Javi Garcia

[Le Havre Oswald]

I don't think many are righting him off.....its just most recognise that we are looking a lot more open in midfield and Garcia isn't as good defensively as dejong is...there aren't many better tacklers than ndj to be fair and we gave lost that bite in midfield...Garcia clearly has more to his game but mancini now needs to find the correct combo and balance in midfield.......and playing yaya in there is NOT the answer....he is wasted back there

This is what I mean. You can't really say that after 3 games give him time.

I remember a few lads where I sit in south stand were not happy with zaba saying they thought corluka was better etc... One even said zaba was slower lol. Only way he could've been slower is if he could only walk backwards.

Yes we do seem open.hopefully Mancini will address this somehow not sure how

i can certainly say after watching him for 3 games that he isnt as good a tackler as dejong and that he is certainly less mobile....two key points for a defensive midfielder.....along with exceptional reading of the game....better int he air than dejong certainly...better useage of the ball than dejong (who just kept it very simple most of the time...though to be fair that is what you want from a player like him)....btu in key defesive attributes like tackling and being able to get back goal side once beaten...then he is well de jong



in your opinion looking at the games we have played do you think we are more open in midfield...especially in the 10 yds infront of the back 4?????? cause i do...and that is because neither dejong or barry are there at present...it is nothing to do with having played 3 games......those basic attributes which i menation you can easily see after just a couple.

Yes we do seem open.hopefully Mancini will address this somehow not sure how like.
Hopefully Garcia will improve in the next few games when he gets used to the pace.
It annoys me when people are calling him shit after 3 games. (Not saying you).

I think it's hard to replace de Jong as he was one of a kind IMO.

 

[OB1]

I really rate Barry as he is a very cleaver player, but both him and Garcia are extremely immobile.

So you are saying that Barry is a hatchet man who is incapable of moving?

Er NO!!!!!

Im saying Barry is a very cleaver player who makes up for his lack of pace by reading the game especially well and is very cleaver at breaking up play.....but both him and garcia are slow and not very mobile.

Er, you seem to have missed the joke there. You might want to check the difference between cleaver and clever!

Barry is not immobile: he is in fact very mobile and pops up in important places all over the pitch.

 

[OB1]

I've never suggested the eye can see everything that stats record. I'm saying that statistics in games such as baseball, NFL, cricket, basketball are much more relevant indicators of performance than they are in football, because good performance in football is more subjective.

The leading guys at Opta have already admitted this themselves. They found that they were expecting the top defenders in the game to make and win the most tackles, but this was rarely the case. In fact, at the time one of the best defenders in the world - Alesssandro Nesta made far fewer tackles than the average for a defender.

That is because he was so good at reading the game he made more interceptions, and people were more reluctant to pass to who he was marking because he was so good. The stats can't tell you that, only watching the game can.

I would assume statistics will tell you James Milner covered the most ground for CIty last year, probably had a high pass completion etc. His stats probably look more impressive than Barry. But there is no statistic for football intelligence, making the correct pass, run, movement, whatever. And there never will be, because each player / manager / fan will have a different interpretation of what the best / most intelligent thing to do is in any given situation. Clearly Mancini decided Barry was a better option in central midfield based on what he saw, not on what the spreadsheet told him.

I'm not saying the stats are worthless, but I would much rather take the expert subjective opinion of Mancini, Platt, Kidd etc on the quality of a player than the statistical analysis of someone like Comolli.

And for the record, I don't need you or your stats to tell me about De Jong's ball retention.

This really is all way off the point of the original post that I made. Although, you mention Milner's stats and an expectation that he has a high pass completion figure but, in fact, relative to most of the City players, he doesn't and I'm quite certain that is one of the reasons that he gets less game time. So you may not need me to tell you about De Jong's ball retention but, in the case of Milner, it seems that you do.

 

[Shaelumstash]

I've never suggested the eye can see everything that stats record. I'm saying that statistics in games such as baseball, NFL, cricket, basketball are much more relevant indicators of performance than they are in football, because good performance in football is more subjective.

The leading guys at Opta have already admitted this themselves. They found that they were expecting the top defenders in the game to make and win the most tackles, but this was rarely the case. In fact, at the time one of the best defenders in the world - Alesssandro Nesta made far fewer tackles than the average for a defender.

That is because he was so good at reading the game he made more interceptions, and people were more reluctant to pass to who he was marking because he was so good. The stats can't tell you that, only watching the game can.

I would assume statistics will tell you James Milner covered the most ground for CIty last year, probably had a high pass completion etc. His stats probably look more impressive than Barry. But there is no statistic for football intelligence, making the correct pass, run, movement, whatever. And there never will be, because each player / manager / fan will have a different interpretation of what the best / most intelligent thing to do is in any given situation. Clearly Mancini decided Barry was a better option in central midfield based on what he saw, not on what the spreadsheet told him.

I'm not saying the stats are worthless, but I would much rather take the expert subjective opinion of Mancini, Platt, Kidd etc on the quality of a player than the statistical analysis of someone like Comolli.

And for the record, I don't need you or your stats to tell me about De Jong's ball retention.

This really is all way off the point of the original post that I made. Although, you mention Milner's stats and an expectation that he has a high pass completion figure but, in fact, relative to most of the City players, he doesn't and I'm quite certain that is one of the reasons that he gets less game time. So you may not need me to tell you about De Jong's ball retention but, in the case of Milner, it seems that you do.

Well I'm sure I read somewhere Milner covered more ground than anyone at one one point last season, doesn't make him a good player. Again, if you analysed Milner's play the major problem wasn't that he gave the ball away too often, it's that he took too long to make a decision on the ball, and often chose the wrong pass. As far as I'm aware there are no stats available to demonstrate that, but if you watch all the games it's obvious.

There are some uses for statistics, but saying a player is good because he's got a high pass completion rate is too simplistic and doesn't take a whole host of other things in to account such as the quality of the pass, how long it took him to make the decision, whether he chose the right pass etc and there are no stats that will tell you that. You say we're going off point, but that is the crux of the debate, De Jong may have a high pass completion rate, but so what.

The analytics team at City even said in their press release that they are releasing the stats in the hope that someone will find a way to use them that will revolutionise the game and be of more use than they are in their current form. I hope some genius does figure it out, but my opinion at the moment is that football is too fluid a game with too many variables and different opinions to ever be dominated by statistics in the same way as the sports mentioned above.

 

[Shaelumstash]

I don't think many are righting him off.....its just most recognise that we are looking a lot more open in midfield and Garcia isn't as good defensively as dejong is...there aren't many better tacklers than ndj to be fair and we gave lost that bite in midfield...Garcia clearly has more to his game but mancini now needs to find the correct combo and balance in midfield.......and playing yaya in there is NOT the answer....he is wasted back there

Again, I don't understand where people get these opinions from, it can't be from watching the game. Yaya played the vast majority of last season there and he was one of the best players in the league, and we won it!

i can assure you it is from watching the game, and highlights and re runs etc etc etc. yaya is wasted playing defensively and he isnt that good at it...his tackling is average for a guy of his size, and he gets caught forward and then cannt get back.....what happened last season was that he may have started games in that role but he was often pushed forward later on in games and this is where he suddenly become s more effective.

(infact as i type this i think maybe its alanguage/communication thing is why we are arguing about this.....what i may mean to say is that when yaya is released from his defensive responsibilities is when he becomes a more effective force......and his defensive capabilities arent anywhere near as good as his attacking ones....there are others that can do a better job defensively than yaya...NDJ was one such player and overall he aint half the player yaya is BUT his tackling and his ability to cover the back for (especially side to side and his ability to (if beaten ) recover is a lot better than yaya's

You make some good points, I agree that Yaya is better going forward than defensively. You are right that he often pushed further forward late in games, and teams can't deal with him. However, he often does make those surging runs playing from his deep position, and teams can't live with it. He is not as good in the tackle as De Jong, but there is a lot more to that position than just tackling. His technique and quality of his passing is absolutely brilliant, on a different planet to De Jong, I'd even go as far as to say he's got the best technique I've ever seen from someone who is 6'4.

To play Yaya further forward from the start means we would have to completely change shape and one of Silva, Nasri or the front players will have to drop out. He played further forward from the start in the season we won the FA Cup with Barry and De Jong behind. For me he was far more effective last season than that one, and the team as a whole was incomparibly better. That was due to losing one defensive midfielder from the starting line up (De Jong) for an extra striker and we were a much better team for it. Pushing Yaya further forward as a plan B is a great option, but we're a better side with the shape we played for the majority of last season.

 

[OB1]

I've never suggested the eye can see everything that stats record. I'm saying that statistics in games such as baseball, NFL, cricket, basketball are much more relevant indicators of performance than they are in football, because good performance in football is more subjective.

The leading guys at Opta have already admitted this themselves. They found that they were expecting the top defenders in the game to make and win the most tackles, but this was rarely the case. In fact, at the time one of the best defenders in the world - Alesssandro Nesta made far fewer tackles than the average for a defender.

That is because he was so good at reading the game he made more interceptions, and people were more reluctant to pass to who he was marking because he was so good. The stats can't tell you that, only watching the game can.

I would assume statistics will tell you James Milner covered the most ground for CIty last year, probably had a high pass completion etc. His stats probably look more impressive than Barry. But there is no statistic for football intelligence, making the correct pass, run, movement, whatever. And there never will be, because each player / manager / fan will have a different interpretation of what the best / most intelligent thing to do is in any given situation. Clearly Mancini decided Barry was a better option in central midfield based on what he saw, not on what the spreadsheet told him.

I'm not saying the stats are worthless, but I would much rather take the expert subjective opinion of Mancini, Platt, Kidd etc on the quality of a player than the statistical analysis of someone like Comolli.

And for the record, I don't need you or your stats to tell me about De Jong's ball retention.

This really is all way off the point of the original post that I made. Although, you mention Milner's stats and an expectation that he has a high pass completion figure but, in fact, relative to most of the City players, he doesn't and I'm quite certain that is one of the reasons that he gets less game time. So you may not need me to tell you about De Jong's ball retention but, in the case of Milner, it seems that you do.

Well I'm sure I read somewhere Milner covered more ground than anyone at one one point last season, doesn't make him a good player. Again, if you analysed Milner's play the major problem wasn't that he gave the ball away too often, it's that he took too long to make a decision on the ball, and often chose the wrong pass. As far as I'm aware there are no stats available to demonstrate that, but if you watch all the games it's obvious.

There are some uses for statistics, but saying a player is good because he's got a high pass completion rate is too simplistic and doesn't take a whole host of other things in to account such as the quality of the pass, how long it took him to make the decision, whether he chose the right pass etc and there are no stats that will tell you that. You say we're going off point, but that is the crux of the debate, De Jong may have a high pass completion rate, but so what.

The analytics team at City even said in their press release that they are releasing the stats in the hope that someone will find a way to use them that will revolutionise the game and be of more use than they are in their current form. I hope some genius does figure it out, but my opinion at the moment is that football is too fluid a game with too many variables and different opinions to ever be dominated by statistics in the same way as the sports mentioned above.

No one suggested a player is good because he has a high pass completion percentage. I simply used two relevant stats about passing and tackling to question someone's perception and hopefully to stimulate some thought about the players' attributes, not to open up a debate about statitics. I've had the debate about the value of stats enough to be very bored with it.

I look forward to Garcia bursting forward and making a forward pass to Aguero as part of a move that wins the title.

 

[Shaelumstash]

This really is all way off the point of the original post that I made. Although, you mention Milner's stats and an expectation that he has a high pass completion figure but, in fact, relative to most of the City players, he doesn't and I'm quite certain that is one of the reasons that he gets less game time. So you may not need me to tell you about De Jong's ball retention but, in the case of Milner, it seems that you do.

Well I'm sure I read somewhere Milner covered more ground than anyone at one one point last season, doesn't make him a good player. Again, if you analysed Milner's play the major problem wasn't that he gave the ball away too often, it's that he took too long to make a decision on the ball, and often chose the wrong pass. As far as I'm aware there are no stats available to demonstrate that, but if you watch all the games it's obvious.

There are some uses for statistics, but saying a player is good because he's got a high pass completion rate is too simplistic and doesn't take a whole host of other things in to account such as the quality of the pass, how long it took him to make the decision, whether he chose the right pass etc and there are no stats that will tell you that. You say we're going off point, but that is the crux of the debate, De Jong may have a high pass completion rate, but so what.

The analytics team at City even said in their press release that they are releasing the stats in the hope that someone will find a way to use them that will revolutionise the game and be of more use than they are in their current form. I hope some genius does figure it out, but my opinion at the moment is that football is too fluid a game with too many variables and different opinions to ever be dominated by statistics in the same way as the sports mentioned above.

No one suggested a player is good because he has a high pass completion percentage. I simply used two relevant stats about passing and tackling to question someone's perception and hopefully to stimulate some thought about the players' attributes, not to open up a debate about statitics. I've had the debate about the value of stats enough to be very bored with it.

I look forward to Garcia bursting forward and making a forward pass to Aguero as part of a move that wins the title.

Well you were bringing the statistics of pass completion in to the debate about us missing De Jong, if the only debate was who had a better percentage out of him and Garcia then it would be essential and relevant.

However, as I understood it the debate is more about whether De Jong was better than Garcia all round, and my point is the stats won't tell you the whole story.

As I say, I rate De Jong and like him, I've not seen enough of Garcia yet to make an informed opinion, although I'm sure you can enlighten me with his statistics to back up whatever your opinion is of him!

I'm delighted for De Jong that he played an important part in our success, he really deserved it with the amount of good work he did for us. But "bursting forward" was hardly a strength of his, and remember QPR were playing a flat back 9 at the time so there wasn't many players for him to "burst" past!

 

[OB1]

Well you were bringing the statistics of pass completion in to the debate about us missing De Jong, if the only debate was who had a better percentage out of him and Garcia then it would be essential and relevant.

However, as I understood it the debate is more about whether De Jong was better than Garcia all round, and my point is the stats won't tell you the whole story.

As I say, I rate De Jong and like him, I've not seen enough of Garcia yet to make an informed opinion, although I'm sure you can enlighten me with his statistics to back up whatever your opinion is of him!

I'm delighted for De Jong that he played an important part in our success, he really deserved it with the amount of good work he did for us. But "bursting forward" was hardly a strength of his, and remember QPR were playing a flat back 9 at the time so there wasn't many players for him to "burst" past!

Yes I mentioned pass completion because Simon23 said Garcia's distribution was better than De Jong's and given that Garcia's average is about ten percentage points worse than De Jong's, I think it begs some questions as to the validity of the statement. It does not mean that pass completion is the only aspect of distribution that counts but it is an important aspect of distribution. I could have added that Garcia has only made one key pass in two games; whereas De Jong made one key pass in one appearance this season, which is another fact that does not support the contention that Garcia's distribution is better but I didn't want to write an essay on the subject.

I also noted that Garcia has been averaging more tackles per game, so far, than De Jong does; which was in response to De Jong being better defensively. Again, this was not meant to paint the whole picture but to point to a fact that did not support the opinion offered.

I didn't actually offer an opinion on who was the better player in either specific area or in terms of their all round game because I've only seen Garcia play three games.

Sadly, my comment didn't get a response from the poster it was aimed at but instead got you explaining why stats are more important in NFL and baseball and how they are less important to a fluid game like football. Heaven knows what baseball has got to do with Javi Garcia; although his name wouldn't be out of place in the NY Yankees' bullpen. Of course what you failed to mention was that the nature of those sports made it much easier to record stats manually and that it is only through advances in technology that football has truly been able to match the level of statistical analysis in those sports, which means there could in fact be a lot more value to be found from what is a much newer science (or art) but that's a whole other thread.

 

[Shaelumstash]

Well you were bringing the statistics of pass completion in to the debate about us missing De Jong, if the only debate was who had a better percentage out of him and Garcia then it would be essential and relevant.

However, as I understood it the debate is more about whether De Jong was better than Garcia all round, and my point is the stats won't tell you the whole story.

As I say, I rate De Jong and like him, I've not seen enough of Garcia yet to make an informed opinion, although I'm sure you can enlighten me with his statistics to back up whatever your opinion is of him!

I'm delighted for De Jong that he played an important part in our success, he really deserved it with the amount of good work he did for us. But "bursting forward" was hardly a strength of his, and remember QPR were playing a flat back 9 at the time so there wasn't many players for him to "burst" past!

Yes I mentioned pass completion because Simon23 said Garcia's distribution was better than De Jong's and given that Garcia's average is about ten percentage points worse than De Jong's, I think it begs some questions as to the validity of the statement. It does not mean that pass completion is the only aspect of distribution that counts but it is an important aspect of distribution. I could have added that Garcia has only made one key pass in two games; whereas De Jong made one key pass in one appearance this season, which is another fact that does not support the contention that Garcia's distribution is better but I didn't want to write an essay on the subject.

I also noted that Garcia has been averaging more tackles per game, so far, than De Jong does; which was in response to De Jong being better defensively. Again, this was not meant to paint the whole picture but to point to a fact that did not support the opinion offered.

I didn't actually offer an opinion on who was the better player in either specific area or in terms of their all round game because I've only seen Garcia play three games.

Sadly, my comment didn't get a response from the poster it was aimed at but instead got you explaining why stats are more important in NFL and baseball and how they are less important to a fluid game like football. Heaven knows what baseball has got to do with Javi Garcia; although his name wouldn't be out of place in the NY Yankees' bullpen. Of course what you failed to mention was that the nature of those sports made it much easier to record stats manually and that it is only through advances in technology that football has truly been able to match the level of statistical analysis in those sports, which means there could in fact be a lot more value to be found from what is a much newer science (or art) but that's a whole other thread.

Garcia's average what is 10% lower? His pass completion? That doesn't mean his distribution isn't better! What about quality of pass, timing of pass, intelligence of pass etc, there are no statistics for these things and never will be because it's subjective.

Again, just because Garcia makes more tackles doesn't mean he is better defensively than De Jong! Baseball has got absolutely nothing to do with Javi Garcia, and that is my point. Baseball has been revolutionised by statistical analysis because it is a very simple game.

How often does a batter hit the ball, how often does a pitcher strike out an opponent, what are a players RBI's etc. These are all factual elements of the game that have a direct impact on success and failure. How many tackles someone makes or how many passes they make / complete is far less relevant to whether a player has performed well.

In baseball if a pitcher pitches the perfect game, you won't get many observers having the opinion that he really didn't play that well. Or if a batter hit's 3 home runs, there won't be many saying he didn't play as well as the batter who only scored none.

Whereas in football the statistics are not so important, no matter what the statistics say, each observer will have a different interpretation of the game. It's interesting you mention art, because a good performance in football can very much be in the eye of the beholder, much like art. You wouldn't say Van Gough is a better artist than Da Vinci because he averages more brush strokes per canvas would you?

 

[ClearwaterBlues]

To be honest I don’t have enough knowledge to compare Garcia and NDJ. I just became a City fan last season when I realized that would be totally unfair to lose the PL after the wonderful campaign.

About Garcia I know him from Benfica which is my other favorite team, I've started wondering if he would fit from the moment some users here start saying that we would be in need of someone such as Xavi Alonso that could improve offense and put some game in the box.

Anyway, the guy that went to Portugal to observe Garcia in Setubal was our defensive coach Angelo Gregucci, so I believe City took priority on someone that could bring some efficiency to the team defensive process.

He’s a 6, he has never been an 8 and will never be, his passing is mostly sideways and you will probably never see him taking the risk on the 1 to 1. As a 6 I consider him a great player, he used to play on a 4-1-3-2 and was able to keep the team up in the field by holding all the defense midfield on his own. He fits better a strategy that goes around putting pressure up high in the field, that benefits his game.

I’ve seen the difficulties he had against Arsenal, he had opponents coming straight at him and speed is definitely not his thing. What he’s really good at is to anticipate the other team’s offensive plays and add pressure so City can recover the ball up forward.

I hope my English is not that confusing.