[Albion] How many more points do you think we'd have if...

[Bozza]

...we had Danny Ings?

Before anyone jumps in, this is not a criticism of Albion's recruitment team, Albion's board, Graham Potter nor our current crop of strikers. Bringing in almost any player involves a gamble of sorts. Neal Maupay could have turned out to be a 25 goal-a-season man in the Premier League (and he still could for that matter), whilst Danny Ings could have continued with his unfortunate injury record and barely be seen in the first team.

Regardless, let's assume that we had signed Danny Ings and he had enjoyed the same level of fitness he has had with Southampton. How many more points do you think we'd have this season with him leading our attack?

 

[Milano]

6. 3 draws turned into wins.

Maupay works his socks off, can’t fault his attitude......but.....he’s not a threat, if you’re an oppo fan you’re not shitting yourself. We played so well yesterday, strangely this highlighted even more the fact that Maupay is the weak link, he played well but never once tested the keeper and that has to be his main job, Welbeck was on the pitch 5 minutes and managed that.

 

[warmleyseagull]

You have answered your own question. These things are to a large degree in the lap of the gods; Welbeck may become our Danny Ings if he avoids injury.

And Ings has scored only 7 in PL this season from 17 games, whereas Maupay has scored, er..... 7 (albeit from 22 games). Not really sure of your point.

 

[dangull]

Good question. A few more I suspect.
If we had paid a bit more for Virgil Van Dijk, we may have been in the top 10 now or a lot richer.

 

[Weststander]

We’re minus 10 points based on our xG compared to reality. Ings has missed 1/3 of Stains games. My estimate is that we’d be 7 points better off.

 

[Hugo Rune]

We’re 6th in the xG total points league (for and against). The calculation is that we’ve left 12 points out on the pitch through sloppy finishing and careless defending.

I think Ings would have turned 6 of our 11 draws into wins:

Burnley Home - One of Welbeck’s chances finished by Ings. 1-0

Liverpool - Maupay’s penalty converted, Connolly’s 1-on-1 converted. 3-1

Fulham home - Ings could have had a couple, very very easily. 2-0.

Sheff Utd home - Certain Ings hat-trick. We should have won that 4-1.

West Brom home - Ings nails Maupay’s massive chance in first half to go 2-0 up.

Palace away - Where Maupay does not hit it first time, Ings does. 1-2

Ings is a natural finisher, very rare and very expensive. Southampton only got him because he’s seen as a sick-note.

 

[Sarisbury Seagull]

We’d be in the European spots now.

I was only thinking the other day he is EXACTLY the type of striker we need. He is mobile, technically brilliant, his movement is so clever he would fit into our attack perfectly with Mac Allister and Trossard - they would cause havoc. And he is also a wonderful, clinical finisher, something we are obviously badly missing.

We can but dream!

 

[tigertim68]

...we had Danny Ings?

Before anyone jumps in, this is not a criticism of Albion's recruitment team, Albion's board, Graham Potter nor our current crop of strikers. Bringing in almost any player involves a gamble of sorts. Neal Maupay could have turned out to be a 25 goal-a-season man in the Premier League (and he still could for that matter), whilst Danny Ings could have continued with his unfortunate injury record and barely be seen in the first team.

Regardless, let's assume that we had signed Danny Ings and he had enjoyed the same level of fitness he has had with Southampton. How many more points do you think we'd have this season with him leading our attack?

I think we would of have more points if Sanchez had been between the sticks all season

 

[m@goo]

Maybe he would have been infected with the same disease as the rest of the team?

Let's face it we know they can all finish but there's a psychological barrier appearing. Ok chances are much harder to come by in this league but that's not our problem, we're creating chance after chance but the quality of the shots is often poor. Also keepers are often outstanding when they need to be so shots must be accurate. Many are wild or at the keeper.

It's becoming a psychological disease that's spread through the team.

 

[m@goo]

I think we would of have more points if Sanchez had been between the sticks all season

Good point. Sanchez IMO has certainly made saves that Ryan would not have reached.

 

[OzMike]

Ings in and Ryan out at the start of the season then 10 more points.

 

[Jesus Gul]

not forgetting Man City away Ings flips a simple lob over Edison when Maupay tries to take it under

 

[Swansman]

Difficult to say. Ings is the more efficient goal scorer, so most likely there would be a few more goals for the team. But he is worse when it comes to passing (Maupay 80% pass completion, Ings 64%) and applying pressure (Brighton win the ball 87% of the time within five seconds of Maupay pressuring, compared to Ings 65%) meaning the team would likely lose the ball more often and fail to retain it as quickly, which is something that normally results in conceded goals.

Maybe five more goals scored and five more goals conceded? Depending on the circumstances, I could imagine Ings instead of Maupay resulting in somewhere between -3 points and +3 points.

 

[blockhseagull]

Undoubtedly we would be better off.

Not sure you can compare stats of the two as they play for different teams and probably asked to do different things without the ball.

However you can’t deny Ings is an instinctive goalscorer and I find it hard to believe he wouldn’t already be way into double figures with us this season.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

10-12 points.

I’m sure stats will get thrown at me, but Maupay is not good player at this level. He is actually a lot better outside the box than he is in it - but unfortunately for him and us, that is where we need him.

We’re one signing away from being a good team, but that signing is not from the Dutch league.....

We can only dream of Ings....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BN41Albion]

6. 3 draws turned into wins.

Maupay works his socks off, can’t fault his attitude......but.....he’s not a threat, if you’re an oppo fan you’re not shitting yourself. We played so well yesterday, strangely this highlighted even more the fact that Maupay is the weak link, he played well but never once tested the keeper and that has to be his main job, Welbeck was on the pitch 5 minutes and managed that.

I agree with this, unfortunately. Makes the wrong decision too often. Classic example against villa was when he was inside the box to the left of goal, had the chance to shoot but took another touch on to his left foot and then skewed his shot wide (then desperately tried to claim a corner )
I love his work rate, and can't fault his energy and work off the ball, but he is so often so frustrating when it comes to the main part of his job

 

[Swansman]

We’re 6th in the xG total points league (for and against). The calculation is that we’ve left 12 points out on the pitch through sloppy finishing and careless defending.

I think Ings would have turned 6 of our 11 draws into wins:

Burnley Home - One of Welbeck’s chances finished by Ings. 1-0

Liverpool - Maupay’s penalty converted, Connolly’s 1-on-1 converted. 3-1

Fulham home - Ings could have had a couple, very very easily. 2-0.

Sheff Utd home - Certain Ings hat-trick. We should have won that 4-1.

West Brom home - Ings nails Maupay’s massive chance in first half to go 2-0 up.

Palace away - Where Maupay does not hit it first time, Ings does. 1-2

Ings is a natural finisher, very rare and very expensive. Southampton only got him because he’s seen as a sick-note.

So 10 goals from these 6 games... I guess its possible. Its unlikely however, but the grass is always greener on the other side.

Why do you think Ings would have converted that penalty? Maupay got 11 penalty goals and 2 misses, Ings scored 9 and missed 3.

Another case of "this striker doesnt play in Brighton so he must be top class and probably convert every chance" when in reality its far more complex than that.

Ings on two occasions in his career post 2013/14 had two goal droughts lasting over 800 minutes (Maupays "record" is 663), I guarantee people were moaning about him not being clinical and effective on those occasions.

Its simply not as easy as "if we sign player X, he is always going to score lots of goals because when they're showing goals from the PL, I've never seen him miss!"

 

[Sarisbury Seagull]

So 10 goals from these 6 games... I guess its possible. Its unlikely however, but the grass is always greener on the other side.

Why do you think Ings would have converted that penalty? Maupay got 11 penalty goals and 2 misses, Ings scored 9 and missed 3.

Another case of "this striker doesnt play in Brighton so he must be top class and probably convert every chance" when in reality its far more complex than that.

Ings on two occasions in his career post 2013/14 had two goal droughts lasting over 800 minutes (Maupays "record" is 663), I guarantee people were moaning about him not being clinical and effective on those occasions.

Its simply not as easy as "if we sign player X, he is always going to score lots of goals because when they're showing goals from the PL, I've never seen him miss!"

No, in this case Swanny, it is quite an easy one. As someone who watches a lot of both of them, believe me, Ings is a far superior player to Maupay and would have scored many more goals for us.

 

[Swansman]

No, in this case Swanny, it is quite an easy one. As someone who watches a lot of both of them, believe me, Ings is a far superior player to Maupay and would have scored many more goals for us.

I'd say he is a little better, which is pretty much to be expected as he is in his peak years. I dont think the difference is very big. I respect your opinion but you also consider Welbeck "far superior" to Maupay and just like (or actually even more so) than in the case with Ings, I just dont agree with your perception of Neal compared to other strikers.

 

[Simster]

Ings is a natural finisher, very rare and very expensive. Southampton only got him because he’s seen as a sick-note.

But we have Lalllana and Welbeck - the sicknote reputation only matters to an extent.

Truth is, they got him partly because of the lure of being at his boyhood club. If he had been born at the same hospital as any of my brothers rather than at the same hospital as my sister, he might well have been playing for the Albion instead!