surprised or outraged that we're 15th/16th on a lot of those tables. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romavillan Posted December 30, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted December 30, 2014 Those tables have 15 teams in them, and we have finished 16th, 15th and 15th. Why are any of you surprised? Absolutely nothing to talk about there. If it was cut off at 6 teams it makes grim reading for Liverpool. Stick a total player wages and net transfer spend next to the team names in the chart and see what you find. As has been said before spending is not the ultimate way to judge this. Gabby, grealish, guzan, delph, Cole, Richardson all available to Lambert for the grand total of 0 pounds spent on transfer fees. Are they all shit and useless because of that? No, but we're also not the only team that can benefit from youth development and free transfers. And the one's that pay and spend the most tend to attract the best youth propects and higher quality freebies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Why use the values when we bought them? The logical thing to use is what they are worth today. Benteke is not worth 7m for starters! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Why use the values when we bought them? The logical thing to use is what they are worth today. Benteke is not worth 7m for starters! And neither is Luna worth 2m today for example. It goes both ways. When you spend so little, you have more of a chance of landing Lunas and Tonevs than you are Bentekes unfortunately. Luckily Lambert has been quite decent in the transfer market, or we would have been relegated long ago imo (we've come close though!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Why use the values when we bought them? The logical thing to use is what they are worth today. Benteke is not worth 7m for starters! Exactly. There's really now point just focusing on one type of financial figure to support any argument. We all know Lambert is working under tough conditions, we all know Lerner has restricted what he can spend. We don't need specific stats to exaggerate how tough he's had it. And if his working conditions are so bad he didn't have to sign a new 4 year deal did he? This summer he was able to add a lot of experience to the squad, something he'd said was lacking previously. While not spending much the squad has become stronger than his first year here. Surely no one disagrees with that. But the problem is we're performing at the same level. We're not making progress. While not having as much money as other teams he's had time to implement ideas, plans and coach players he's worked with. We're standing still with him, now that would be fine if we were in the top 7/8 and consistent there but its pretty shit when its around the relegation battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Stats for both sides probably don't show the whole picture. I guess we just have to go with what we see and and our gut feeling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Why use the values when we bought them? The logical thing to use is what they are worth today. Benteke is not worth 7m for starters! And neither is Luna worth 2m today for example. It goes both ways. When you spend so little, you have more of a chance of landing Lunas and Tonevs than you are Bentekes unfortunately. Luckily Lambert has been quite decent in the transfer market, or we would have been relegated long ago imo (we've come close though!). Using the values that our players are (roughly) worth today, is a better way of judging Lambert's match performance, than using their purchase price. If you were to do that with all the teams in the league, or a select few, you would be able to see the match performance in relation to the value of the squad, to really judge how Lambert is performing. Using the 'purchase price versus current value', would be a good way of judging how good Lambert is in the transfer market. But unfortunately, you can be the best manager in the window, but still be poor at managing the team in actual matches. Discounting Lambert's good transfers (and bad transfers), I would say that he is underperforming in matches, considering the value of the players he has in the squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Why use the values when we bought them? The logical thing to use is what they are worth today. Benteke is not worth 7m for starters! Exactly. There's really now point just focusing on one type of financial figure to support any argument. We all know Lambert is working under tough conditions, we all know Lerner has restricted what he can spend. We don't need specific stats to exaggerate how tough he's had it. And if his working conditions are so bad he didn't have to sign a new 4 year deal did he? This summer he was able to add a lot of experience to the squad, something he'd said was lacking previously. While not spending much the squad has become stronger than his first year here. Surely no one disagrees with that. But the problem is we're performing at the same level. We're not making progress. While not having as much money as other teams he's had time to implement ideas, plans and coach players he's worked with. We're standing still with him, now that would be fine if we were in the top 7/8 and consistent there but its pretty shit when its around the relegation battle. We're standing still, but we have properly addressed our major achilles heel which was our defence. Improved it almost beyond recognition, it's like people forgot how bad we were. We're also now in the process of improving the style of play. Is it really so inconceivable to give Lambert time to sort out our attack now? He's clearly working towards something. It's not like we're the exact same team we were in 2012, nowhere near it in fact. Of course if you just look at the points tally, you might say we that we are but as was said it doesn't tell the whole story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 In a couple of areas we are better than Sunderland, don't know why people are complaining... I look at Sunderland and think how similar our situations are having given the same man shitloads of money to spend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Unfortunately even though we improve massively one area (6th best defence) we have regressed in the other area (20th in attack). I honestly think that some creativity this window and dropping the players like Weimann who are in for their defensive efforts in place of more attacking players will yield better results. If we could sacrifice some of our defence for attack we'll be alright. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 It's much easier to improve a misfiring attack (especially one that proved it can fire before!), than it is to shore up a (very) leaky defence. Since Lambert has managed to do the latter, I'm willing to give him time to do the former. I think he deserves it, and I think he can do it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 (edited) It's much easier to improve a misfiring attack (especially one that proved it can fire before!), than it is to shore up a (very) leaky defence. Since Lambert has managed to do the latter, I'm willing to give him time to do the former. I think he deserves it, and I think he can do it. I agree. Especially when the defence has already been improved considerably. Edited December 30, 2014 by sexbelowsound Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Unfortunately even though we improve massively one area (6th best defence) we have regressed in the other area (20th in attack). I honestly think that some creativity this window and dropping the players like Weimann who are in for their defensive efforts in place of more attacking players will yield better results. If we could sacrifice some of our defence for attack we'll be alright. Exactly, I think we're probably two players short of being sorted. Unfortunately, those players are generally the most expensive and it seems Lambert has been unable to do a deal to get them in, not even for Hoolahan who would cost £2m at most. Instead he has to pick the likes of Weimann and Agbonlahor who have very little craft. Hopefully Grealish can get a run of games in the second half of the season. I'm hoping that the recent change in style is to get the players used to passing as he has an attacking player up his sleeve for the transfer window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 We're standing still, but we have properly addressed our major achilles heel which was our defence. Improved it almost beyond recognition, it's like people forgot how bad we were. We're also now in the process of improving the style of play. Is it really so inconceivable to give Lambert time to sort out our attack now? He's clearly working towards something. It's not like we're the exact same team we were in 2012, nowhere near it in fact. Of course if you just look at the points tally, you might say we that we are but as was said it doesn't tell the whole story. A big part of our improved defence is bringing back a player he had since day one and signing a decent lb the 3rd time of trying. I don't think he's shown some sort of managerial brilliance to improve a record breaking defence he created. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 We're standing still, but we have properly addressed our major achilles heel which was our defence. Improved it almost beyond recognition, it's like people forgot how bad we were. We're also now in the process of improving the style of play. Is it really so inconceivable to give Lambert time to sort out our attack now? He's clearly working towards something. It's not like we're the exact same team we were in 2012, nowhere near it in fact. Of course if you just look at the points tally, you might say we that we are but as was said it doesn't tell the whole story. A big part of our improved defence is bringing back a player he had since day one and signing a decent lb the 3rd time of trying. I don't think he's shown some sort of managerial brilliance to improve a record breaking defence he created. Hutton is a strange one, nobody knows what happened there plus its very difficult to get a left back spot on when you are having to split your funds across many areas. Admittedly left back is his weakest transfer area but you can't expect him to get every transfer spot on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 We're standing still, but we have properly addressed our major achilles heel which was our defence. Improved it almost beyond recognition, it's like people forgot how bad we were. We're also now in the process of improving the style of play. Is it really so inconceivable to give Lambert time to sort out our attack now? He's clearly working towards something. It's not like we're the exact same team we were in 2012, nowhere near it in fact. Of course if you just look at the points tally, you might say we that we are but as was said it doesn't tell the whole story. A big part of our improved defence is bringing back a player he had since day one and signing a decent lb the 3rd time of trying. I don't think he's shown some sort of managerial brilliance to improve a record breaking defence he created. Hutton is a strange one, nobody knows what happened there plus its very difficult to get a left back spot on when you are having to split your funds across many areas. Admittedly left back is his weakest transfer area but you can't expect him to get every transfer spot on. No I agree but then at the same time I'm reluctant to base confidence on him sorting out the attack because our defence looks stronger this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts