Diego Carlos

[Dax777]

If the stats were all up against the same opposition in the same circumstances then yes.

But we've seen him play, recently & we know he isn't the best of that bunch don't we ?

Probably not :)

Different circumstances change the dynamics for everyone. But KK and Diaz seem solid enough across the board.

 

[Neville Kneville]

Probably not :)

Different circumstances change the dynamics for everyone. But KK and Diaz seem solid enough across the board.

Always liked the look of Diaz but of course he plays in 'that' league, so can't be certain.

 

[Larry Stranger]

Rankings based on the above stats
1. Stones; 6
2. Laporte: 21
3. Koulibaly: 23
4T Diaz 27
4T. Deligt 27
6. Van Dyke: 28
7. Fernandihno: 29
8 . Skinnier: 30
9T. Soyuncu: 35
9T Otamendi 35
11T Maguire 37
11T Garcia 37
13T Torres: 42
13T Carlos: 42
15: Ake: 44


Contrary to popular opinion, John Stones is by a large margin the best of the bunch based on these stats.

It's not even close. I suppose we cann add interception stats and tackles per game ( both of which may reduce is overall gap, but he has a sizeable lead. And much seems like staying healthy is his real Achilles heel. Not performance.

If the stats were all up against the same opposition in the same circumstances then yes.

But we've seen him play, recently & we know he isn't the best of that bunch don't we ?

Yes comparing stats don't tell the whole story. How teams play is another factor. How much possession they play with, compared to how much defending they do. Likewise with the opponent. Does the opposition sit back and defend deep or press high?

A comparable example would be our recent games against Liverpool and Bournemouth. Garcia and Laporte played against Liverpool and Ota and Stones against Bournemouth. Both teams press us high up the pitch.

We know Liverpool is one of the best pressing teams. Laporte and Garcia did give away the ball on a few occasions yes, but they also were instrumental in playing out from the back to put us in advanced positions to score.

Against Bournemouth who you wouldn't think are a pressing team, Ota and Stones were unable to help advance the ball forward. They couldn't play the ball quickly and find the midfielders or wingers. Consequently they played back to Ederson who had to boot it long giving away possession. Bournemouth also played the long ball where they had the likes of Stanislas, King, Solanke and Billing all up top winning the duels in the air. You would have thought Ota and Stones 2 of our better defenders in the air would be able to handle it but they couldn't. To which we were under so much pressure and looked like we didn't have control of that game.

Against teams that sit back and don't press you have a different story. You have to able to defend, but equally if you aren't able to also play the ball with your feet you compound your own problems having to defend more in our system.

 

[Neville Kneville]

Yes comparing stats don't tell the whole story. How teams play is another factor. How much possession they play with, compared to how much defending they do. Likewise with the opponent. Does the opposition sit back and defend deep or press high?

A comparable example would be our recent games against Liverpool and Bournemouth. Garcia and Laporte played against Liverpool and Ota and Stones against Bournemouth. Both teams press us high up the pitch.

We know Liverpool is one of the best pressing teams. Laporte and Garcia did give away the ball on a few occasions yes, but they also were instrumental in playing out from the back to put us in advanced positions to score.

Against Bournemouth who you wouldn't think are a pressing team, Ota and Stones were unable to help advance the ball forward. They couldn't play the ball quickly and find the midfielders or wingers. Consequently they played back to Ederson who had to boot it long giving away possession. Bournemouth also played the long ball where they had the likes of Stanislas, King, Solanke and Billing all up top winning the duels in the air. You would have thought Ota and Stones 2 of our better defenders in the air would be able to handle it but they couldn't. To which we were under so much pressure and looked like we didn't have control of that game.

Against teams that sit back and don't press you have a different story. You have to able to defend, but equally if you aren't able to also play the ball with your feet you compound your own problems having to defend more in our system.

I think any back 4 we currently put out, struggles against any kind of team playing any kind of football, once they come out of their own half.

We usually have the ball, so they only get so many chances per game. But this season, that has been enough for a bunch of no marks to beat us, wheras Liverpool, who normally score from every shot v City, missed on this occasion.

 

[01cravend]

Yes comparing stats don't tell the whole story. How teams play is another factor. How much possession they play with, compared to how much defending they do. Likewise with the opponent. Does the opposition sit back and defend deep or press high?

A comparable example would be our recent games against Liverpool and Bournemouth. Garcia and Laporte played against Liverpool and Ota and Stones against Bournemouth. Both teams press us high up the pitch.

We know Liverpool is one of the best pressing teams. Laporte and Garcia did give away the ball on a few occasions yes, but they also were instrumental in playing out from the back to put us in advanced positions to score.

Against Bournemouth who you wouldn't think are a pressing team, Ota and Stones were unable to help advance the ball forward. They couldn't play the ball quickly and find the midfielders or wingers. Consequently they played back to Ederson who had to boot it long giving away possession. Bournemouth also played the long ball where they had the likes of Stanislas, King, Solanke and Billing all up top winning the duels in the air. You would have thought Ota and Stones 2 of our better defenders in the air would be able to handle it but they couldn't. To which we were under so much pressure and looked like we didn't have control of that game.

Against teams that sit back and don't press you have a different story. You have to able to defend, but equally if you aren't able to also play the ball with your feet you compound your own problems having to defend more in our system.

Yeah but Otamendi and Stones don't play Bournemouth every week. Why not use Laporte and Garcia vs Norwich? Its easy to pick and choose. They all play good teams they all play the shite ones.

 

[Dax777]

Yes comparing stats don't tell the whole story. How teams play is another factor. How much possession they play with, compared to how much defending they do. Likewise with the opponent. Does the opposition sit back and defend deep or press high?

A comparable example would be our recent games against Liverpool and Bournemouth. Garcia and Laporte played against Liverpool and Ota and Stones against Bournemouth. Both teams press us high up the pitch.

We know Liverpool is one of the best pressing teams. Laporte and Garcia did give away the ball on a few occasions yes, but they also were instrumental in playing out from the back to put us in advanced positions to score.

Against Bournemouth who you wouldn't think are a pressing team, Ota and Stones were unable to help advance the ball forward. They couldn't play the ball quickly and find the midfielders or wingers. Consequently they played back to Ederson who had to boot it long giving away possession. Bournemouth also played the long ball where they had the likes of Stanislas, King, Solanke and Billing all up top winning the duels in the air. You would have thought Ota and Stones 2 of our better defenders in the air would be able to handle it but they couldn't. To which we were under so much pressure and looked like we didn't have control of that game.

Against teams that sit back and don't press you have a different story. You have to able to defend, but equally if you aren't able to also play the ball with your feet you compound your own problems having to defend more in our system.

The above is all well and good, but the numbers are the numbers.

As it relates to just the 4 categories ( and there are a myriad of other categories that weren't including. But as it relates to % of headers won, tacked won, pass accuracy and long pass accuracy. John Stones shows a distinct superiority. This might be function not playing so few games, agreed.

But the numbers are simply saying what the numbers are.

Let's take your example for a second, you said Bournemouth were playing vthe long ball and winning headers? Well John wind 65% of his headers same as Larporte. So we can't assume it would have been any better if Laporte had been the one in the duels. Conversely, we can assume it would have been worse, if it was Garcia seeing as he has the worst in the air percentage I've ever seen on a defender. Perhaps we might have controlled the ball better on the ground though.

These stats are not a full picture of stats talk less performance. But they hint at tendencies in those listed areas.

If nothing else those stats hint at the fact that John Stones might not be as bad as we think!

 

[Larry Stranger]

I think any back 4 we currently put out, struggles against any kind of team playing any kind of football, once they come out of their own half.

We usually have the ball, so they only get so many chances per game. But this season, that has been enough for a bunch of no marks to beat us, wheras Liverpool, who normally score from every shot v City, missed on this occasion.

True, but this shows that Pep wants to play with a player like Garcia rather than someone who's better defensively like Stones or Ota or even Dinho. He's one of the only managers that has the ball to play this way. If you go with better defender or DM then you're going to be just like every other team who plays against Liverpool. You'll probably lose the ball more, have less possession and end up defending most of the game with little going forward.

 

[ctid1894]

For real. Stones biggest on pitch problem imo he has no instinct to close the space and always lets attackers run at him and other defenders

There was one earlier this season when someone run from the halfway line, the whole South Stand was screaming at him to make a tackle. He had men around him so wouldn't have got a red card even if he had taken man, ball and everything else. That was the second time in a short period and swung things out of his favour for me.

 

[Neville Kneville]

The above is all well and good, but the numbers are the numbers.

As it relates to just the 4 categories ( and there are a myriad of other categories that weren't including. But as it relates to % of headers won, tacked won, pass accuracy and long pass accuracy. John Stones shows a distinct superiority. This might be function not playing so few games, agreed.

But the numbers are simply saying what the numbers are.

Let's take your example for a second, you said Bournemouth were playing vthe long ball and winning headers? Well John wind 65% of his headers same as Larporte. So we can't assume it would have been any better if Laporte had been the ones in the duels. Conversely, we can assume bit would have been worse, if it was Garcia seeing as he has the worst in the air percentage I've ever seen on a defender. Perhaps we might have controlled the ball better on the ground though.

These stats are not a full picture of stats talk less performance. But they hint at tendencies in those listed areas.

If nothing else those stats hint at the fact that John Stones might not be as bad as we think!

Stones can do everything required.

But can also just fall over.

 

[Larry Stranger]

Yeah but Otamendi and Stones don't play Bournemouth every week. Why not use Laporte and Garcia vs Norwich? Its easy to pick and choose. They all play good teams they all play the shite ones.

Because I'm using the example of 2 teams that pressed us well high up the pitch.