Harvey Barnes

[lexicon]

1 hour ago, DaveAV1 said:

Barnes is a good player and may fit well with us. However as others have pointed out he wouldn’t be cheap, English premium and all that. 
 

You’d think that our recruitment team, especially with our new Spanish based scouts and of course Unai’s input, we’d be able to find better value elsewhere. 

There are definitely debates to be had about that. Barnes would need to change his style quite considerably IMO as I think we're looking for a player who can retain possession better and create more than he does. He seems to be an ideal fit for a counter-attacking team rather than one like ours. A large part of the scouting on him would be determining whether he can adapt and fit it or not. I wouldn't want to spend more than say 25m on him for that reason. 

[avfc1982am]

Just now, lexicon said:

There are definitely debates to be had about that. Barnes would need to change his style quite considerably IMO as I think we're looking for a player who can retain possession better and create more than he does. He seems to be an ideal fit for a counter-attacking team rather than one like ours. A large part of the scouting on him would be determining whether he can adapt and fit it or not. I wouldn't want to spend more than say 25m on him for that reason. 

6 months ago we were all debating how many of the squad could adjust to Emery's style of football. 

I see lots of arguments about one player of another not being the right fit but anyone coming in will need to adjust, just as the squad has already. I have no doubt so could Barnes if Emery wants him and he's gettable.

I don't think it's relevant to say players can't adjust but more relevant as to what they can bring to the team. We need a bit of everything, including what we don't already have so we could say Barnes fits right into that category. 

[lexicon]

1 minute ago, avfc1982am said:

6 months ago we were all debating how many of the squad could adjust to Emery's style of football. 

I see lots of arguments about one player of another not being the right fit but anyone coming in will need to adjust, just as the squad has already. I have no doubt so could Barnes if Emery wants him and he's gettable.

I don't think it's relevant to say players can't adjust but more relevant as to what they can bring to the team. We need a bit of everything, including what we don't already have so we could say Barnes fits right into that category. 

I think we've been fortunate in that so many of them have taken to it and been able to adjust but in any case, I think given our relatively decent budget this year, it would make more sense to sign somebody that there are fewer doubts about regarding their ability to fit in.

To take an example from the squad, Bailey seems to be one who hasn't found his feet in the side yet and if you think about the criticisms of him, then look at Barnes' weaknesses:

 

 

This, for me, doesn't make sense given the system and he doesn't actually offer anything that we don't already have. 

[MaVilla]

14 minutes ago, lexicon said:

He seems to be an ideal fit for a counter-attacking team rather than one like ours.

We do at times play on the break though.

Emery seems to have two core systems.

For teams that sit back he does utilise players with high ball retention, intelligence, passing, movement, workrate etc etc.

For teams that like to push on, or just dont sit back, Emery seems to like a scenario where we control the ball in our own half, retain possession, pull opposition players around and draw their press or move their players towards our goal to open up space or gaps behind, then when the chance appears we break quickly, this is basically a way of creating an artificial break transition, in this scenario the team does need some very skilful/athletic/direct players to break forward and use the spaces in behind.

So while as you say, Emery likes possession football, some of his tactics also require (ideally), your rapid, skilful, athletic, progressive players to artificially break on a team, ie: players like Barnes, Sarr, Zaha, Williams, Bailey etc etc.

Whether Barnes is good enough?, dunno, but my point is more that Emery isnt just a possession type manager, he also creates artificial break/transition scenarios where those old school skilful winger types would suit perfectly.

I guess its horses for courses, sometimes he would be useful, sometimes not, so Emery would select the team around whats needed in that game, i guess.

Edited May 27, 2023 by MaVilla

[lexicon]

4 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

We do at times play on the break though.

Emery seems to have two core systems.

For teams that sit back he does utilise players with high ball retention, intelligence, passing, movement, workrate etc etc.

For teams that like to push on, or just dont sit back, Emery seems to like a scenario where we control the ball in our own half, retain possession, pull opposition players around and draw their press or move their players towards our goal to open up space or gaps behind, then when the chance appears we break quickly, this is basically a way of creating an artificial break transition, in this scenario the team does need some very skilful/athletic/direct players to break forward and use the spaces in behind.

So while as you say, Emery likes possession football, some of his tactics also require (ideally), your rapid, skilful, athletic, progressive players to artificially break on a team, ie: players like Barnes, Sarr, Zaha, Williams, Bailey etc etc.

Whether Barnes is good enough?, dunno, but my point is more that Emery isnt just a possession type manager, he also creates artificial break/transition scenarios where those old school skilful winger types would suit perfectly.

I guess its horses for courses, sometimes he would be useful, sometimes not, so Emery would select the team around whats needed in that game, i guess.

I agree with that - but we need players that can do both. To take the example in the post I wrote just now, Bailey's a good player to have on the break, but he's not quite got the skillset for the possession-based phases, it seems. Barnes hasn't shown that he has them either and I'd much rather buy a fast player who is good at retaining the ball i.e. someone who's comfy with both. 

Edited May 27, 2023 by lexicon

[MaVilla]

10 minutes ago, lexicon said:

I agree with that - but we need players that can do both. To take the example in the post I wrote just now, Bailey's a good player to have on the break, but he's not quite got the skillset for the possession-based phases, it seems. Barnes hasn't shown that he has them either and I'd much rather buy a fast player who is good at retaining the ball i.e. someone who's comfy with both. 

yeah, ideally you want a player who is both the rapid road runner, but also skilful and comfortable on the ball, those types are rare and expensive though, hopefully we manage to get one!

[lexicon]

8 minutes ago, MaVilla said:

yeah, ideally you want a player who is both the rapid road runner, but also skilful and comfortable on the ball, those types are rare and expensive though, hopefully we manage to get one!

That's basically why I want us to sign Ferran Torres. Think that link might be dead given Alemany's decision to stay, though. 

[bobzy]

30 minutes ago, lexicon said:

I think we've been fortunate in that so many of them have taken to it and been able to adjust but in any case, I think given our relatively decent budget this year, it would make more sense to sign somebody that there are fewer doubts about regarding their ability to fit in.

To take an example from the squad, Bailey seems to be one who hasn't found his feet in the side yet and if you think about the criticisms of him, then look at Barnes' weaknesses:

 

 

This, for me, doesn't make sense given the system and he doesn't actually offer anything that we don't already have. 

Doesn't need to do any of that in our system, though.  He'd essentially be what Bailey/Traore are meant to be - a pacey outlet who can score goals.

[bobzy]

Would also suggest (as I have in the Leicester thread) that they're a side setup to counter attack - have been ever since their league win.  Barnes has been asked to play in that particular way.  Players can adapt, it's a thing.

[lexicon]

21 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Doesn't need to do any of that in our system, though.  He'd essentially be what Bailey/Traore are meant to be - a pacey outlet who can score goals.

Of course, he'd have to do it - for the reasons discussed above. You don't solve any problems by bringing in more of the same, you still have a weakness to be exploited. 

[bobzy]

54 minutes ago, lexicon said:

Of course, he'd have to do it - for the reasons discussed above. You don't solve any problems by bringing in more of the same, you still have a weakness to be exploited. 

He doesn't need to do it.  Bailey doesn't often do it, Traore sure as hell doesn't do it.  Our weakness at the moment is not scoring enough goals - we've scored the fewest in the top half by 7 goals as it stands (49, next up Man Utd with 56).

A player like Barnes is exactly what we did.  Attacking, quick, makes intelligent runs, scores goals.  He'd easily cover the current defensive output which that position sees.

 

Edit:  My mistake, 10th placed Fulham have scored 54.  So we're 5 goals worse than any other top half side, not 7.

Edited May 27, 2023 by bobzy

[lexicon]

30 minutes ago, bobzy said:

He doesn't need to do it.  Bailey doesn't often do it, Traore sure as hell doesn't do it.  Our weakness at the moment is not scoring enough goals - we've scored the fewest in the top half by 7 goals as it stands (49, next up Man Utd with 56).

A player like Barnes is exactly what we did.  Attacking, quick, makes intelligent runs, scores goals.  He'd easily cover the current defensive output which that position sees.

 

Edit:  My mistake, 10th placed Fulham have scored 54.  So we're 5 goals worse than any other top half side, not 7.

Why are you including Gerrard's tenure though? You'd have to extrapolate Emery's goals per game total over 38 games to get a fair comparison. We don't have a problem scoring goals. 

It's also not about defending, it's about retention and creativity - which aren't Barnes' strong points. 

[DaveAV1]

2 hours ago, lexicon said:

There are definitely debates to be had about that. Barnes would need to change his style quite considerably IMO as I think we're looking for a player who can retain possession better and create more than he does. He seems to be an ideal fit for a counter-attacking team rather than one like ours. A large part of the scouting on him would be determining whether he can adapt and fit it or not. I wouldn't want to spend more than say 25m on him for that reason. 

I don’t think you have to worry to be honest as I think the club will be reluctant to spend £25m on him and Leicester will be hoping to cash in big time on him. They’ll price us out of him, not because we can’t meet their valuation, but because we won’t meet their valuation. 

That should guarantee his arrival next week!
 

[DaveAV1]

49 minutes ago, bobzy said:

He doesn't need to do it.  Bailey doesn't often do it, Traore sure as hell doesn't do it.  Our weakness at the moment is not scoring enough goals - we've scored the fewest in the top half by 7 goals as it stands (49, next up Man Utd with 56).

A player like Barnes is exactly what we did.  Attacking, quick, makes intelligent runs, scores goals.  He'd easily cover the current defensive output which that position sees.

 

Edit:  My mistake, 10th placed Fulham have scored 54.  So we're 5 goals worse than any other top half side, not 7.

Don’t worry we’ll get that sorted on Sunday. 

[S-Platt]

Yeah if this one is a goer it depends on Leicesters survival.  They ain't getting 40 million if they are relegated.

I think we have plenty of options and if Unai says yes who are we to argue?

[Tom13]

54 minutes ago, bobzy said:

He doesn't need to do it.  Bailey doesn't often do it, Traore sure as hell doesn't do it.  Our weakness at the moment is not scoring enough goals - we've scored the fewest in the top half by 7 goals as it stands (49, next up Man Utd with 56).

A player like Barnes is exactly what we did.  Attacking, quick, makes intelligent runs, scores goals.  He'd easily cover the current defensive output which that position sees.

 

Edit:  My mistake, 10th placed Fulham have scored 54.  So we're 5 goals worse than any other top half side, not 7.

Funny thing is, Traore adds plenty of goals when he actually gets substantial minutes. Problem is he's not trusted enough to start, and sadly, I do get that.

[bobzy]

36 minutes ago, lexicon said:

Why are you including Gerrard's tenure though? You'd have to extrapolate Emery's goals per game total over 38 games to get a fair comparison. We don't have a problem scoring goals. 

It's also not about defending, it's about retention and creativity - which aren't Barnes' strong points. 

OK - I'll take an arbitary comparison period of the last 10 games.  We've scored 14 and conceded 6.

11 teams have scored more than us in the last 10 games, with Brentford scoring the same amount.  Comparatively, only Man Utd have conceded fewer (5).

 

Scoring goals is our problem.

[lexicon]

27 minutes ago, bobzy said:

OK - I'll take an arbitary comparison period of the last 10 games.  We've scored 14 and conceded 6.

11 teams have scored more than us in the last 10 games, with Brentford scoring the same amount.  Comparatively, only Man Utd have conceded fewer (5).

 

Scoring goals is our problem.

 

Extrapolated over the course of the season, that would give us a +30 goal difference or 4th best in the league. That's not good enough for you?

[bobzy]

3 minutes ago, lexicon said:

Extrapolated over the course of the season, that would give us a +30 goal difference or 4th best in the league. That's not good enough for you?

You've suddenly chucked in "goal difference", which I haven't been discussing at all.  I've said our weakness is scoring goals.  Not the difference between how many we've scored and how many we've conceded.

Scoring goals.

[RichW]

Think this is a deal the club will only do if Leicester are relegated as everybody knows they need money for FFP so him and Maddison will go for less then what Leicester are expecting. If they stay up then this will probably be too expensive and the club will move on. 

Have always thought he was a good player over the last few years, scored a great goal against us this season but I’m guessing like Bailey, his inconsistent so I’m not sure what he will add to the squad.