Banter 2009/2010

Originally Posted by HO-YOUNG

Anderson of Man U is a good "box-to-box" midfielder... even though he is injured he could be a gamble... buy him wounded and get him cheap!!! like punctured ferrari...

If we buy him, we should use him in his best position instead of doing what Ferguson tries to do, shouldn't we ?

He's a pure attacking midfielder, full of talent, he has to be used there, if it's to use him as a "box to box player" (very hyped role on the forum), there are plenty other players better than him for this role ...

With all these Box-to-box player jumping up lately. I just have to say, is there even a clear definition of this role among us?

To me, a box to box midfielder is just someone can contribute in attack and defense constantly. Thats why I believe an attack mid can turn into a box to box mid but a DM will have a harder time to do so. As the old saying goes, offense is a gift while defense is just hard work.

Pato should be back for Old Trafford. Great news!

Should he not make it, Leo will probably play a 4312, which is good news too (meaning he's not stubborn and is willing to change when circumstances change).

"According to La Gazzetta dello Sport, David Beckham would play in Pato's place at Old Trafford alongside Klaas-Jan Huntelaar and Marco Borriello in attack. "

--------------Abbiati
-------Nesta--------Thiago
Bonera---------------------Jankulovski
----------Pirlo------Ambro
-----Beckham
-------------------------Ronaldinho
--------Borriello
-------------------Huntelaar


I actually think that this 11, even without Pato, can come back with a two goal win.

I found some stats on XT (recent but not completely up to date) about minutes played to goals scored by our attackers.

I know there's always discussion about which attacker to use, and although these aren't definitive in selection, it's worth noting Huntelaar's doing very well with goals compared to minutes played.

Domestic
KJH: 592 minutes, 6 goals.
Pato: 1556 minutes, 10 goals.
Borriello: 1273 minutes, 8 goals.
Ronaldinho: 1849 minutes, 9 goals.
Inzaghi: 444 minutes, 1 goal.

All Competitions
KJH: 886 mins, 6 goals
Borriello: 1787 mins, 10 goals
Inzaghi: 957 mins, 4 goals
Pato: 2386 mins, 14 goals
Ronaldinho: 2597 mins, 12 goals

Anyway, just thought this might be of interest to many posters here.

http://www.goal.com/en/news/10/italy...-milan-its-all

So Balotelli once again makes it clear that he's a Milanista. If the opportunity presents itself, do you think we should sign him?

http://www.goal.com/en/news/10/italy...-milan-its-all.

Balotelli again say's he follows Milan and when he thinks of the city he only thinks of AC Milan , he went to the coppa game again Novara and the Champions League game against Man Utd. Now its obvious he follows Milan but a transfer is impossible and Im not sure if I'd like him at Milan but then again he is a Raw talent with huge potential but is very disruptive . Maybe this is because he is unhappy at Inter or maybe is all bullsh1t.

Originally Posted by devoted_dm

http://www.goal.com/en/news/10/italy...-milan-its-all

So Balotelli once again makes it clear that he's a Milanista. If the opportunity presents itself, do you think we should sign him?

Damnit you beat me to it.

Originally Posted by ACMILAN1983

I found some stats on XT (recent but not completely up to date) about minutes played to goals scored by our attackers.

I know there's always discussion about which attacker to use, and although these aren't definitive in selection, it's worth noting Huntelaar's doing very well with goals compared to minutes played.

Domestic
KJH: 592 minutes, 6 goals.
Pato: 1556 minutes, 10 goals.
Borriello: 1273 minutes, 8 goals.
Ronaldinho: 1849 minutes, 9 goals.
Inzaghi: 444 minutes, 1 goal.

All Competitions
KJH: 886 mins, 6 goals
Borriello: 1787 mins, 10 goals
Inzaghi: 957 mins, 4 goals
Pato: 2386 mins, 14 goals
Ronaldinho: 2597 mins, 12 goals

Anyway, just thought this might be of interest to many posters here.

Definitely interesting. I did a little math to find the average time between each goal for our strikers:

Huntelaar: 1 goal per 147 minutes played
Pato: 170 mins
Borriello: 178 mins
Ronaldinho: 216 mins
Inzaghi: 239 mins


That makes Huntelaar our most efficient striker, by far. Based on that alone, one might wonder why he doesn't play more. Then again, he doesn't really add anything to our game besides his goal poaching qualites, whereas Borriello is pretty good at winning headers, holding up the ball, etc. Still, I'd like to see him play a bit more.

Looking at those numbers you composed, devoted dm, and it is really sad. The best striker we have is a guy who can score one goal every 147 minutes? Is this still the same team that employeed all those great strikers?

Pato has 12 goals now not 10.

Originally Posted by slifersd

Looking at those numbers you composed, devoted dm, and it is really sad. The best striker we have is a guy who can score one goal every 147 minutes? Is this still the same team that employeed all those great strikers?

Consider it as a goalscoring ratio of greater than 1:2 (1 goal every 2 games), as is the case with Pato and it really isn't as bad as it seems.

Originally Posted by Jay Crisp

Pato has 12 goals now not 10.

As I said in my original post, the stats aren't quite up to date.

Originally Posted by devoted_dm

Definitely interesting. I did a little math to find the average time between each goal for our strikers:

Huntelaar: 1 goal per 147 minutes played
Pato: 170 mins
Borriello: 178 mins
Ronaldinho: 216 mins
Inzaghi: 239 mins


That makes Huntelaar our most efficient striker, by far. Based on that alone, one might wonder why he doesn't play more. Then again, he doesn't really add anything to our game besides his goal poaching qualites, whereas Borriello is pretty good at winning headers, holding up the ball, etc. Still, I'd like to see him play a bit more.

1 goal every two games is actually pretty average for a good striker, but for Huntelaar (and Inzaghi) I do expect it to be a little higher than that, since like you said, they don't contribute much other than goals.

I'd love to see a shots/goals statistic.

Originally Posted by brk

1 goal every two games is actually pretty average for a good striker, but for Huntelaar (and Inzaghi) I do expect it to be a little higher than that, since like you said, they don't contribute much other than goals.

I'd love to see a shots/goals statistic.

In Huntelaar's case it's greater than 1 goal every 2 as 2 games is 180 minutes and obviously 147 is quite a lot less (a third of a game's worth to be precise).

If we go a step further and only look at him in Italy, the goals to minutes ratio goes down to 1 goal every 99 minutes, which is pretty close to a goal a game.

Given that he doesn't play consistently and has obviously struggled, I think his stats are actually very impressive.

Originally Posted by M.O.I.

i agree.especially flamini..

I agree with both of you, Flamini is not weak, but he's not that strong either. When you put players like Ambrosini and Seedorf next to him, that's physically balanced midfield, but with Pirlo and Hamsik that's another story... Since we are stuck with Pirlo and Flamini, we need one veery strong midfielder to make that all important balance.

For box-to-box midfielder, that's an "imaginary" position. Box-to-box seems to be a midfielder who does his job both in defense and in attack but there are many different kind of "box-to-box" players, for example Seedorf was "attacking box-to-box", Ambrosini is "defending box-to-box"... What we need is a midfielder of good attacking potential (passing, team play, shooting) who will help in defending with his strength, pace and stamina. Sadly Gourcuff would be ideal.

Originally Posted by Revolver

I agree with both of you, Flamini is not weak, but he's not that strong either. When you put players like Ambrosini and Seedorf next to him, that's physically balanced midfield, but with Pirlo and Hamsik that's another story... Since we are stuck with Pirlo and Flamini, we need one veery strong midfielder to make that all important balance.

For box-to-box midfielder, that's an "imaginary" position. Box-to-box seems to be a midfielder who does his job both in defense and in attack but there are many different kind of "box-to-box" players, for example Seedorf was "attacking box-to-box", Ambrosini is "defending box-to-box"... What we need is a midfielder of good attacking potential (passing, team play, shooting) who will help in defending with his strength, pace and stamina. Sadly Gourcuff would be ideal.

Thanks for clearence,i mean we need an attacking box to box...

What about this midfield?Hernanes-Pirlo -Sissoko/Asamoah...

Hernanes and Sissoko are strong players and would be ideal midfield...

Seedorf as a sub and Ambro as sub,we would have the ideal midfield...

let them fight for 3 spots...

sell Flamini and get rid of his high salaries,5.1 m euros a year i think.its too high for a player who always sits on the bench...3rd choice on the bench as well after Beckham and Gattuso...we are not that rich guys...