Conor Hourihane

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, Stratvillan said:

Just bland criticism with nothing to back it up.

Better stats than McGinn in Championship

Better stats than McGinn in Premier league

But McGinn is God and Hourihane is a lower level championship player.

The only horrific thing is your reluctance to look at the facts.

This all sounds like just lies.  I'm assuming "stats" are purely goals and assists here?  Because I'm almost certain Hourihane - our #1 set piece taker - will do better there than John McGinn.  However, in almost every single other aspect of the game, McGinn is simply a better player.

I have nothing against Hourihane, but if it wasn't for the fact that he has such brilliant set piece delivery, he wouldn't be at Aston Villa.  He offers very little else.

[TRO]

22 minutes ago, Johnnyp said:

VT is humorous when it comes to Hourihane and has been since he joined probably.. Has a game where ( insert any game really against Norwich ) where he scores plenty. Also, lots of of other games he scored great goals and delivered great set pieces and it's all positive. But when none of those come off - it's all negative. I'll nail my colours to the mast now re Hourihane before he pings in a hatrick from frees against Fulham. I'll stand by this regardless. Great at set pieces. Does not influence the game or is technically good enough on the ball in open play to be in a villa team that seemingly wants to kick on.

For me he lacks the ability of all top players in this league.....He is limited in his play " Without the ball"......The teams that rise up this league are competent off the ball as well as on it.

When he has his moments, he is easy on the eye, but when the going gets tough, he is anonymous.

He is 29, he can hang around for me, we won't get much money for him, might as well stay on the peripheral for the odd games.

But i don't not like him.

Edited September 23, 2020 by TRO

[MessiWillSignForVilla]

4 hours ago, useless said:

 

The problem with this is it looks good out of context, but in context, it isn't that great, just kind of okay. As others have pointed out, this is likely xA/90 for players that have played 1000+ minutes, however his xA is around 27th in the league, which is still fairly high. You also have to consider that over half of his xA is from set pieces* and corners (according to understat - 3.01 xA from set pieces and corners, 2.72 xA from open play - this open play xA would drop him from 27th to 100th in xA of players with 1000+ minutes), which when looked at deeper shows that whilst his open play has a higher xA than his set pieces alone (2.72 v 2.49) his xA/Key Passes (passes that result in a shot) is higher for Set Pieces (0.25 v 0.17), which would indicate that from open play he provides a higher quantity of lower quality passes, and the inverse for set pieces.

Which essentially paints the picture that most of us already knew, Conor is a set piece specialist, and mostly average elsewhere. Specifically, he is a free kick specialist, as from the 6 players that I can see that took corners for us last season, Conor ranked 5th with an xA/KP of 0.04, with only El Ghazi's 0.03 ranking below. (This is partly due to the fact that corners are getting increasingly harder to score from, hence why so many teams now take short corners as they have a greater chance of goals). Having said that, I couldn't find how many corners each player took, so I couldn't how these numbers compare to the volume of corners taken, which could add further insight.

 

This is all to say, stats like xG and xA can be useful, however they are meaningless when used in isolation to compare players, and you need to dig down in to them to help formulate a greater picture of a player and what they offer to a team, and they also need a good sample size to be relevant, which is why xG for singular games is useless, whereas over an entire season it can give you an idea of team performance.

 

*I don't know why understat separates these out, I assume they are just free kicks.

[Stratvillan]

1 hour ago, bobzy said:

This all sounds like just lies.  I'm assuming "stats" are purely goals and assists here?  Because I'm almost certain Hourihane - our #1 set piece taker - will do better there than John McGinn.  However, in almost every single other aspect of the game, McGinn is simply a better player.

I have nothing against Hourihane, but if it wasn't for the fact that he has such brilliant set piece delivery, he wouldn't be at Aston Villa.  He offers very little else.

I've nothing against McGinn, but the blind tolerance of McGinn despite his performances compared to the refusal to accept what Hourihane brings confuses me.

This isnt a hourihane vs mcginn, debate but mcginn hasn't been overly effective in the Premier league either. 

[mikeyjavfc]

Connor is a good option off the bench where you are playing a team that you can’t break down and you need a quality set piece taker to unlock a goal. As a starter he is somewhat limited from general play and hopefully we can bring in an upgrade before the window closes, so he can drop back to a squad player.

[Tomaszk]

14 minutes ago, Stratvillan said:

I've nothing against McGinn, but the blind tolerance of McGinn despite his performances compared to the refusal to accept what Hourihane brings confuses me.

Where's that been said? It was asked "Stats" was cleared up because that is a bit open ended.

Blind tolerance? Blimey, go back and read the last six months in the McGinn thread. Claws been out there as well.

It's not a McGinn v Hourihane debate because there isn't one to be had.

The best thing Hourihane does is get goals and assists in dominant team performances. He didn't do that v Sheff United because they were pretty good sitting back and tough to break down. 

Hourihane has his place in a PL squad. It's on the bench/reserves to bring on in games like the Sheff U one.

[Pez1974]

12 minutes ago, mikeyjavfc said:

Connor is a good option off the bench where you are playing a team that you can’t break down and you need a quality set piece taker to unlock a goal. As a starter he is somewhat limited from general play and hopefully we can bring in an upgrade before the window closes, so he can drop back to a squad player.

This.

Although for a team that plays with wingers and attacking full backs, the fact that we think we need a quality set piece taker on the bench (a view I agree with) is pretty damning on the first 11.

[rodders0223]

1 hour ago, MessiWillSignForVilla said:

The problem with this is it looks good out of context, but in context, it isn't that great, just kind of okay. As others have pointed out, this is likely xA/90 for players that have played 1000+ minutes, however his xA is around 27th in the league, which is still fairly high. You also have to consider that over half of his xA is from set pieces* and corners (according to understat - 3.01 xA from set pieces and corners, 2.72 xA from open play - this open play xA would drop him from 27th to 100th in xA of players with 1000+ minutes), which when looked at deeper shows that whilst his open play has a higher xA than his set pieces alone (2.72 v 2.49) his xA/Key Passes (passes that result in a shot) is higher for Set Pieces (0.25 v 0.17), which would indicate that from open play he provides a higher quantity of lower quality passes, and the inverse for set pieces.

Which essentially paints the picture that most of us already knew, Conor is a set piece specialist, and mostly average elsewhere. Specifically, he is a free kick specialist, as from the 6 players that I can see that took corners for us last season, Conor ranked 5th with an xA/KP of 0.04, with only El Ghazi's 0.03 ranking below. (This is partly due to the fact that corners are getting increasingly harder to score from, hence why so many teams now take short corners as they have a greater chance of goals). Having said that, I couldn't find how many corners each player took, so I couldn't how these numbers compare to the volume of corners taken, which could add further insight.

 

This is all to say, stats like xG and xA can be useful, however they are meaningless when used in isolation to compare players, and you need to dig down in to them to help formulate a greater picture of a player and what they offer to a team, and they also need a good sample size to be relevant, which is why xG for singular games is useless, whereas over an entire season it can give you an idea of team performance.

 

*I don't know why understat separates these out, I assume they are just free kicks.

 

[Keener window-cleaner]

Good as LCM, not as DCM. Good against the lower half teams, not against the top half teams.

I've been criticising him previously, but as LCM and against that opposition he comes to his right. And he works hard and has a good attitude. Scores many valuable goals too.

Thinking about that he cost £3,5M, that's amazing business! Not many others in the squad have more than tripled their value.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Keener window-cleaner

[barry'sboots]

I think he is either a DCM (which I believe is the position he played for Barnsley before we bought him) or a no. 10 (which he effectively played when he scored his hat trick against Norwich) BUT is not capable of playing as a box to box midfielder - he doesn't have the dynamism or energy and gets lost - which, unfortunately is where DS keeps playing him because he likes a 4-3-3.

As a DCM both Luiz and Nakamba offer more energy and a better screen and Luiz, in particular, offers equally good, if not better distribution.  It would be academic to discuss the "10" role as DS never really uses it and, if he did, Jack would play there all day assuming we can get another wide option in.

I think CH is also useful coming off the bench if you are chasing a game - as long as you are dominating possession - as he does carry a goal threat.

However, if it were me I would look to cash in, given that he is 29 and only has a year left on his contract and upgrade with Swift (Reading) - probably at zero net cost - who I have seen described as a Hourihane with legs!  Swift would be proper cover for another SJM injury then. 

[Kiwivillan]

8 hours ago, Stratvillan said:

 

Just bland criticism with nothing to back it up.

Better stats than McGinn in Championship

Better stats than McGinn in Premier league

But McGinn is God and Hourihane is a lower level championship player.

The only horrific thing is your reluctance to look at the facts.

Complete bollocks. McGinn had higher xG and xGI than Hourihane last season. Hourihane had higher xA but he's on set pieces so that's hardly surprising

[Kiwivillan]

2 hours ago, barry'sboots said:

I think he is either a DCM (which I believe is the position he played for Barnsley before we bought him)

He was LCM in a 442 and was scoring for fun that's why Bruce bought him. 

[barry'sboots]

5 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said:

He was LCM in a 442 and was scoring for fun that's why Bruce bought him. 

I had read that he largely played from deep though as "quarterback" type.  I thought a lot of his Barnsley goals and assists were set pieces?

[rbcuk]

Take away his set pieces, he’s an average player who we need to improve on if we are to be competing higher up the league 

[Villan_of_oz]

9 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Is this what they call satire?

 

You can disagree with me but why not offer an opinion of your own rather than go the cheap route! I thought he played an average match and then didn't celebrate our goal, I find that maddening.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

15 minutes ago, Villan_of_oz said:

You can disagree with me but why not offer an opinion of your own rather than go the cheap route! I thought he played an average match and then didn't celebrate our goal, I find that maddening.

Apologies if I offended you. 

He was clearly annoyed at his own performance. Or frustrated at how the game went. Or yeah, maybe he was pissed off at being taken off just before a corner. You know, his 'thing'... Or all of the above...

I imagine he got over it pretty quick, and I expect his teammates will too. If they even noticed he had a grump on.

He's a fierce competitor, and a human being. I think you made a bigger deal out if than it warranted. 

[dont_do_it_doug.]

I thought he was crap on Monday, though we did not make the most of a couple of juicy Conor specials either. 

I think his overall value to the squad is underrated and always has been. Maybe always will be, but he needs competition. All our midfield do. Whether that's A.N. Other or Jack Grealish. Or both.  

Eventually, we are hoping to move beyond Conor. But we're definitely not there yet. 

[Villan_of_oz]

8 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Apologies if I offended you. 

He was clearly annoyed at his own performance. Or frustrated at how the game went. Or yeah, maybe he was pissed off at being taken off just before a corner. You know, his 'thing'... Or all of the above...

I imagine he got over it pretty quick, and I expect his teammates will too. If they even noticed he had a grump on.

He's a fierce competitor, and a human being. I think you made a bigger deal out if than it warranted. 

No apology required, as a legend on VT, I respect your views and was disappointed with your short quip. You are possibly right that I overreacted, but I too am a human being and upon seeing the footage my emotions got the better of me. So the same reasoning you use to defend Conor could also be applied to defend my reaction I just don't want any little things to affect us getting off to the best possible start to this season.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Villan_of_oz

[Stratvillan]

52 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said:

Complete bollocks. McGinn had higher xG and xGI than Hourihane last season. Hourihane had higher xA but he's on set pieces so that's hardly surprising

Nice reasoned argument.

McGinn and hourihane scored the same, hourihane had more assists despite playing 800 minutes less.

 

[rodders0223]

42 minutes ago, barry'sboots said:

I had read that he largely played from deep though as "quarterback" type.  I thought a lot of his Barnsley goals and assists were set pieces?

In league one maybe. Everytime I saw him play DM or "DLP" he got absolutely ran through.