Jump to content

The weak link theory & our transfer strategyy


Andrew3000

Recommended Posts

I was listening to the Revisionist History podcast, and heard about David Sally's theory that in 'soccer' (as opposed to Basketball) what matters most in building a great team is how good your worst player is, not how good your best player is. This is built on stats which suggest that upgrading your poorest players is more influential to how many matches you win. This is the essence of the weak link argument (apparently in his book the numbers game).

One thing we have often complained about on here under the Morris years is the persistently horrible lack of balance in our squad.

So, this summer we pay a large fee for Bielik and do a deal to bring in Rooney and then take some avg loans. 

Were we guilty of making power moves for status and glory over the best way of improving the squad or did we simply not have time to identify the weak links and make our moves?

Ok so  as Cocu has said,we have to factor in bringing in the young players we have developed .  Our form so far also highlights that we have several glaring weak links throughout the team.  If we do not address these then we will seriously negate Rooney's impact as our best player and dent the confidence of our youngsters.

Therefore, whilst we are not set to do much business, it will reveal much about our strategy and Cocu's ability to identify the problems.   Add new investors in the mix and it all adds up to be a fascinating period for our club. Thoughts..?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 33
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I think to apply the theory quoted would take some joined up thinking by the club which I have not seen any evidence of under Morris especially in the transfer stakes. 

The scattergun pay over the odds for someone who has had one good season transfer policy is still prevalent and currently having serious repercussions on the playing field and also for Cocu. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Andrew3000 said:

So, this summer we pay a large fee for Bielik and do a deal to bring in Rooney and then take some avg loans. 

Last season, I think the holding midfield position *was* our weakest link.  Not one of the players we had could do what was required of them to play in the position - Huddlestone was too slow, Johnson was too poor on the ball, Evans was too weak etc.  We consistently struggled to get the ball into Mount and Wilson's feet, and/or got overrun in midfield by the opposition.  Splashing the cash on that position made absolute sense in that regard, and in theory, Bielik addresses all of those problems (even if we haven't 100% seen it yet).

The problem is that other areas of the team have now regressed significantly from last season - we haven't replaced Mount and Wilson, Holmes still is chasing form and fitness (presumably after missing preseason) etc.  I'm assuming that Rooney is effectively a Mount replacement (at least in terms of where they play), so hopefully that will at least partly address the lack of creativity and goals from central midfield.  So we got a bit stuck by having a player lined up but not being able to use him for half a season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

fair play this post

 

If you say Rooney, Belik and Bogle  - (tin hat on) are our only quality players / assets. - yes - to build a team round?

Our loanees. - have been woeful this season - Dowell, Paterson (compared to Tomorri, Wilson and MM)

The way I think. - is that we need 3 or 4 quality signings (at GK, CH, Winger and Midfielder) - we need to ship out 4 or 5

Replace the two loanees with quality loans.

Then the rest of the squad would be made up of youth - and hard hitters / "do a job for you" players  (like Davis, Wisdom and Fozzy)

 

oh and yes...start shooting at the goal might help.........

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andrew3000 said:

I was listening to the Revisionist History podcast, and heard about David Sally's theory that in 'soccer' (as opposed to Basketball) what matters most in building a great team is how good your worst player is, not how good your best player is. This is built on stats which suggest that upgrading your poorest players is more influential to how many matches you win. This is the essence of the weak link argument (apparently in his book the numbers game).

One thing we have often complained about on here under the Morris years is the persistently horrible lack of balance in our squad.

So, this summer we pay a large fee for Bielik and do a deal to bring in Rooney and then take some avg loans. 

Were we guilty of making power moves for status and glory over the best way of improving the squad or did we simply not have time to identify the weak links and make our moves?

Ok so  as Cocu has said,we have to factor in bringing in the young players we have developed .  Our form so far also highlights that we have several glaring weak links throughout the team.  If we do not address these then we will seriously negate Rooney's impact as our best player and dent the confidence of our youngsters.

Therefore, whilst we are not set to do much business, it will reveal much about our strategy and Cocu's ability to identify the problems.   Add new investors in the mix and it all adds up to be a fascinating period for our club. Thoughts..?

Spend your money of several first team players and you get limited quality and blocked progression routes for the youths. This was the problem we had starting from the Clement era.
The plan changed to recruit in areas where we lack quality. Permanent signings in areas where we have little long term depth, and loans in areas where we do or where a suitable permanent signing cannot be found.

From last season, we lost 1 CB, 1 LB, 1 DM, 2 CM, 1 W, 1 CF.
Lowe and Martin returned from their loans meaning the losses of Cole and Nugent were negated. The signing of Shinnie was pre-arranged leaving CB, DM, CM and W positions. Carson going out meant another GK too.

Our most talented academy players are judged to be CMs and wingers (Sibley, Knight, JML, Whittaker, Archie, Wilson, etc...). We also knew Rooney would be joining halfway through the season. So it was vital these positions were loans. So we're down to GK, CB, DM.

Roos was judged to be first choice keeper going in to the season. We either needed to recruit someone better, or a solid backup on the cheap. I doubt we could get anyone better in, so a cheap loan made sense.

Keogh needed a new partner at CB given Davies and Forsyth were both coming back from long-term injuries and weren't the most capable at playing out from the back. I doubt we able able to recruit our targets, so another loan deal was arranged to see us through another year.

That left us with just a DM to sign. Our options here without any signings were Huddlestone, Evans and Bird. All three seemed to struggle with injuries, form or the pace of the game last season so it would have been a risk going into this one without recruiting. Huddlestone only had 1 year left on his deal and Evans may be needed at CB, so getting someone in on a permanent was logical. With no other positions to fill, we had a large budget to spend on a single player.

I think it'll be a habit of us spending big on one or two players each season, plugging gaps with loans and promoting the youth. Over the next two windows we'll likely recruit at GK, CB (2), W and CF, spending big on a CB and CF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Bielik is just the first through the door... We need more players of that quality.

It's not a case of buying Bielik or a bunch of mediocre players for the same price.

Bielik, as others, have pointed out was the priority because our weak spot was defensive midfield. That gap filled, we now have a few others that need filling. It won't be instant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IslandExile said:

I think Bielik is just the first through the door... We need more players of that quality.

It's not a case of buying Bielik or a bunch of mediocre players for the same price.

Bielik, as others, have pointed out was the priority because our weak spot was defensive midfield. That gap filled, we now have a few others that need filling. It won't be instant.

I think we'll see a new CB, RW, GK in Jan. 2 on loan and 1 permanent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s an interesting thought to be fair. You’ve always gotta make sure that you spend your budget wisely, so that you get all the players in that you need, rather than blowing it all on a couple of players and them ending up not getting all the other players that you needed to sign. It definitely feels a bit more like we’ve done the latter this season, much like in the Pearson reign. Bielik is a top player don’t get me wrong, and I was delighted we signed him, but when you realise later that that was all the budget we have, you have to them start questioning whether we could’ve spent it wiser but spreading it out, 2m here and there on decent players. With the way we’ve done things, we’ve left ourselves with some glaring unresolved weaknesses. It was a disaster of a window, said it as soon as the window shut, and I maintain it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...