De Jong has never been good positionally. I said so last year and got cursed out for it. There is a difference between a guy who's positioning impedes the opposition, and a guy who hustles and tackles fiercely. De Jong has always been the latter, never really the former. But it is hard to explain without being in a room with someone pointing it out. I used to get heated anytime he didn't play and comments would ring out about how we were so open and easy to attack, something that wouldn't happen if De Jong was there. While in fact you watch the games De Jong played, and it happened constantly.Jumanji said:
Unfortunately for a long time, the measurable stats (at least the most important one) goals conceded favored those who made the "De Jong keeps us safe in the back" argument. I often pointed out to no avail, that 1) the chances against created did not favor that claim, and worse the opposition faced skewed the data.
But it was a pointless argument last year, since most bought into it like a mantra. De Jong is good at doubleteaming. He is fantastic against players who hold on to the ball too long. and he is great at attacking loose balls. These are all fine qualities, but positionally he has always been average. He is best manmarking a dangerous opponent, than he is being a DM who reads the game. Barry has always been better at that. Even the interception stats, and blocks backed up that claim last year. But folks love to ignore stats when it doesn't support what they want to believe.
Now that there seems to be a growing discomfort with De Jong (including Blueprint's personal vendatta) folks seem more comfortable viewing him more objectively. while I deplore Blueprint's personal attacks on De Jong. I'd say it is about fucking time being objective about his game got here.
And we should be that way about ALL our players. Objective criticism for all. We should support them always, celebrate them when they excel and point out their flaws that make them vulnerable. That is true support in my opinion.