Strikers - the not so talked about stats

That's just semantics, though. A player that set up goals is noticed for his ability to do that regardless of whether it's called an assist.

There is a lot of statistical analysis nowadays, clubs actually use this to scout players, though. Yeah they scout them live as well but statistical analysis is used also. Just the nature of the sport nowadays, especially with the money involved, and so clubs want to make sure they are getting the best idea about the player they're going to spend big money on.

That's why stats do have their place in the game and to suggest they don't mean anything isn't true. But on the other hand stats don't mean everything either. Especially in a comparative analysis as there are many variables.

Rooooooooooonnnnneeeeeyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

I don't think that the stats are particularly telling. Hernandez and Welbeck had the best passing accuracy, but when you realise that so few of theirs were key passes, it's obvious that they were playing safe passes, which were symptomatic of the turgid, expressionless football we played last season.

As for statistics in general, I think there are very few isolated statistics that can be demonstrable indications of ability. Goalscoring for strikers, number of passes/game for midfielders and number of interceptions for defenders are all normally correlated with good performances.

I remember seeing that in 2004/05 Roy Carroll had the second best "saves/shot faced" ratio in the Premier League, compared to his eventual replacement VDS who had the worst. Ferguson allegedly determined Jaap Stam's falling tackles/game stat to be a sign that he was fading as a player (he wasn't).

I don't think that stats are irrelevant, but I think that finding the right stats is difficult. The analysts are often too lazy and simply find a player who had a good game, ruffle through the stats until they find one that supports this player's claim, and champion it as a key performance marker.

Most of football analysis should focus on team cohesion and tactics, in my opinion, with focus on individual players being limited to their influence over a team's system.

I think stats are incredibly important and tell a lot more than biased eyes do

Great post, Rusty, agree with most of it.

Any kind of passing stats for both team and individual, imo, are pretty much useless in isolation.

For strikers, it's easier. Shots per goal, aerial duels won % and dispossessed per game ratio and so on are all fairly solid.

I'll pretty much always think of Bergkamp when it comes to stats, though. Look at his, pretty bang average. But probably the best player I've seen turn out for Arsenal, including TH14.

I'll pretty much always think of Bergkamp when it comes to stats, though. Look at his, pretty bang average. But probably the best player I've seen turn out for Arsenal, including TH14.
----------------------
THIS

Stats would also indicate that Lampard is greater than Zidane

Chris, I bet Bergkamp would have had pretty good stats anyway. I don't think they were recording assists, and certainly not key passes, for the majority of the time that he was at Arsenal.

It's just that goal scoring stats were the main thing recorded and so people always think about those when talking about Bergkamp, even though he was a better passer than he was finisher.

He was just as good a finisher as he was a passer. He just swung more toward the latter attribute as he grew older and always had Wright/Anelka/Henry ahead of him so could sit back more

Vision & Finishing were both amazing
DB10

Welbeck and Hernandez's shots on goal accidentally reaching their wingers are skewing the stats i fear.

dot