Wesley Moraes

[thunderball]

It’s a quandary, he needs a decent run with this team to show what he can do, but this is unlikely to happen as the stakes are too high. I think there is a decent player in there, he just needs some luck which sadly he’s had none so far.

He isn’t ousting Watkins, he needs to play alongside him, but I would rather take a chance on him in the squad than persevere with Davis. I think we buy another forward, loan out Davis and keep Wes in the squad next season.

[CVByrne]

Given how much Watkins plays, he's never injured and he never gets tired. He's a freak in that regard, especially when you add in his work rate. So I can't see the need having three centre forwards competing for 1 place in the team. Have the pre-season games, 4 Prem games and a EFL cup game before the window shuts. So we can assess if Wesley is going to be a better option to cover Watkins and make impact off the bench to go with for the season. 

[DCJonah]

22 hours ago, gwi1890 said:

He’s a decent finisher 5 goals in 21 appearances last season in a much poorer performing  team was ok, he has obvious flaws to his game but we might as well continue developing him it’s unlikely we recoup what we paid for him but he can be 2nd or 3rd choice for the foreseeable future strikers don’t come cheap even backup ones.

That's quite a claim. He scored in 4 games. Went 12 games without a goal, and 4 games without a shot on goal. 

 

[May-Z]

2 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

That's quite a claim. He scored in 4 games. Went 12 games without a goal, and 4 games without a shot on goal. 

 

That doesn't necessarily mean he's not a good finisher though...just that he wasn't getting many chances (Or maybe struggling to get into the positions)

Off the tip of my head his finishes against Everton at home, the control and shot against Burnley, and the one touches finishes against Arsenal and Norwich away show that he doesn't get too flustered in front of goal and is fairly sharp in that department. 

[CVByrne]

he had xG of 7.18 and scored 5 goals in 19/20 season. It's not a great ratio

[gwi1890]

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

That's quite a claim. He scored in 4 games. Went 12 games without a goal, and 4 games without a shot on goal. 

 

Decent means ok , didn’t say he was Harry Kane, He showed good technique for his goal against Everton shot across goal something Davis can’t do. There’s something there to develop  sure he doesn’t get into positions often enough but he can certainly finish when he’s in a position to do so.

Edited May 22, 2021 by gwi1890

[DCJonah]

16 minutes ago, gwi1890 said:

Decent means ok , didn’t say he was Harry Kane, He showed good technique for his goal against Everton shot across goal something Davis can’t do. There’s something there to develop  sure he doesn’t get into positions often enough but he can certainly finish when he’s in a position to do so.

I just don't think we've seen enough to claim he's a decent finisher. He managed to put the ball in the net in 4 games wearing a villa shirt. 

People used to claim Kozak was a good finisher, based on his odd goal. 

I'm all for Wesley being a part of this squad and hoping he can come good, but I think he seems to be remembered as something he really wasn't. He was a major part of why we struggled so much last season.

[NurembergVillan]

2 hours ago, CVByrne said:

Given how much Watkins plays, he's never injured

Neither did Wesley until Ben Mee got involved.

It's not always about the player's propensity for injury, sometimes it's unavoidable.

[May-Z]

1 hour ago, CVByrne said:

he had xG of 7.18 and scored 5 goals in 19/20 season. It's not a great ratio

Scoring 5/7 is a fairly good ratio, no?

I mean, after twenty-odd games you'd think our main striker would be 'expected' to have more than 7 goals anyway...but considering that's what number he was at, getting 5 is not far off that.

I think his main problem is him getting into the positions and the fact we didn't create a lot last year...but when he was in the right area he normally did well. 

[Laughable Chimp]

1 hour ago, May-Z said:

Scoring 5/7 is a fairly good ratio, no?

I mean, after twenty-odd games you'd think our main striker would be 'expected' to have more than 7 goals anyway...but considering that's what number he was at, getting 5 is not far off that.

I think his main problem is him getting into the positions and the fact we didn't create a lot last year...but when he was in the right area he normally did well. 

No. The way its designed, getting 7/7 would be average, hence why its called expected goals. You're expected to get that amount given the amount of chances you had, getting less would be disappointing. Getting more than that would be good. At least in terms of finishing ability, not necessarily in terms of actual goalscoring.

Although in Wesley's case, there is a considerable difference between what his xG is depending on the source you use so I wouldn't really use the stat to discuss him.

 

Edited May 22, 2021 by Laughable Chimp

[May-Z]

25 minutes ago, Laughable Chimp said:

No. The way its designed, getting 7/7 would be average, hence why its called expected goals. You're expected to get that amount given the amount of chances you had, getting less would be disappointing. Getting more than that would be good. At least in terms of finishing ability, not necessarily in terms of actual goalscoring.

Although in Wesley's case, there is a considerable difference between what his xG is depending on the source you use so I wouldn't really use the stat to discuss him.

 

Fair enough. I don't think disappointing is how I'd describe it though. If you expect 7 but get 5, you're not far off. If we expected 7 and he had 2 then I'd say there was a problem with finishing. I don't put too much weight on expected goals really, and just to be clear, I'm not saying Wesley is an elite finisher or anything.

I don't think he has missed many chances that I felt he definitely should have scored but messed up...definitely not in the same way Samatta, Davis, or even Watkins at times should have. 

 

[Sulberto21]

On 21/05/2021 at 09:18, villalad21 said:

He is nowhere near Watkins level. 

So how can it be justified keeping him on? This isn't charity business. We need a striker who can actually challenge and compete with Watkins. 

That's how we improve, and that's how we get to the next level. 

Better more expensive players are not on Watkins' level. Oh I CBA.

[villalad21]

17 minutes ago, Sulberto21 said:

Better more expensive players are not on Watkins' level. Oh I CBA.

We should sell Davis and Wesley and buy Toney.

[hippo]

The major thing keeping him here is a lack of suitors at a price we find acceptable.

At the time of signing we had to assemble a squad very quickly - we've moved on from that. We shouldn't take our eye off the ball as we seek to improve further. For Wes that's most likely he revives his career elsewhere.

[hippo]

5 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

We should sell Davis and Wesley and buy Toney.

Mane from Liverpool.

[villalad21]

I'd genuinely give Brentford Wesley and Davis + 10M for Toney and feel good about it.

[MotoMkali]

5 hours ago, villalad21 said:

I'd genuinely give Brentford Wesley and Davis + 10M for Toney and feel good about it.

They wouldn't accept that. They want cash and to sign their own players. 

[sne]

2 minutes ago, MotoMkali said:

They wouldn't accept that. They want cash and to sign their own players. 

Pretty sure they are not willing to pay the type of wages that even "low payed" players like Wes and Davies are on either.

[theboyangel]

Keeping Wesley will give much needed competition to Watkins and vice versa.

it’s what we need in the squad. 

[DaveAV1]

22 minutes ago, theboyangel said:

Keeping Wesley will give much needed competition to Watkins and vice versa.

it’s what we need in the squad. 

I agree it’s what we need in the squad.  The only question is whether Wesley can provided it after his injury? Fingers crossed he can and keep Ollie on his toes at least.