oldtype

de Jong played some nice through balls in NZ, i think hes just a very intelligent player and chooses the best option the majority of the time he has the ball. I hate to resort to cliches, but he looks like a textbook "neat and tidy" passer. He's not going to wow you with Cabaye-style through balls but he'll make the right decision more often than not.

Clearly centerback is the gaping hole now, so hopefully it will be addressed. Seriously doubt we'll go after another striker given that we'll probably only play one alongside De Jong up top, and we have four options + whatever miniscule game time Armstrong or Campbell get. "proven" strikers are expensive and unfortunately most of them are too ambitious or too expensive for us. I'm reasonably happy that we've made some low-risk high-return investments instead. Riviere is a striker with good numbers who wasn't a focal point for his team and didn't get a lot of minutes. He may relish being the main man and grow into the role. Ferreya has a fine record in lesser leagues. He may be able to transfer that to the Prem. Perez is a young player who seems on the verge of a breakout season. There's no guarantee that any one of them will work out, but it's probably more likely than not that at least one of them does. We have options, and in the absence of a sure thing, options is the best you can ask for.

De Jong's not a creative force either. He's more of a rich man's Kevin Nolan: plays short simple passes and scores goals. I assume Cabella will be fulfilling the ball-dominant playmaker duties for the most part.

It would be nice if we showed some ambition, but having accepted that we never will, this window has been about as good as we could possibly expect.

This sort of loan deal with a future fee agreed is all-upside really. He's an unproven player so it's good to be able to test him out for a year before making the full outlay. It's quite different from the Remy deal, where we were going for a proven player who was only interested in a short-term deal. So while the usual caveats about how everything is terrible and we're bad forever apply, it's still a good deal in isolation.

is it me or.....if he's available for under £5m, why aren't tons of clubs lining up to take a chance on him?! even sunderland? he's such an immense player who just needs a little guidance. The fact that despite his immense talent he's managed to fall out with every single club he's been at so far may have something to do with it.

Post-match dominos has been around for ages. I remember watching pizza get loaded into the buses after we beat Chelsea at Stamford Bridge. They only get it when they win mind, so it doesn't happen that often.

Given our track record with injuries, I don't want any part of him if he's failed a medical.

Cabella > HBA that never plays, so I'm fine with that.

It's better than just selling a player and not replacing him, which is what we've come to expect.

That graph just means that there are both good players that run a lot and good players that run less. Similarly, there are bad players that run a lot and bad players that run less. This is just an eyeball estimation but the predictive value of those lines relative to the scatterplot simply can't be that strong. Tbf I thought it showed that more players that ran less than 120 metre in a min tended to be more productive, but there you go. I mean, the points aren't close enough to the regression line for that information to be significant. The pattern you're looking at is more or less random.

That graph just means that there are both good players that run a lot and good players that run less. Similarly, there are bad players that run a lot and bad players that run less. This is just an eyeball estimation but the predictive value of those lines relative to the scatterplot simply can't be that strong.

Progress?

Personally I'd just sell Cisse to Qatar or something and get another striker in. Don't think the club would be ready to give up on him though.

Riviere (whose name I'll never be able to spell correctly), Cisse, Gouffran, Perez, and Armstrong probably all competing for one striker slot. Unless someone leaves I can't see the club forking over more for a striker.

Think he'll turn out to be quite good. Fast, strong, deceptively good finishing. Maybe not the most intelligent player but adds the physicality that our frontline is so desperately missing. Biggest question is whether he'll be able to make the step up in responsibility given that he's never had to be the "main striker" before.

Yeah, the elite athleticism is what's impressing me so far. Been so long since we've had a striker that isn't small/weak/slow

The stats do tell you that his conversion rate and shot accuracy is surprisingly impressive, on par with the top goalscorers in Europe. He just doesn't score that much because he's on a team where he's not a full-time starter and doesn't get the ball as much when he's on the pitch. It remains questionable of course whether he can maintain that rate over more minutes, but I can see why scouts would be impressed. Also worth noting that his stats have improved every year for the past five.

Interesting that Armstrong is starting for the first team while Campbell is with the U21s

We'd already have Riviere, Cisse, Perez, Gouffran, and Campbell/Armstrong competing for one spot up front. Doubt the club will pay big money for another striker on top of that unless Cisse leaves.

Ashley's a devious bastard, knows exactly when we're about to fall out of love with the club and throws us some carrots to bring us back in.

Appears based on his stats to be an extremely good finisher, just doesn't shoot very often for whatever reason. Converts nearly 20% of all goal-scoring opportunities and over half his shots are on target. Never seen him play, but I'm guessing he may be a player who could blossom when given a larger role in a different tactical system.

At this pace we'll actually spend that 50 mil

I agree but clustered together? I'm looking forward to it, especially as Brazilians don't need a visa (at least for now). I just mean that all the cities and host sites are in Europe, with none in Asia/Siberia (not logistical genius or anything, just the way of things tbf), so the travel will be relatively comparable to Brazil despite Russia being probably more than twice as large. Aye, I think they'll host a great World Cup, don't think Russia would like to embarrass themselves. I mean if our government managed to hide everything for a month why shouldn't they be able to do an even better job? I think the problem with Russia is that like Qatar they won the bid through bribery. I'm just hoping that the World Cup after these two go to sensible choice. I doubt there's been a single World Cup bid in the past two decades that was won without significant amounts of money changing hands.

I agree but clustered together? I'm looking forward to it, especially as Brazilians don't need a visa (at least for now). I just mean that all the cities and host sites are in Europe, with none in Asia/Siberia (not logistical genius or anything, just the way of things tbf), so the travel will be relatively comparable to Brazil despite Russia being probably more than twice as large. Aye, I think they'll host a great World Cup, don't think Russia would like to embarrass themselves. I mean if our government managed to hide everything for a month why shouldn't they be able to do an even better job? WTF, no matches in Vladivostok?