[Albion] Midfield goal production and the striker myth

[Swansman]

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.

 

[BadFish]

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.

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.

 

[albionalex]

This has been an issue for a number of seasons. People used to chastise Stephens and Propper for their lack of goals but Bissouma hasn't offered an improvement.

 

[BadFish]

This has been an issue for a number of seasons. People used to chastise Stephens and Propper for their lack of goals but Bissouma hasn't offered an improvement.

Macallister and Trossard should certainly be scoring more.

Let's face it though if any of the mentioned three were scoring 10+ a season, they wouldn't be with us for much longer.

 

[Rugrat]

Change the record, Finding a team like West Ham who have hardly had any strikers to play and Leica who have two of the best young midfielders in the country doesn't prove anything.

Of course our midfielders should chip in with more but with 4000 combined minutes of play from Maupay, Connolly, Welbeck and Zeqiri a return of 8 goals from open play and 2 assists is shameful no matter what examples of worse you can dig up

 

[Swansman]

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?

Some teams are not as easy to measure because they are using wingers that according to some are "strikers" and others "attacking midfielders". Like, how do you label Salah or Rashford? They are both wingers on paper, meaning they are sort of both midfielders and strikers, making it difficult to compare.

If we take numbers from the "official" central striker, Liverpool scored 10 (Firmino 6, Jota 3 and Salah 3 while starting in the striker role) while their midfielders scored 24 (Salah was RW/AMR, Mané 7, Jota 2 in a winger role, Wijnaldum 2, Henderson 1, Minamino 1). But its difficult to compare as they could be considered forwards (not central strikers though).

Same goes for a lot of teams - take Leeds, Bamford scored 13 for Leeds and thats the only striker goals they've got, but their midfielders/wingers scored 20+ goals.

Brighton is one of very few teams that are not playing with wingers which is something making every comparison difficult. Players like Trossard and Gross often drift out to the wings, but they are not really wingers however at least Trossard usually play equally high up the pitch as the wingers of other teams. It gets even more complicated when Lamptey/Veltman and March/Burn actually also play as high up on the pitch as eg the Leeds wingers. But still we count them as wing backs.

What remains obvious looking at the numbers is that the Brighton central forwards are not far behind (and often ahead) of the central forwards of other teams, contrary to what many believe. The big difference in sheer numbers is everywhere else on the pitch, regardless if you see players as wingers/attacking midfielders/wing backs/etc.

The solution? Its difficult. Replace Maupay with someone else and you might get five more goals or so. Good stuff, those five goals would be needed. But the real issues as I (and the numbers) see it is: the squad is probably the only squad in the Premier League without wingers (except Ali J, who is not good enough, and Izquierdo, status unknown) which would perhaps be ok if one or several of the attacking midfielders (Trossard, Mac Allister, Gross and Lallana) had even a similar record to other MC/AMCs like Soucek, Maddison or Fernandes - but they dont.

Trust me, I would much prefer if the solution was "get rid of Maupay and bring another striker", but the issues are deeper than that.

 

[Swansman]

This has been an issue for a number of seasons. People used to chastise Stephens and Propper for their lack of goals but Bissouma hasn't offered an improvement.

Bissouma, considering how deep he is playing, is the one midfielder I wouldnt really hold accountable for anything. Just like with central defenders, I see goals from him as bonus goals. Gross, Lallana, Trossard, Ali Mac, Alzate and Ali J however - they are not anywhere near their equivalents/pseudo-equivalents elsewhere.

 

[BadFish]

Some teams are not as easy to measure because they are using wingers that according to some are "strikers" and others "attacking midfielders". Like, how do you label Salah or Rashford? They are both wingers on paper, meaning they are sort of both midfielders and strikers, making it difficult to compare.

If we take numbers from the "official" central striker, Liverpool scored 10 (Firmino 6, Jota 3 and Salah 3 while starting in the striker role) while their midfielders scored 24 (Salah was RW/AMR, Mané 7, Jota 2 in a winger role, Wijnaldum 2, Henderson 1, Minamino 1). But its difficult to compare as they could be considered forwards (not central strikers though).

Same goes for a lot of teams - take Leeds, Bamford scored 13 for Leeds and thats the only striker goals they've got, but their midfielders/wingers scored 20+ goals.

Brighton is one of very few teams that are not playing with wingers which is something making every comparison difficult. Players like Trossard and Gross often drift out to the wings, but they are not really wingers however at least Trossard usually play equally high up the pitch as the wingers of other teams. It gets even more complicated when Lamptey/Veltman and March/Burn actually also play as high up on the pitch as eg the Leeds wingers. But still we count them as wing backs.

What remains obvious looking at the numbers is that the Brighton central forwards are not far behind (and often ahead) of the central forwards of other teams, contrary to what many believe. The big difference in sheer numbers is everywhere else on the pitch, regardless if you see players as wingers/attacking midfielders/wing backs/etc.

The solution? Its difficult. Replace Maupay with someone else and you might get five more goals or so. Good stuff, those five goals would be needed. But the real issues as I (and the numbers) see it is: the squad is probably the only squad in the Premier League without wingers (except Ali J, who is not good enough, and Izquierdo, status unknown) which would perhaps be ok if one or several of the attacking midfielders (Trossard, Mac Allister, Gross and Lallana) had even a similar record to other MC/AMCs like Soucek, Maddison or Fernandes - but they dont.

Trust me, I would much prefer if the solution was "get rid of Maupay and bring another striker", but the issues are deeper than that.

As I say, your point about our midfielders stands, however this point does not negate the fact that our forwards are also under achieving. Across the team we are not scoring enough goals.

The thing that I am questioning though is your comparisons.

You have added a few more clubs into your comparison. So currently you are comparing us with West Ham (4th), Liverpool (6th) Man U (2nd) Leicester (3rd).


Why did you choose these clubs in the top 6 to compare us with?

 

[Swansman]

You have added a few more clubs into your comparison. So currently you are comparing us with West Ham (4th), Liverpool (6th) Man U (2nd) Leicester (3rd).


Why did you choose these clubs in the top 6 to compare us with?

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.

 

[BadFish]

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.

They are much better comparisons. Like I say you are correct about your point that our midfield needs to score more goals.

But that doesn't detract from the fact that . . . so do our forwards.

Tonight certainly our forwards missed some great opportunities. If we had better players up front we would have won the game

I totally get your point but I don't think you'll convince me that our midfield needs upgrading before our forwards.

 

[saafend_seagull]

They are much better comparisons. Like I say you are correct about your point that our midfield needs to score more goals.

But that doesn't detract from the fact that . . . so do our forwards.

Tonight certainly our forwards missed some great opportunities. If we had better players up front we would have won the game

I totally get your point but I don't think you'll convince me that our midfield needs upgrading before our forwards.

What?

We should be compared to West Ham and Leicester since we create the same if not more chances.

Wolves and soton are considerably less.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Terry Butcher Tribute Act]

Have been beating this drum for a while now. The returns from Trossard Mac Allister Gross and Lallana are dire.

Another comparison - Grealish, El Ghazi, Traore, Barkley- it's not just Watkins scoring for Villa.



Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

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.

Out of interest, which of West Ham’s players are you including as a striker?

 

[BadFish]

What?

We should be compared to West Ham and Leicester since we create the same if not more chances.

Wolves and soton are considerably less.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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?

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

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.

I agree with midfield contribution.

But given the chances we create it surely cannot be denied that a deficiency remains up front.

It’s the ones you miss not the ones you score and the one thing it isn’t is a myth.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BN41Albion]

Yes, yes, but what I see on the pitch with my own eyes is mainly our strikers missing glorious chances week and week, such as Connolly's yesterday. Therefore its perfectly reasonable to be asking questions about our strikers' ability to do their job.

You are right though in that the midfield need to take some of the blame too in terms of goals, as well as other issues that have been mentioned such as not having a recognised penalty or free kick taker. Lack of threat from set pieces despite having a lot of tall lads.

 

[Springal]

Posted this in another thread....

Maupay has scored more than the ‘top scorers’ at the following clubs above us:

Burnley
Wolves


He also only has 1 goal less than the top scorers from:

Southampton
Arsenal

And 2 goals less than:

Palace


Like I keep saying, it’s the rest of the teams responsibilities to score goals to

 

[The Optimist]

An interesting follow up question would be why aren’t our midfield scoring many? Is it because they are missing chances or not getting chances? Just from watching it feels more like the latter (except for Trossard). If it is the latter, is it their fault for not getting into good positions or a result of the way we play?

Another question would be, how does the number of chances created for our strikers and midfielders compare to other teams? I feel like we probably create more for our strikers and less for our midfielders than other teams. If this is true then more blame can be put on our strikers as we are giving them more opportunities than other clubs but not getting more goals as a result.

 

[Shooting Star]

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.

There's a lot I don't see eye to eye with you on Swansman, but on this I agree with you wholeheartedly. As others have mentioned, it's been a problem for Albion for quite some time.

 

[zefarelly]

Our midfielders are scared of shooting. I think they're under order not to.