[Albion] Midfield goal production and the striker myth

[Neville's Breakfast]

Lots of moaning about the strikers and lack of competent strikers.

Its quite interesting. Brighton strikers so far scored 11 goals (Maupay 7, Connolly 2, Welbeck 2).

That is one more goal than West Ham in 4th place.

The midfielders scored 7 goals so far.

That is 13 less than West Hams 20 (Soucek 8, Bowen 5, Lingard 3, Fornals 2, Lanzini 1, Rice 1).

Leicester strikers scored 14 goals (Vardy 12, Perez 1, Iheanacho 1). Better than the Brighton strikers? Yes, 3 more. Does 3 more take you to the Champions League?

No. Midfield goal production does.

I repeat: the Brighton midfielders scored 7 goals. Leicesters midfielders: 24 (Barnes 9, Maddison 8, Tielemans 5, Praet 1, Ndidi 1).

I've said this about twenty times on the board already, always getting the reply "... but its the strikers job to score, Clough said so in the 70s"). Fair enough. But fact remains - goal production from midfielders are very important if you want to win games, and the major difference between Brighton and the top teams. The handful more goals produced by their strikers got very limited impact compared to the ca 15 goals more that the midfielders of (pretty much every) other team scored.

Yes, we all know this. There have been plenty of posts on the subject over the last few years. There is no need for the dig about Brian Clough. This is a Brighton message board so perhaps dial down the contempt.

 

[martin tyler]

Striker myth isn’t a myth though. It’s not like the strikers are living on scraps. Take Vardy, Ings, Wilson at Newcastle, Jiminez, wood ect and give them the chances we create we would be a mid table side at worst.
Midfielders also profit from decent movement up front and exploit gaps that are left. Especially players like Barnes and Maddison.
The midfield could do with chipping in and shooting more but strikers are there to take
Chances on offer and we offer them up on a plate time and time again only to see the ball blazed over or wide or on occasions missed completely.

 

[raymondo]

What about the other teams? I get your point and agree that our midfielders need to produce more goals.

How do we compare with the other 17 teams in terms of midfield goals?

Personally I would think it logical that if you are looking to improve the numbers of goals scored in your team the first place you look is your stikers. The first question you ask is; are they converting their expected chances? (in our case this is a resounding 'no'). Then you would start to look at the contribution from the midfield.

Obviously, this needs improving as well. an improvement in either area would serve to mask the other somewhat. However, your suggestion seems to be that actually our strikers are doing fine and it is our midfield that is at fault. I can't agree with this. Our strikers are missing chances they should get and this is causing us to lose points.

In all honesty either would serve to improve our situation but, IMHO, our midfielders are doing their primary job and creating chances for the strikers. Our strikers are not doing their primary job and converting them.

Good post. Both need improvement but our strikers have missed many chances.

 

[DJ NOBO]

Lots of moaning about the strikers and lack of competent strikers.

Its quite interesting. Brighton strikers so far scored 11 goals (Maupay 7, Connolly 2, Welbeck 2).

That is one more goal than West Ham in 4th place.

The midfielders scored 7 goals so far.

That is 13 less than West Hams 20 (Soucek 8, Bowen 5, Lingard 3, Fornals 2, Lanzini 1, Rice 1).

Leicester strikers scored 14 goals (Vardy 12, Perez 1, Iheanacho 1). Better than the Brighton strikers? Yes, 3 more. Does 3 more take you to the Champions League?

No. Midfield goal production does.

I repeat: the Brighton midfielders scored 7 goals. Leicesters midfielders: 24 (Barnes 9, Maddison 8, Tielemans 5, Praet 1, Ndidi 1).

I've said this about twenty times on the board already, always getting the reply "... but its the strikers job to score, Clough said so in the 70s"). Fair enough. But fact remains - goal production from midfielders are very important if you want to win games, and the major difference between Brighton and the top teams. The handful more goals produced by their strikers got very limited impact compared to the ca 15 goals more that the midfielders of (pretty much every) other team scored.

Does this mean when I watch our strikers miss chance after chance I’m not meant to think it’s a bad thing?
It certainly feels bad.
It makes me think they are not very good.
It makes me think that is what is costing us.
Ah well, I’m not going to argue with stats.
Strikers who score goals are clearly a 70s thing.
I need to update my understanding of football.

 

[Guinness Boy]

And Leeds (some position).

Mainly because I was going to reply to the "if we sign a good striker we're a top 6 club" thread and counted the numbers of the clubs up there. There's also, oddly enough, more similarities in play style between eg Brighton and United/City/Leicester than with Burnley/CP/bottom 3, making the comparison more logical in that sense.

Lets take Wolves and Saints then:

Wolves, goals from players playing in the central striker role: Jimenez 4, Fabio Silva 2, Neto 1. A total of 7. Goals from midfield: Ruben Neves 5, Neto 4, Podence 3, Moutinho 1. Total: 13.

Saints: striker goals Ings 8, Adams 4, Walcott 1. Total of 15. Goals from midfield: JWP 5, Armstrong 3, Minamino 2, Walcott 1, Djenepo 1, Redmond 1, Romeu 1. Total of 14. Less difference between striker & midfield over there, but still double the amount of Brighton mf goals while Maup/Connolly/Welbeck are only four goals behind their strikers.

Four of JWP's are from free kicks. You told me on another thread he only gets one or two a season.

 

[mashman156]

Whether they play as a CF or part of a midfield or as a wide attacker, if the ball drops to you or is played to you in the box, you should hit the target at least half the time. No one in our team hits the target 10% of the time. Hence the worst conversion rate in the league. Whether they play in a Grint 3 wide or as a proper number 9, we need someone who can finish. We need the Murray replacement (that we've needed for 2/3 years) and until we get that natural finisher, we will not improve. Too Half comfortably in defence and midfield, Mid table Championship up front.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Yes, we all know this. There have been plenty of posts on the subject over the last few years. There is no need for the dig about Brian Clough. This is a Brighton message board so perhaps dial down the contempt.

This Brian Clough of who you speak? Would he be the bloke who took a totally unfashionable side with fairly average players and turned them into European Champions, breaking up the title spree of Bob Paisley's mighty Liverpool? That Clough?

Imagine taking an unfancied club to those heights when another side is dominating the top league......

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

Lots of moaning about the strikers and lack of competent strikers.

Its quite interesting. Brighton strikers so far scored 11 goals (Maupay 7, Connolly 2, Welbeck 2).

That is one more goal than West Ham in 4th place.

The midfielders scored 7 goals so far.

That is 13 less than West Hams 20 (Soucek 8, Bowen 5, Lingard 3, Fornals 2, Lanzini 1, Rice 1).

Leicester strikers scored 14 goals (Vardy 12, Perez 1, Iheanacho 1). Better than the Brighton strikers? Yes, 3 more. Does 3 more take you to the Champions League?

No. Midfield goal production does.

I repeat: the Brighton midfielders scored 7 goals. Leicesters midfielders: 24 (Barnes 9, Maddison 8, Tielemans 5, Praet 1, Ndidi 1).

I've said this about twenty times on the board already, always getting the reply "... but its the strikers job to score, Clough said so in the 70s"). Fair enough. But fact remains - goal production from midfielders are very important if you want to win games, and the major difference between Brighton and the top teams. The handful more goals produced by their strikers got very limited impact compared to the ca 15 goals more that the midfielders of (pretty much every) other team scored.

A threatening striker takes the focus of a teams defence and frees up space for midfield goals. You mention Wolves, without Jiminez their threat has significantly diminished, not just through the loss of his goals, but because defences don’t have to focus on a particular threat.

Defences with us can go 1 on 1 with Maupay or Connolly and not be that concerned by that. You need panic if a striker with a threat is left in space or 1 on 1.

 

[beorhthelm]

great stats analysis. here's more: 3 games, 66 shots, 1 goal. the problem isn't simply the strikers, its the goal scoring opportunities not taken. if the midfield isnt producing, are they not being coached better to take their opportunities?

 

[Seagull58]

And Leeds (some position).

Mainly because I was going to reply to the "if we sign a good striker we're a top 6 club" thread and counted the numbers of the clubs up there. There's also, oddly enough, more similarities in play style between eg Brighton and United/City/Leicester than with Burnley/CP/bottom 3, making the comparison more logical in that sense.

Lets take Wolves and Saints then:

Wolves, goals from players playing in the central striker role: Jimenez 4, Fabio Silva 2, Neto 1. A total of 7. Goals from midfield: Ruben Neves 5, Neto 4, Podence 3, Moutinho 1. Total: 13.

Saints: striker goals Ings 8, Adams 4, Walcott 1. Total of 15. Goals from midfield: JWP 5, Armstrong 3, Minamino 2, Walcott 1, Djenepo 1, Redmond 1, Romeu 1. Total of 14. Less difference between striker & midfield over there, but still double the amount of Brighton mf goals while Maup/Connolly/Welbeck are only four goals behind their strikers.

You are trying to deflect criticism of our strikers by focussing simply on goals scored an not considering the ratio of chances to goals. Connolly, forinstance,blasted a chance over the bar from 4 yards yesterday when he could have knocked it in with his nutsack if he had steadied himself. I suspect ,although I haven't examined the stats, that our style of play tends to produce a high ratio of chances for the forwards compared to the midfielders. Now this may be because we often overplay in the final third and attempt to practically walk the ball into the net. The fact remains that our forwards appear to miss relative sitters on a continual basis.

 

[Swansman]

Four of JWP's are from free kicks. You told me on another thread he only gets one or two a season.

For 8 out of 9 of his PL seasons he never scored more than two free kicks per season (but I know you are going to ignore this now when you have the opportunity) and this is the first time anyone scores more than 3 since 2013/14, it happens every sixth or seven years.

 

[Rugrat]

Four of JWP's are from free kicks. You told me on another thread he only gets one or two a season.

He's on a mission, and will throw all sorts of facts and numbers at you until you acquiesce.

The fact that there are so many different styles, formations and jobs is irrelevant. You must understand that you dinosaur!

 

[Sarisbury Seagull]

I admire your stoic determination to constantly defend Maupay when all of the evidence suggests otherwise and yes, we all know we could do with more goals from midfield but overall our midfield has been superb this season and dominated most games.

The truth is Maupay is our main striker and has by far the worst goal to xg ratio in the Premier League except for Timo Werner and only 1 assist all season despite starting nearly every single one of our matches. And Werner is only slightly worse and has 5 assists. And it’s blatantly obvious Connolly is out of his depth and Welbeck is not fit enough.

 

[Johnny RoastBeef]

Lots of moaning about the strikers and lack of competent strikers.

Its quite interesting. Brighton strikers so far scored 11 goals (Maupay 7, Connolly 2, Welbeck 2).

That is one more goal than West Ham in 4th place.

The midfielders scored 7 goals so far.

That is 13 less than West Hams 20 (Soucek 8, Bowen 5, Lingard 3, Fornals 2, Lanzini 1, Rice 1).

Leicester strikers scored 14 goals (Vardy 12, Perez 1, Iheanacho 1). Better than the Brighton strikers? Yes, 3 more. Does 3 more take you to the Champions League?

No. Midfield goal production does.

I repeat: the Brighton midfielders scored 7 goals. Leicesters midfielders: 24 (Barnes 9, Maddison 8, Tielemans 5, Praet 1, Ndidi 1).

I've said this about twenty times on the board already, always getting the reply "... but its the strikers job to score, Clough said so in the 70s"). Fair enough. But fact remains - goal production from midfielders are very important if you want to win games, and the major difference between Brighton and the top teams. The handful more goals produced by their strikers got very limited impact compared to the ca 15 goals more that the midfielders of (pretty much every) other team scored.

You are right, but a reason our midfielders dont score enough is because we dominate possession forcing teams to sit deep and crowd the box.

If our strikers could score an early goal, the opposition would be forced to be more offensive leaving space for our midfielders to exploit.

Our strikers dont score the first goal often enough, this is the crux of all our problems, including goals from other areas.

 

[Hamilton]

Lots of moaning about the strikers and lack of competent strikers.

Its quite interesting. Brighton strikers so far scored 11 goals (Maupay 7, Connolly 2, Welbeck 2).

That is one more goal than West Ham in 4th place.

The midfielders scored 7 goals so far.

That is 13 less than West Hams 20 (Soucek 8, Bowen 5, Lingard 3, Fornals 2, Lanzini 1, Rice 1).

Leicester strikers scored 14 goals (Vardy 12, Perez 1, Iheanacho 1). Better than the Brighton strikers? Yes, 3 more. Does 3 more take you to the Champions League?

No. Midfield goal production does.

I repeat: the Brighton midfielders scored 7 goals. Leicesters midfielders: 24 (Barnes 9, Maddison 8, Tielemans 5, Praet 1, Ndidi 1).

I've said this about twenty times on the board already, always getting the reply "... but its the strikers job to score, Clough said so in the 70s"). Fair enough. But fact remains - goal production from midfielders are very important if you want to win games, and the major difference between Brighton and the top teams. The handful more goals produced by their strikers got very limited impact compared to the ca 15 goals more that the midfielders of (pretty much every) other team scored.

Posting at 1.48am?

You should be in bed Graham.

 

[GT49er]

If that a fact? The problem I have here is that Swansman is telling us that ou midfield is no good. So who are creating all the chances?

.... and who is it that is failing to convert them?

No, he's telling us that our midfield is no good at scoring goals - and he's absolutely right. It's been a major problem for a long time, going back to Hughton's time. If he'd had one or two Gerrard/Robson/Scholes/Horton type midfielders who would arrive in the penalty area and score a few goals he probably wouldn't have been sacked.

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

No, he's telling us that our midfield is no good at scoring goals - and he's absolutely right. It's been a major problem for a long time, going back to Hughton's time. If he'd had one or two Gerrard/Robson/Scholes/Horton type midfielders who would arrive in the penalty area and score a few goals he probably wouldn't have been sacked.

Other than his goal in the cup, Bissouma looks more likely to disturb roosting pigeons in the back of stands than the goal from anywhere around the edge of the box.

 

[scooter1]

We’ve become easy to play against. We don’t have size up front therefore we’re going to try and play with pace. Sit deep and this negates our ability to get behind the defence(yesterday). Defend in numbers, fill in the gaps and shots get blocked. The stats are there but they don’t tell the story of the games. Yes Connolly should have scored yesterday, if he’d miss hit it, it would have gone in. Maupay has played the last 2 games with his back to goal dropping in to get involved, not his strength. Bissouma has tried a couple of wayward efforts and wasted them. Lallana is not a threat in front of goal, has he ever been. He has to step up, as we’re going to pay him a fortune for another 2.5 years(ouch).
Potter is trying, but the players are not good enough to put his plans into practice. We have depth, but the depth is no better than the starting 11.
Yes we need a clinical finisher, but more so we need players to create better chances and then we can complain if those gilt edged chances are not being finished.
And somebody who can take penalties......

 

[blockhseagull]

Do we need more goals from midfield ... yes

Does that change the fact that yet again our three ‘strikers’ all missed golden chances..... no.

So although I completely agree that we do need more goals from midfield, the fact our strikers are poor isn’t a ‘myth’ ... it’s a fact backed up by further facts.

 

[GT49er]

Other than his goal in the cup, Bissouma looks more likely to disturb roosting pigeons in the back of stands than the goal from anywhere around the edge of the box.

Exactly - and that's a problem.