Lloyd Kelly

[TRon]

7 minutes ago, Displayname said:

Looks just fine for what we brought him in for, being a backup CB/LB. We needed more depth there.

 

Not sure he's looked any better than the back ups we've already got, that's the problem.

[Kid Icarus]

There's definitely more to come from him, you can tell. 

[Jordan]

I’d give him a go at CB instead of Burn. We need the pace at the back desperately. 

[Hanshithispantz]

It's been said but 'Trippier, Schar, Kelly, Livramento' looks a great back 4 on paper.

[Newcastle Fan]

Dosn't look strong enough to play CB but not technical enough to play LB, annoying how many times he got beaten in the air today.

[Lush Vlad]

10 hours ago, Newcastle Fan said:

Dosn't look strong enough to play CB but not technical enough to play LB, annoying how many times he got beaten in the air today.

Towards the end. He started to win his fair share. But seemed like he lost every header for the first 20-25 minutes of that second half. 

He looks quite physical and aggressive when the ball is on the deck. Which I like. He’s not afraid to get tight. But he does look questionable in the air. 
 

Certainly better on the ball at CB than he is at LB. 

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I thought he was OK in general, just obviously doesn’t like overlapping and getting crosses in. 
 

Combining with Willock was quite painful because he’d just pass it to Willock’s feet, he wouldn’t overlap and Willock would cut inside into traffic. Never going to be productive.

[TRon]

11 hours ago, Newcastle Fan said:

Dosn't look strong enough to play CB but not technical enough to play LB, annoying how many times he got beaten in the air today.

 

I've seen this comment a few times, TCD was saying in this thread he doesn't look particularly strong in the air. Can't say I've noticed since he's barely played CB so far. But if he is weak in the air, then I would question the point of signing him, since as far as I'm concerned he's a CB not a LB.

 

That said, I thought he got overly criticised last night. He was trying to be positive as a LB, unlike some of his fellow defenders, and he did well enough when he was belatedly shifted to his proper CB position.

[RobsonsWonderland]

About 40 mins in Howe and tindall said something to him making short nothing passes 

 

Second half he was moved to CB 

 

Maybe he doesn't want to play lb but I would rather see him fail with a cross then pass 10 metres to play safe

[Lush Vlad]

42 minutes ago, RobsonsWonderland said:

About 40 mins in Howe and tindall said something to him making short nothing passes 

 

Second half he was moved to CB 

 

Maybe he doesn't want to play lb but I would rather see him fail with a cross then pass 10 metres to play safe

 

His passing does seem a lot better at CB.  Even seems more inclined to try the big diagonal or clipped ball in behind.  

 

I guess you're in a different position on the pitch, more central, often deeper, more time on the ball etc.  But watching him at left back, you would not think he has quite a decent pass on him.  Like you've alluded to here  Everything was safe and just passing for passing sake.  Seemed like he wanted to just get rid of the ball sideways or backwards and let someone else sort it out. 

[HayDen Traces]

Looks more a natural cb than lb for sure. Too static to play lb in a Howe system for me.

[Kanji]

Burn looks a better LB tbh. Thought Burn also looked better at CB when he came on too. 
 

Miss Botman, though. 

[andyc35i]

He’s a CB to me and I thought he looked more comfortable in that role. I think that’s where he should be played from now on unless there’s injuries 

[RodneyCisse]

A few times he played long balls which were on, but just didn’t quite get his range right.

[Kanji]

Thought he’d be a seamless and instant ball playing / pacy upgrade on Burn and Dummett. He’s young tho so hopefully there is more development in him. 
 

If all 5 our main CB’s were fit and available he’d be bottom of my list at this point. 
 

I’d sooner play Schar at LCB with Jamaal if Burn and Botman were hurt. 

[The College Dropout]

Think in some niche instances he could work at CB. Like alongside Lascelles or an aerially dominant CB.  Or a back 3. 
 

At LB he’s just competition for Hall but not a proper long term option imo.  
 

I prefer Burn at CB.  I haven’t had to see Burn at LB for awhile. But I might prefer prime Burn at LB too from what I’ve seen so far. 

[Nucasol]

Kelly is the sort of expensive wage / contract signing we can hopefully avoid in future by sorting out the academy. Genuinely should be able to plug back up gaps from there and focus on buying in first team game changers. However, it’s where we are at the moment and we’ll have to live with it for a few more years yet. 

[TRon]

9 hours ago, The College Dropout said:

Think in some niche instances he could work at CB. Like alongside Lascelles or an aerially dominant CB.  Or a back 3. 
 

At LB he’s just competition for Hall but not a proper long term option imo.  
 

I prefer Burn at CB.  I haven’t had to see Burn at LB for awhile. But I might prefer prime Burn at LB too from what I’ve seen so far. 

 

But wasn't the problem with Burn in either position the lack of pace and ability to bring the ball out? How does he cope if we press high which is your preferred way of us playing?

 

 

[The College Dropout]

39 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

But wasn't the problem with Burn in either position the lack of pace and ability to bring the ball out? How does he cope if we press high which is your preferred way of us playing?

 

 

I don’t want either at LB tbf. Happy for Kelly to share some minutes with Hall.  
 

And ideally neither play at CB too.  But Burns ability to win headers is invaluable when we have a relatively small backline that’s weak in the air.  
 

You don’t need pace to press attackers. Neither Schar or Botman are quick themselves. Aggression, bravery, anticipation.  Burns been poor at that at times this season but so has Schar.  
 

I can see Kelly’s use at CB if we need a goal due to his betttee distribution.  But then again Burn is a bigger threat from set pieces.  
 

It’s early days for Kelly.  He might prove himself a much better player than I’m giving him credit for.  Maybe I read the game too basic but I like to see players with standout attributes. 
 

And the rumoured wages are scary.  

[TRon]

26 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I don’t want either at LB tbf. Happy for Kelly to share some minutes with Hall.  
 

And ideally neither play at CB too.  But Burns ability to win headers is invaluable when we have a relatively small backline that’s weak in the air.  
 

You don’t need pace to press attackers. Neither Schar or Botman are quick themselves. Aggression, bravery, anticipation.  Burns been poor at that at times this season but so has Schar.  
 

I can see Kelly’s use at CB if we need a goal due to his betttee distribution.  But then again Burn is a bigger threat from set pieces.  
 

It’s early days for Kelly.  He might prove himself a much better player than I’m giving him credit for.  Maybe I read the game too basic but I like to see players with standout attributes. 
 

And the rumoured wages are scary.  

 

You don't need pace to press attackers, but you do need pace for recovery if you lose the ball while pressing high up the pitch.

 

Also you keep mentioning Kelly's lack of ability to win headers. Is that something which is an actual weakness or just something which you have assumed because he is not 6'4"+?  If it was you would think Bournemouth fans would have expressed this, but they seemed to rate him highly as a CB.

[The College Dropout]

58 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

You don't need pace to press attackers, but you do need pace for recovery if you lose the ball while pressing high up the pitch.

 

Also you keep mentioning Kelly's lack of ability to win headers. Is that something which is an actual weakness or just something which you have assumed because he is not 6'4"+?  If it was you would think Bournemouth fans would have expressed this, but they seemed to rate him highly as a CB.

It’s in the data as a CB (same for Schar and Guehi) and in the eye test.  

[TRon]

12 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

It’s in the data as a CB (same for Schar and Guehi) and in the eye test.  

 

Don't really pay too much mind to data, and I haven't seen enough of him for the eye test. I just find it strange we would buy someone who doesn't really identify as either a CB or a LB. Especially one who isn't particularly good at either, if what you are saying is true. Although I'll hold judgement on that until I've seen him as a CB.

 

[The College Dropout]

25 minutes ago, TRon said:

 

Don't really pay too much mind to data, and I haven't seen enough of him for the eye test. I just find it strange we would buy someone who doesn't really identify as either a CB or a LB. Especially one who isn't particularly good at either, if what you are saying is true. Although I'll hold judgement on that until I've seen him as a CB.

 

Our first choice LB is 20 yo and will need to be rotated. 
 

our first choice LCB has an ACL injury. As does our backup RCB.  

 

Our current backup LCB and LB is 32.  
 

For this season Kelly shares minutes with Hall at LB and is our backup LCB.  

 

Long term he’s the Dan Burn replacement as backup LCB and LB.  

 

We’ll aim to replace Schar with a more aerially dominant RCB which would make Kelly a better option at LCB too.  
 

He’s a perfectly capable prem player. He just doesn’t start for us with everyone fit.  Nor would he start for any other top 8 team. We do need to raise the floor of the squads quality and he does that.  

[TRon]

19 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Our first choice LB is 20 yo and will need to be rotated. 
 

our first choice LCB has an ACL injury. As does our backup RCB.  

 

Our current backup LCB and LB is 32.  
 

For this season Kelly shares minutes with Hall at LB and is our backup LCB.  

 

Long term he’s the Dan Burn replacement as backup LCB and LB.  

 

We’ll aim to replace Schar with a more aerially dominant RCB which would make Kelly a better option at LCB too.  
 

He’s a perfectly capable prem player. He just doesn’t start for us with everyone fit.  Nor would he start for any other top 8 team. We do need to raise the floor of the squads quality and he does that.  

 

Look mate, it was you who was describing him as a nothing player just a few days ago. Also complaining about his reported wages and being a step down from Dan Burn just a few posts up. Not really sure what you are complaining about if you think he's a perfectly decent back up player who improves the squad.

[Groundhog63]

29 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Our first choice LB is 20 yo and will need to be rotated. 
 

our first choice LCB has an ACL injury. As does our backup RCB.  

 

Our current backup LCB and LB is 32.  
 

For this season Kelly shares minutes with Hall at LB and is our backup LCB.  

 

Long term he’s the Dan Burn replacement as backup LCB and LB.  

 

We’ll aim to replace Schar with a more aerially dominant RCB which would make Kelly a better option at LCB too.  
 

He’s a perfectly capable prem player. He just doesn’t start for us with everyone fit.  Nor would he start for any other top 8 team. We do need to raise the floor of the squads quality and he does that.