Ranking our Squad - 28 Willock

[Kid Icarus]

And compare them with each other.

 

Those around us also include Man City, Chelsea, Brighton, Villa all who have spent tons and are below Forest. They're also the only team out of that 3 above us.

[TheBrownBottle]

Just now, gbandit said:

You say that but I’d have absolutely no confidence assigning ratings for a single player outside of NUFC. I will comment on individual players a lot when I watch them in the “other games” thread but realistically you only know your own players well enough to score

I agree, it would be hard to do it.  Which means that it is harder to assess performance of your own squad.

 

I still think the final count will show that we’ve got a decent squad with some superb players, but some pretty gaping holes in it too.  GK, RCB, RW, CF are not well stocked (allowing for CF having one elite player in it). 

[Kaizero]

Murphy is extremely underrated given the fact the guy's got one of the best assists per minute ratio of any NUFC player in history, and by virtue of that is also holding his own amongst the best assists per minute ratios in modern football as a whole. 

 

He's not a flashy player beyond that ratio though, and I'm quite influenced by the overall consensus about him over the years – meaning that even after learning the above fact, I've still gone with a "C", not a "B"  

[TheBrownBottle]

10 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

Murphy is extremely underrated given the fact the guy's got one of the best assists per minute ratio of any NUFC player in history, and by virtue of that is also holding his own amongst the best assists per minute ratios in modern football as a whole. 

 

He's not a flashy player beyond that ratio though, and I'm quite influenced by the overall consensus about him over the years – meaning that even after learning the above fact, I've still gone with a "C", not a "B"  

‘Assists’ are a weird old metric, though.  They’re a pretty recent introduction, and are borderline meaningless - they imply that the last pass before a goal is the one which creates a goal. 

[Kaizero]

56 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

‘Assists’ are a weird old metric, though.  They’re a pretty recent introduction, and are borderline meaningless - they imply that the last pass before a goal is the one which creates a goal. 

 

"Assists" = "Chance Creation"

 

The ability a player has to create chances for their team is not "borderline meaningless", or a "weird old metric". It's a great measurement of what a player can add to the quality of any given team when playing.

 

 

This season, Jacob Murphy's xA90 has been 0.30 – the player in our squad with the second most assists this season, Guimarães, has an xA90 of 0.20.

 

Murphy's xA90 is the 10th highest of all PL players with 5 or more assists so far this season.

– 11th highest for players with 4 or more.

– 16th highest for players with 3 or more.

– 18th highest for players with 2 or more.

- 27th highest for players with 1 or more.

 

And that's without taking into account if the players are considered "starters" for their teams or not. When applying that metric and only including players with at least 1350 minutes of playing time so far this season (15 games), his xA is the 11th highest of all Premier League players.

 

In addition, his xChain90 is the 47th highest among all players in the Premier League (xChain90 = xG average per 90 minutes from any pass-chain involving the player).

 

And the above is only his stats for this season, his overall stats are even higher. Last season he had the 6th highest xA90 of all players in the Premier League with game time equal to at least 10 matches played.

 

Averaging all measurable "x" stats sees Murphy 47th of all Premier League players this season. If we use that stat as a theoretical measurement to theorise his "level", with each team starting with 10 outfield players, his "team" would be 5th – which by this measurement would make him a must-start player for a team expecting to finish between 3rd and 7th.

 

He's very underrated. So underrated that after breaking down his ability for this post, I've changed my vote from C to B  

[TheBrownBottle]

48 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

"Assists" = "Chance Creation"

 

The ability a player has to create chances for their team is not "borderline meaningless", or a "weird old metric". It's a great measurement of what a player can add to the quality of any given team when playing.

 

 

This season, Jacob Murphy's xA90 has been 0.30 – the player in our squad with the second most assists this season, Guimarães, has an xA90 of 0.20.

 

Murphy's xA90 is the 10th highest of all PL players with 5 or more assists so far this season.

– 11th highest for players with 4 or more.

– 16th highest for players with 3 or more.

– 18th highest for players with 2 or more.

- 27th highest for players with 1 or more.

 

And that's without taking into account if the players are considered "starters" for their teams or not. When applying that metric and only including players with at least 1350 minutes of playing time so far this season (15 games), his xA is the 11th highest of all Premier League players.

 

In addition, his xChain90 is the 47th highest among all players in the Premier League (xChain90 = xG average per 90 minutes from any pass-chain involving the player).

 

And the above is only his stats for this season, his overall stats are even higher. Last season he had the 6th highest xA90 of all players in the Premier League with game time equal to at least 10 matches played.

 

Averaging all measurable "x" stats sees Murphy 47th of all Premier League players this season. If we use that stat as a theoretical measurement to theorise his "level", with each team starting with 10 outfield players, his "team" would be 5th – which by this measurement would make him a must-start player for a team expecting to finish between 3rd and 7th.

 

He's very underrated. So underrated that after breaking down his ability for this post, I've changed my vote from C to B  

Like I said, meaningless  

[Cf]

A D+ for Jacob Murphy. 

 

Next is Joe Willock. A year or so ago I'd have expected him to be knocking on the door of B by now. As it is I'm really not sure what to make of him. 

[NotRich]

Reeks of C.

[Kilcline]

C for Little Joe, as many of us regularly say he's got a decent career at Palace or Fulham written all over him

[toon25]

Injuries really taken their toll. He hasn't progressed at all in almost 2 years now. Looks low on confidence and doesn't look like getting it back any time soon.

[Kid Icarus]

When up and running he's a C+ with B potential for me. As he's not up and running he's a C for me.

[gbandit]

Joe Willock - Solid C, has some brilliant attributes but is not a consistent player and can go through spells where he seems completely off it, injuries have exacerbated this 

[Abacus]

A low C for me. He's good to have in the squad and has some definite qualities, but at the moment right now for us he's more of a D. I.e. good to have in the squad, but you'd hope for better.

 

But on balance I'm sticking with C since D seems a bit harsh because I think I'm judging it a bit based on a bad run of injuries and lack of availability.

[Erikse]

C, basically a case of "what could have been". I agree that he's currently closer to a D.

 

 

Edited 9 hours ago by Erikse

[Kimbo]

C but in danger of becoming a D.

[Erikse]

I missed it, but why is Lascelles an E+ if Targett is a D? I recall Lascelles being rock solid for a good while pre injury, and he's a leader aswell.

 

 

Edited 9 hours ago by Erikse

[Yorkie]

It's all just in theory with Willock. In reality he's a D. One of the first out the door for me. 

[David Edgar]

C-

[GEFAFWISP]

D. He's finished for us. Shame as on his day I really like his style of play but that's what happens after 2 years of constant injuries.

[frankpingel]

D on current form and there's been little evidence that he'll return to previous levels. 

[Dr. TC]

54 minutes ago, Erikse said:

I missed it, but why is Lascelles an E+ if Targett is a D? I recall Lascelles being rock solid for a good while pre injury, and he's a leader aswell.

 

 

 

Age and injuries I think 

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

Pffft, I couldn't say he was a solid PL starter right now. For who? Fulham? Palace? Everton? West Ham?

 

I don't think there's many teams in this division he'd be starting for on the reg with his current form. It's a crying shame. I'm not sure whether pre injury Willy is still in there, I hope he is, but there's barely been a glimpse. And where does he get enough time to build back to that? He's been poor for us of late and it all looks very laboured and clunky. 

 

Still only 25 as well. Should be a good sale there, but I fear we'd struggle. We can't keep him I know that.

 

D. 

[Erikse]

51 minutes ago, Dr. TC said:

Age and injuries I think 

 

I didn't know that being injured right now (or for a while) is a factor, though. In that case Botman could be a C. Krafth was out with the same injury, and he's 30 aswell. He came back and did well. I just think that E is pretty harsh, like he's not that bad, and he probably still has 2-3 more years in him.

 

 

Edited 7 hours ago by Erikse

[Beren]

He flashes enough capability to be a C, but his durability in playing 38 games+ means he can't be higher than a D.

[midds]

I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and go C- rather than D but I can totally understand why others have gone D. I think injuries have really knocked him physically and mentally over the last couple of seasons to the extent he may never actually get his career back on track and fulfil his potential. It's a huge shame for us and him personally but I think he'll gradually fall down the Leagues and end up doing well for a top-end Championship/low-end PL team. Absolutely no axe to grind with him though, looks like a lovely lad off the pitch