Nicolas Otamendi - 2016/17 performances

[FromPollockToSilva]

The problem with these stats is that they are quantitative, not qualitative. It doesn't show the headers he didn't contest because he was out of position, or how many of the duels that he lost led to a goalscoring chance.

Not to beat up on Otamendi, who I don't have a major problem with, just that the raw stats aren't ever going to be the whole story, especially with something as hard to codify as "good defending."

 

[Neville Kneville]

I understand that might be your perception of him, but the fact is Otamendi is a beast in the air and there's no way around it.

Whoscored shows that he has the best 'Aerial' score from all defenders in the Premier League. The number of aerial duels he won is second only to Virgil Van Dijk who is much taller and bigger than him.

Squawka here showed he's 7th in the Premier League in Aerial duels despite playing the 2nd LEAST minutes compared to everyone in the top 10.

Oh for Gods sake not again.

Have a look at how many aerial clearences Ben Mee has made.

He's useless in the air.

 

[Neville Kneville]

@mavsmcfc its not about the facts. Its just framing. Neville just wanted to give a negative opinion so he framed it that way. He knows the facts, but its best to undermine it by saying "only when no one puts in a decent challenge." In other words, he isn't disputing the facts, just simply explaining it away.

The other way folks do it is by saying "he was good today." In other words he is normally bad, but today he was good. In reality he has 4 very good games for every 1 bad game.

The most logical conclusion anyone should reach is that he is very good (I.e. that's the norm) but has a penchant for having howlers every once in a while.

But Nooooo, most see the 1 bad game in 5 as his norm and the other 4 games as him being good in individual games. Its one of those strange thing I've seen on here.

No I'm actuallg going off years of watching players who are actually 'beasts' in the air & Otamendi s nowhere near any of them.

Your stats are fucking nonsense

And a bad game one in 5 for a centre back is dogshit, same as with a keeper.

 

[Dax777]

No I'm actuallg going off years of watching players who are actually 'beasts' in the air & Otamendi s nowhere near any of them.

Your stats are fucking nonsense

And a bad game one in 5 for a centre back is dogshit, same as with a keeper.

Again give me a name of a player from the last 3 years who was a beast in the air. Lets do a clinical comparison.

And why are you comparing Otamendi to historical players? Compare him to his contemporaries. Who is the beast in the air this season that you have seen that makes you think Ota is shit?

And who are the defenders you know who don't have 1 bad game every 5 games. Give me names and I'll prove you wrong.

It is easy to say Ota is shit when you compare him to a myth. It gets harder when you compare him to actual players.

Real Madrid isn't interested because they like shit players. Every indicator suggesting he is very good isn't lying and trying to trick you.

He is in fact good by non-mythical standards.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

Give me names and I'll prove you wrong.

The fact that you are saying you WILL prove him wrong before he has even suggested anyone concerns me. It suggests to me you will do your usual stats and double dutch riddles combo to suit your argument.

 

[Delphacito]

Oh for Gods sake not again.

Have a look at how many aerial clearences Ben Mee has made.

He's useless in the air.

I take it you've watched every single minute that Ben Mee played this season? Probably not. But the stats are there - from every single minute that he played. Same thing goes with Otamendi.

 

[Dax777]

The fact that you are saying you WILL prove him wrong before he has even suggested anyone concerns me. It suggests to me you will do your usual stats and double dutch riddles combo to suit your argument.

No, it simply means Otamendi on the average is so good that you wouldn't find anyone so much better that would justify you concluding he is Shit.

For example if someone has scored 20 goals this season, its hard to conclude he is a "shit striker." Sure you can find people who have scored 27 or 28. And you can conclude those are better. But this will only show how hard it is to find those who have scored more.

For someone to be shit, it should be easy to find both those who are good and those who are average that are better. If you have to struggle to find 2 names, you've already proved yourself wrong in concluding he was Shit.

If someone for example says Bravo is Shit, the fact that 18 of the other 19 starting keepers in the league have a better save % strongly supports their argument.

However if you say Otamendi is Shit in the air, but only 1 defender is outright better than him statistically, its easy to call bullshit on that one. The facts simply do not support the notion.

 

[cadds92]

If Madrid offered our money back on him I would sell.

Excellent player when he wants to be but far too inconsistent.

 

[Neville Kneville]

I take it you've watched every single minute that Ben Mee played this season? Probably not. But the stats are there - from every single minute that he played. Same thing goes with Otamendi.

Dear me.

 

[Delphacito]

The problem with these stats is that they are quantitative, not qualitative. It doesn't show the headers he didn't contest because he was out of position, or how many of the duels that he lost led to a goalscoring chance.

Not to beat up on Otamendi, who I don't have a major problem with, just that the raw stats aren't ever going to be the whole story, especially with something as hard to codify as "good defending."

That is completely irrelevant here. The only thing that we're talking about here is whether he's shit in the air or he's a beast. He won more duels than anyone