Laughable Chimp

37 minutes ago, El-Reacho said:

Pretty sure Tom Fox using the 'stepping stone' selling technique to Ayew/Veretout/Amavi/Traore/Gana etc. would have been one of the reasons we didn't much out of them when they did come.

I mean, wouldn't that motivate them to actually do well at Villa since they're trying to be spotted by bigger clubs? Its not like they wouldn't have had the desire.

If my memory serves me correct, Amavi and Gana were good for us anyway whilst Ayew was okay but never that good. It was only Veretout that was a complete failure during his time with us for some reason. 

45 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Why would you remove that game other than to paint a particular picture? It happened. He should have had 3 that day, he played that well. 

Talking about replacing him in his first January window at the club is just way too soon. Signing someone else to supplement him and take the load off him, sure. But deciding he isn't good enough after a dozen games just isn't right.

Because, its completely  unrepresentative of how he usually plays. If a particular result is so out of the norm, it may not be included into the analysis, as it can give a skewed representation of the player. Now, if Wesley shows that he can repeat that kind of performance with the results that come with in the future,then the Norwich match can be reconsidered to be included but if its just a one-off that would only occur in a very specific set of circumstances and doesn't seem like it will happen again or very rarely,(facing arguably the worst team in the league in defensively) there's really no reason to include it in the analysis as we're not gonna be facing the worst team in the league defensively very often in the future. And the only reason for the analysis is to give an idea of how good Wesley will play in the future.

I agree with the rest though. Personally I think Wesley will come good, I just don't think we can afford to solely rely on him hoping that he eventually does come good. But I do think Davis might actually be good enough to lead the line for us and is worth giving a chance. I know he's been better than Wesley everytime he's come on, and yeah apparently his finishing is crap but I haven't really seen much evidence from his appearances this season in the PL to think so yet. That's mostly due to him lacking game time though which leads me back into wanting to see him given a proper chance in the PL when he returns from injury,

9 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

You know Davis is injured right? He won’t be back until December I reckon. 

And he can't be back soon enough. Come on, Davis come back and save us from the mediocrity that is Wesley.

9 minutes ago, TRO said:

Chris, I think we are a long way from comparing to their quality.....many of our crosses are rank poor from corners.....when was the last headed corner scored?

Conor has a decent delivery as does JM .....but we do have plenty of low grade stuff.

I also thought Mings and Engles could weigh in with a few headed goals, but not much sign of that.

Only 6 other teams in the PL have scored more in terms of corners than us this season, which is 2. And we're barely winning corners to begin with, being the 4th worst team in terms of average corners won per game. I don't mind how we score from these corners, as long as we score them and I don't think we're doing too bad in that department stats wise.

26 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Trez is alright mate. He’s played about 12 games in his Villa career. Give the guy a little longer and you’ll all be happy I’m sure. He has what it takes.

Wonder how many people said that abuot Aleksandar Tonev

2 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

Why wouldn’t he?

How would we, in our current situation be in any way a more attractive proposition than staying in Bournemouth?

4 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

Does anyone think that we could get Callum Wilson from Bournemouth? He would take some of the burden from Wesley, Wilson would come straight in to our first xi and improve us in my opinion, although there would be a lot of competition for him

He's their top scorer so far, only 27 years old too. Bournemouth wouldn't sell him to us unless for big money and he wouldn't want to come us anyway.

24 minutes ago, MotoMkali said:

First of all el ghazi has already had 4+ good games this year in the prem in 10. Which isn't bad considering if you want a winger to be good every game you have to sign heung min son or raheem sterling. Was good against arsenal (got an assist and was among our most dangerous players going forward), Norwich (obviously), wolves by far our best player with nakamba and if others had been on the ball we could have easily got a result, Liverpool 85 brilliant minutes of creating chances and tracking back with 1 lapse in error that plenty of full backs would make let alone an attacking minded winger, and obviously last 20 minutes against Everton and was the only player who wanted anything too happen.

Wesley has had 3 good games this year which obviously isn't much but in those games we rarely played long balls (which we have begun to do constantly) players were close to him and running in behind and he either received the ball to feet or for him to run onto. We haven't been doing that the rest of the season and that gives me reason to believe that unlike Hogan we aren't playing to his strengths. Hogan never had a good game for us and was a waster. Wesley on the other hand is a hard worker otherwise he wouldn't be where he is today who is still in his formative stages as football player. Most players at his age have been in professional academies for at least 12 years (Jack has been at villa for nearly 20 years) wesley on the other hand is behind by about 5 years on a player like keinan so he is not likely to have the same level of skills as them however he has great finishing ability inside 12 yards and has been a key player in 7 or 8 of our 17 goals so that is pretty good contribution from a player who people say we may as well be playing with 10 men.

Edit: At 7 years into his footballing career Jamie Carragher was still playing as a striker and what he is probably one of the best ever England defender and certainly one of the best of the premier league era. 

I generally agree with you on the El Ghazi point.

But as for Wesley, remove the Norwich game from the equation because that game was an incredible anomaly and is not representative at all of how he usually plays. The criticism that about how its playing with 10 men with him is in reference to his usual game, which is worlds away from that one game.

Without that game, Wesley has 2 goals and 0 assists out of 12 goals we've scored. 

For every footballer that looked shit at Wesley's level of development and then turned out to be world class there are also many footballers that looked shit at Wesley's level of development and continued to be shit for the rest of their career. Which is why I find the whole, listing all the players who were initially shit at Wesley's level of development and then became good whether it be age or time as a professional footballer, whichever suits the narrative more, to be a garbage argument.

49 minutes ago, birdman said:

Am I the only one who thinks 20 million transfer fee isn't that much money these days? For that kind of money these days you wouldn't necessarily expect a player to deliver from the get go?

I think Wes was a calculated risk and has the potential to be very good. The scouts must have seen something they liked and the hope would have been to hit the ground running. Obviously we're not quite there yet however Dean Smith has to find a way to get him more support and of course Wes needs to do his bit also. 

We're a promoted club, our financial resources isn't going to be as much as the big clubs and the man was our record signing. I think expecting a player to be able to I don't know, not be completely useless for most of the time he's out there on the field for us when he is the most amount of money the club had spent at that point for a player, is reasonable. It is also still a significant amount of money for clubs like us. If you look at the list of teams that finished in the bottom 10 last year outside the relegated ones but replace with them with the promoted teams, basically the teams we are expected to compete with Wesley is the third or fourth most expensive signing out of the 10 teams this summer. It shows, at our level, that is still a lot of money and as such the expectation for him to deliver is reasonably much higher. 

What gives me him some leeway is how young he is, suggesting we bought him for his potential, but not his price tag.

11 hours ago, MotoMkali said:

The reason we are lower than them in expected points is because of the last 20 minutes of spurs, arsenal and Burnley etc. We sat back and let them have 20 shots. Against a team like Watford I think we are less likely to do that and potentially we may have changed tactics or Dean has wised up to the fact that he can use substitions before the opponents have scored multiple times. 

You know, I'd like to think Dean has wisened up after every match but have so far yet to be convinced that he has. Even in our wins against so called easier opposition in Brighton and Norwich we conceded 20 or more shots to the opposition, and I doubt that's gonna change anytime soon.

Also, interesting tidbit I just noticed. Our expected goals conceded from open play is 6 more than our actual amount of goals conceded from open play. To put that into perspective, that means with the chances we've been conceding, we should have conceded 6 more goals from open play. That's a very large difference, wouldn't be surprised if its the largest in the league and its probably the reason why our expected points seem so low. Thing is, it implies we've been pretty lucky or our last ditch defending has been pretty great. Either way, I don't expect that difference to remain like that unless there's a drastic change in how we play and we're eventually gonna come into a game and just get battered by a side that happens to be lucky and super clinical on that day and suddenly, our goal difference isn't' going to look that great.

11 minutes ago, Tomaszk said:

Sunday was difficult, he'd have done nothing just like everyone else.

If Grealish is back he's worth thinking about v Newcastle as we might have some good play.

Idk, I'd still think he'd be a step up above Luiz that game. He'd at least be a bigger goal threat.

2 minutes ago, Villarocker said:

He beat three with his goal against Wolves! 

He didn't. The ball fell to him with space after it missed everyone from the corner. He took a touch to control the ball and unleashed his shot before anyone got close to him.

5 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Where should we be in terms of expected points?

16th

If you include Kozak's strike rate for his entire time in the PL with us its 1 goal every 260 minutes. If you're only looking before the leg break its 1 goal every 196 minutes. Wesley's rate so far is 1 goal every 258 minutes.

As a comparison to other forwards who've played the most minutes in this PL this season for each team ranked.

1-Manchester City-Sergio Aguero-1 goal every 85 minutes

2-Chelsea-Tammy Abraham-1 goal every 89 minutes

3-Leicester-Jamie Vardy-1 goal every 98 minutes

4-Arsenal-Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang-1 goal every 141 minutes

5-Southampton-Danny Ings- 1 goal every 162 minutes

6-Tottenham-Harry Kane-1 goal every 165 minutes

7-Manchester United-Anthony Martial-1 goal every 176 minutes

8-Norwich-Teemu Pukki-1 goal every 179 minutes

9-Burnley-Ashley Barnes-1 goal every 180 minutes

10-Wolves-Raul Jiminez-1 goal every 209 minutes

11-Bournemouth-Callum Wilson-1 goal every 210 minutes

12-Crystal Palace-Jordan Ayew-1 goal every 225 minutes

13-Watford-Gerard Deulofeu-1 goal every 233 minutes

14-Everton-Dominic Calvert-Lewin-1 goal every 237 minutes

15-West Ham-Sebastian Haller-1 goal every 248 minutes

16-Aston Villa-Wesley-1 goal every 258 minutes

17-Brighton-Neal Maupay-1 goal every 280 minutes

18-Liverpool-Roberto Firmino-1 goal every 321 minutes(kind of unfair to put him in here over Salah or Mane but he has played the most minutes for Liverpool)

19-Newcastle-Joelinton-1 goal every 993 minutes

20-Sheffield United-Davic McGoldrick-0 goals

27 minutes ago, MotoMkali said:

I don't see us drawing with Watford. They are crap even if they have troy deeney. I think we should be able to smack them if we are fully fit. 

Watford are 10th in the PL table in terms of expected points this season, far higher than us. They should be far higher up the table than they actually are but for some reason, are not. I think we would be wise not to underestimate them.

11 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

If we weren’t verging on being embroiled in a relegation battle then we’d do it

70million on just a striker? I heavily doubt it. The only teams in the PL to shell out that kind of money for only one player have been Arsenal and Man United this summer transfer window and I'd take a gander and say we probably don't have near the amount of financial resources that they do nor make enough profit to circumvent FFP. And yes, even if we pull more shady tricks to get around FFP we still probably won't dump that kind of money on one singular player.

17 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

I agree that in the main, it is a good strategy to buy young and sell at a profit but you need a mix, we did it with Konsa and Wesley. To buy experience is also needed, we did it in the Summer with Heaton. Long term potential is a prerequisite for this club, how do you know we can’t afford a striker worth £70m? I think we can but we just aren’t in a position to do it currently 

I don't get your point. Surely, if we're not in a position to do it currently that means we can't afford it?

8 minutes ago, sir_gary_cahill said:

£7m spent on him, I wouldn’t rule him out of having success here, he hasn’t really had a fair crack at the whip for me. He’s only played 9 games for us according to wiki, are we in a position where we can just discard a £7 Croatia international goalkeeper? I don’t think so

He's clearly 4th choice keeper at this point, I wouldn't be suprised if he never even gets another game for us, in fact that's probably what will happen unless we have a really bad injury crisis or all 3 of our other keepers suddenly turn to shit or both. And if he never gets another game for us, he isn't going to get  the opportunity to show that he deserves the spot.

If the fact that we wouldn't discard a 7(million) pound Croatia international goalkeeper is the reason why he will eventually get a game, then why hasn't his price tag justified putting him on even the substitutes bench before this? Smith isn't going to randomly decide mid way through the season, "Wait, I have this 7 million pound international goalkeeper in my squad, I should probably give him some game time", 

Hard to score from corners when we don't get corners in the first place due to having to defend most of the time. Currently, we are the 4th worst team in terms of corners won in the premier league.

36 minutes ago, lexicon said:

What are the real percentages of doing that? Hoof it up to a guy who isn't great in the air, against usually at least 2 CBs who will more often than not get it away? It's a shit tactic at the best of times. 

Its not like its how we want to play, but we've been forced into that alleyway for several games already and inievitably they almost never come off and we just lose the ball. I'm not confident in the team's ability to play it from the back and I don't think this team is confident in it themselves either. So yeah, its a shit tactic but it seems like the best we've got at the moment.

4 hours ago, Rightdm00 said:

Yeah he scored after a ball literally fell to him from 5 yards out.  Not trying to take anything away from  him but any prem quality attacker should bury that.  What about the shot he wiffed on from barely 6 yards out.  Or the multiple attacks that broke down against Wolves the closer he got to the opponents box.  Trez is all run no finish which was the main knock on him in the Turkish league as well.  

I disagree. Look at the angle he's shooting from, that is not an easy angle to beat the keeper from at the edge of the 6 yard box at all, he's almost at a point where it would've been better for him to cross the ball instead of shooting. To score from the angle, Trezeguet needed to not only deliver the shot with incredible power, but also aim it right at one of the few holes through the keeper, and he did both perfectly, not to mention how he set up the shot in the first place. Trezeguet's end product is generally poor, but that finish is not an example of one of them. 

Well, good news is understat listed him as the most likely to score a goal among our players for once if you looked at his expected goals this game. Although its a sad state of affairs when our striker being the most likely to score a goal among our players for once can be considered "good news".

I personally agree with this, I thought all things considered he was the most likely to score out there and actually had 2 chances where he could've possibly made something out of it. As opposed to previous games where he didn't do anything in front of goal.

Better than Targett this game but that isn't saying much.

Were the Wolves players told to give him more space to go up I wonder? Because it felt like he was moving up the field a lot and predictably he wasn't very good attacking wise. If that was the plan, fair play to them since it directly lead to us conceding the second goal.

23 minutes ago, Dave-R said:

I'd say the long balls is a huge problem to us loosing the balls and a complete loss of possession. Seriously what is the point of us passing it around 10 plus times to get it Into midfield then someone hits the long pass and it ends up in the lap of the opposition, it in does all that passing work and annoys the rest of the team because it puts us on defence alert.

We're smarter than this, we've seen some very sweet play at times in past matches, but today in the first half it looked as though we were no where near confident as we were in the second half, you could really see the difference.

 

Are we though? We've usually had a few stretches in a match where things are going our way and we actually looked not utter crap and having to rely on aimless long balls, but for some reason these stretches never last. Like, in this game it happened in the last 10 minutes. I can't imagine the team and manager doesn't see what we're seeing, so the question is why haven't they done anything to rectify it? Why can we look decent for a 10-20 minutes in some random stretch of the game and then just be on the backfoot for the rest of it concending chance after chance? 

What's funny is is that there've been times I feel where we've been playing well, and then the opposition goes to 10 men and we've somehow gotten worse and fall into the trap of conceding chance after chance. Like, why? Its like there's some invisible trigger to us playing well and playing badly.

12 minutes ago, MotoMkali said:

Yeah he made a couple of mistakes. But you know what every week people are saying it is like playing with 10 players. Yeah he missed the target but why weren't people complaining about mcginn doing that the first 8 weeks of the season. And the ball he missed from trez he made a brilliant run across and the ball was very awkward straight at him so to hit the target he had to try and awkwardly hit it and he missed the ball. I'm not sure why he has revived so much blame today when he has shown his finishing is actually quite good before. 

Because Mcginn is a midfielder, and his main job isn't to score goals. He did his other roles in midfield well in the first 8 weeks of the season as well as having more goals than Wesley did for most of those 8 weeks, prior to the Norwich match. 

Also, another interesting statistic. In the last 4 matches, Wesley has had 5 shots on goal in total. Only one of those has actually hit the target. Wesley has been averaging, 1.25 shots per game and only 1/5th of those shots even hit the target, much less become a goal.