Javi Garcia

[Akira]

Why we needed two I don't know

indeed.

Mancini wanted De Rossi.

Rodwell + Garcia were the back up plan. Rodwell was bought as one for the future as well.

Rodwell was probably more of an replacement for Hargreaves/Pizarro. Garcia for De Jong.
We failed to get in a proper deep lying playmaker. I remember the OS describing Garcia as one...but i don't think he is.

Think Mancini values physicality from his holding midfielders more....otherwise i'm sure Mancini would have bought Veratti. Who has been very impressive for PSG. But lacks the physique. De Rossi would have offered both.

Pizarro was the Deep Lying Playmaker. Rodwell is not one. We haven't gotten a Deep Lying Playmaker. The one closest to that description in our squad right now is probably Garcia or Yaya.

 

[Shaelumstash]

Try telling me something that I don't know or have not already alluded to.

"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."

Well as I read this as Simon23 said Garcia's distribution was better, and you said "his average is 10% lower" as if it meant his distribution is 10% worse. Maybe you should have clarified you meant his pass completion is 10% lower.

Anyway, we both now seem to be in agreement that statistics can only give you a fraction of the story about how good a player / passer someone is. Still seems a bit strange that this is your view but you still bring statistics up to argue how good De Jong is, but hey ho.

Bloody hell, my English must be poor if thought I said Garcia’s distribution was 10% worse than NDJ’s. Indeed, my English must be appalling as I do not seem to be able to get my message across but here is one last attempt to do so.

I was not expressing an opinion that NDJ is better than Garcia either defensively or at distributing the ball or in any other way.

I was simply trying to point out that an opinion expressed by someone else appeared anomalous to a couple of statistics. I was trying to use the statistics as a device to stimulate a debating point about the players; not about the value of statistics in general.

I do not think that pointing out that pass completion does not give the whole picture regarding a player’s distribution in any way provides a useful argument to support the view that the player with the worse pass completion is better at distribution than the one with the better pass completion.

I am not attempting to define how important statistics are or how much weight should be given to them. I do think statistics are useful and interesting and useful in taking a balanced view of performance; I do not care who agrees with that view or disagrees with that view.

Yeh we're going round in circles, I don't think pass completion statistics are relevant to your debate with the earlier poster. I don't think that stat is relevant to who is a better player, I don't think it's relevant to who has better distribution, and I think statistics as a whole aren't very useful in analysing a players quality. Your opinion differs for whatever reason, although you've not really explained why, let's just leave it there.

 

[stan horne]

if he is a replacement for Nige then he's way off the mark when it comes to protecting the back four. Javi's distrabution and goal threat seems to be better but we have goals in our team we need someone to snuff out any threat to our back four.

 

[DaveTheYid]

What City need is somebody like Sandro.

He is like De Jong but younger,quicker and more agile.

 

[Akira]

if he is a replacement for Nige then he's way off the mark when it comes to protecting the back four. Javi's distrabution and goal threat seems to be better but we have goals in our team we need someone to snuff out any threat to our back four.

That's not what people are saying when Nigel was around.

 

[OB1]

Yeh we're going round in circles, I don't think pass completion statistics are relevant to your debate with the earlier poster. I don't think that stat is relevant to who is a better player, I don't think it's relevant to who has better distribution, and I think statistics as a whole aren't very useful in analysing a players quality. Your opinion differs for whatever reason, although you've not really explained why, let's just leave it there.

I should leave it there but, given how strongly I disagree about your view of pass completion, I am compelled to offer a retort. I view the ability to consistently pass to a team mate as a fundamental skill and an essential part of good distribution. I fully realize that by paying safe, a player can keep their pass completion up and that being more adventurous in his passing a player is likely to have a deleterious effect on their completion percentage. However, it is no bloody good being adventurous if you cannot execute if effectively. A player has to make good decisions about when to try for a more difficult pass, too many bad decisions or poor execution will lead to a poor pass completion percentage. Top class midfield players should be averaging 85% plus on their pass completion. Xabi Alonso’s average for last season was 88% and he plays a lot of long balls; Xavi, who plays nearly as many LB’s averaged over 92%. You may not think that there is no correlation between high pass completion and good distribution but I do or, put another way, I am damn sure that poor pass completion is a sign of poor distribution.

 

[Shaelumstash]

Yeh we're going round in circles, I don't think pass completion statistics are relevant to your debate with the earlier poster. I don't think that stat is relevant to who is a better player, I don't think it's relevant to who has better distribution, and I think statistics as a whole aren't very useful in analysing a players quality. Your opinion differs for whatever reason, although you've not really explained why, let's just leave it there.

I should leave it there but, given how strongly I disagree about your view of pass completion, I am compelled to offer a retort. I view the ability to consistently pass to a team mate as a fundamental skill and an essential part of good distribution. I fully realize that by paying safe, a player can keep their pass completion up and that being more adventurous in his passing a player is likely to have a deleterious effect on their completion percentage. However, it is no bloody good being adventurous if you cannot execute if effectively. A player has to make good decisions about when to try for a more difficult pass, too many bad decisions or poor execution will lead to a poor pass completion percentage. Top class midfield players should be averaging 85% plus on their pass completion. Xabi Alonso’s average for last season was 88% and he plays a lot of long balls; Xavi, who plays nearly as many LB’s averaged over 92%. You may not think that there is no correlation between high pass completion and good distribution but I do or, put another way, I am damn sure that poor pass completion is a sign of poor distribution.

Of course I agree maintaining possession is absolutely fundamental in the modern game, particularly in the way we play. Xavi is the perfect example, I'm glad you've brought him up. My opinion from watching him play is that he's the best playmaker in world football, he dominates games with the intelligence of his passing, creates chances, dictates the rhythm of a game. He also has a very high pass completion percentage.

Now, let's say him and De Jong have the same pass completion percentage of 92%, how would a statistician with no knowledge of the game be able to deduce who had "better distribution" (which was the subject of the original discussion)?

As far as I'm aware statistics will not be able to demonstrate how Xavi controls games with his passing, or how De Jong slowed us down with his. The statistics are fairly useful for certain things, but they completely pale in to insignificance in comparison with watching a player regularly with an educated eye.

 

[King Geedorah]

The one closest to that description in our squad right now is probably Garcia or Yaya.

Yaya plays that role if he's not playing off the striker. Don't let the odd storming run cloud what he does all game, which is sit deep and dictate play.

 

[OB1]

Now, let's say him and De Jong have the same pass completion percentage of 92%, how would a statistician with no knowledge of the game be able to deduce who had "better distribution" (which was the subject of the original discussion)?

As far as I'm aware statistics will not be able to demonstrate how Xavi controls games with his passing, or how De Jong slowed us down with his. The statistics are fairly useful for certain things, but they completely pale in to insignificance in comparison with watching a player regularly with an educated eye.

Yeah, yeah, stats are quantitative rather than qualitative but the original discussion wasn't comparing Xavi with 92% to NDJ with 92% but NDJ's 92% to Garcia's 82%; which simply raises question marks about what exactly justified the opinion first given.

 

[Akira]

The one closest to that description in our squad right now is probably Garcia or Yaya.

Yaya plays that role if he's not playing off the striker. Don't let the odd storming run cloud what he does all game, which is sit deep and dictate play.

But we aren't looking for the "tempo" player, we have tons of them who can do that - Silva, Nasri, Barry, etc.

When Pizarro came in, he played like (fuck me) Paul Scholes. Throwing diagonal long balls regularly to stretch out deep defences. Yaya, albeit if he could do it, doesn't do that enough. And Yaya strengths lie in his capability to drive forward and his industry.

I'm still holding my verdict on Javi, but what we need is a player who would sit nowhere, but right in front of the defence, and just throw accurate long balls to the flanks. However then again, looking at our defence's current state, I wouldn't put the deep-lying playmaker as a priority.