[Football] At the moment, Graham Potter is too good for Brighton. He needs better players.

[Icy Gull]

They have more pace in the attacking parts of their squad, making it a lot easier to attack quickly. But sure, part of it is down to that.

Fact remains however that even teams playing a similar style as Brighton got a far better midfield goal production while only having a slightly better goal production from the strikers. The "if only we had a decent striker" talk is nonsense, in most teams (with a couple of exceptions in both directions) the midfield provide at least 50% of the goals, in Brighton Maupay alone has scored the same amount of goals as all the midfielders in the team. Thats where the big (completely ignored) difference is. People are eager to compare Maupay/Welbeck/Connolly to Bamford/Ings/Vardy but the comparison between Trossard and Jack Harrison/Harvey Barnes/Grealish or between Ali Mac and Maddison/Soucek are rarely seen despite the difference in production being larger in the other roles than the striker position.

I’d be interested in why Lallana is so shit at finding the target, arguably had our best chances in the last two games and hasn’t even hit the target with any of them. We aren’t going to get better players than England Internationals. Why is he SSOOOO shit at finishing?

 

[andy1980]

With finishing of chances, we’d be 6th, ten points ahead of Leeds.

View attachment 134191

I get all that, but we can all see that we haven't got someone who can finish the chances of regularly enough. So for me Graham Potter has to work around this. This year so far he seems to of found a way of restricting the oppositions chances whilst letting us carry on creating them, the result is we score about the same (not solving that problem) but concede less. That impresses me a lot more than creating chances whilst not having someone to finish them. It turned me from a Potter out to Potter in for now. Although I am very wary we are now 3 games without a win against Fulham, Villa, Palace, and I am not convinced we will beat West Brom overall this year I have seen enough to give him a bit of breathing space.

 

[Swansman]

I’d be interested in why Lallana is so shit at finding the target, arguably had our best chances in the last two games and hasn’t even hit the target with any of them. We aren’t going to get better players than England Internationals. Why is he SSOOOO shit at finishing?

Aside for one season where he scored quite a few he's known as pretty goal shy... same goes for Welbeck really.

Personally I think Lallana has been ok overall, perhaps not the injection of class expected, but he remains a class passing player. Statistically speaking he is in the top 10% of midfielders when it comes to creating chances per 90 minutes - with normal goal scoring in the team this means he should produce goal assists every third game which would have put him just behind De Bruyne, Grealish and Fernandes. So there's still qualities to his game, but unfortunately he himself is not someone who is going to score a bunch of goals. He rarely scored while playing higher up the pitch for a better team and is unlikely to improve on that playing in a deeper role for Brighton.

 

[vagabond]

I’d be interested in why Lallana is so shit at finding the target, arguably had our best chances in the last two games and hasn’t even hit the target with any of them. We aren’t going to get better players than England Internationals. Why is he SSOOOO shit at finishing?

I think it’s because he doesn’t play enough. He can’t even complete more than a half (correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t believe he has yet). So he’s perennially lacking match sharpness.

It’s all very well playing for one half and doing some flash flicks in the middle of the park when we’re under no pressure, it’s at the business end of the pitch where it matters and thus far the guy hasn’t delivered.

I don’t want to be harsh on the guy, but he’s not a young player and he’s arrived with fanfare and reputation. Maybe he offers a lot of value off the pitch, but at the moment I’d sooner develop a younger player in his position. A Moder or Teddy Jenks.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Good thread.

I think ‘yes’.

Defensively, he has addressed concerns/criticisms - but due to injuries has to persist with certain players.

Midfield is excellent and GP must be delighted at the way the players have responded with Bissouma developing.

He has brought the youngsters through - so no complaints so far.

Then you get to the forwards, and this is why I think it is a ‘yes’ - the quality just isn’t there, so the manager and rest of the teams development is outpacing the forwards at a rate of knots. You can coach until you’re blue in the face, but the players need to be able to perform at a certain level, and the current forwards can’t.

Where GP has got it wrong (IMO), is the persistence of one forward, when it is the weakest area. If it means dropping one of MacAllister or Trossard then so be it, but given are shortcomings I believe he should go with two.

 

[GT49er]

I’d be interested in why Lallana is so shit at finding the target, arguably had our best chances in the last two games and hasn’t even hit the target with any of them. We aren’t going to get better players than England Internationals. Why is he SSOOOO shit at finishing?

Match rusty?

 

[Bry Nylon]

They have more pace in the attacking parts of their squad, making it a lot easier to attack quickly. But sure, part of it is down to that.

Fact remains however that even teams playing a similar style as Brighton got a far better midfield goal production while only having a slightly better goal production from the strikers. The "if only we had a decent striker" talk is nonsense, in most teams (with a couple of exceptions in both directions) the midfield provide at least 50% of the goals, in Brighton Maupay alone has scored the same amount of goals as all the midfielders in the team. Thats where the big (completely ignored) difference is. People are eager to compare Maupay/Welbeck/Connolly to Bamford/Ings/Vardy but the comparison between Trossard and Jack Harrison/Harvey Barnes/Grealish or between Ali Mac and Maddison/Soucek are rarely seen despite the difference in production being larger in the other roles than the striker position.

Hard for players to score when they are not on the pitch. I guess a more meaningful comparison for the midfielders you reference would be goals per minutes played.

I’ve no doubt the comparison would still stand up, but I feel part of the issue concerning goal production from our midfielders is that until very recently it seemed non of them got a consistent run in the team and were being chopped and changed on a frequent basis or subbed off.

 

[Swansman]

I think it’s because he doesn’t play enough. He can’t even complete more than a half (correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t believe he has yet). So he’s perennially lacking match sharpness.

It’s all very well playing for one half and doing some flash flicks in the middle of the park when we’re under no pressure, it’s at the business end of the pitch where it matters and thus far the guy hasn’t delivered.

I don’t want to be harsh on the guy, but he’s not a young player and he’s arrived with fanfare and reputation. Maybe he offers a lot of value off the pitch, but at the moment I’d sooner develop a younger player in his position. A Moder or Teddy Jenks.

Lallana played 15 426 minutes over the last 9 years, scoring 33 goals, meaning one goal every 467th minute (= every 15,5th game). I think even if he played every game he wouldnt score more than 3 or 4.

 

[Icy Gull]

Match rusty?

Not buying that, he had time but lacked any composure at all. I semi expect that from Biss and Mac but not a player who has played at the top level for so long and was brought in for his experience. At least one of those very good chances should have been on target?

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Not buying that, he had time but lacked any composure at all. I semi expect that from Biss and Mac but not a player who has played at the top level for so long and was brought in for his experience.

Another fail in recruitment for me. Never mind the misses, his injury record as he reaches the end of his career has not been good. Of course he still has ability (other than finishing apparently), but a poor signing.

 

[m@goo]

https://www.sportinglife.com/football/news/is-potter-too-good-for-brighton/189504

Too good for Brighton ?

I like how he's got us playing. More a case that some of the players aren't good enough for the Premier League.

 

[vagabond]

Lallana played 15 426 minutes over the last 9 years, scoring 33 goals, meaning one goal every 467th minute (= every 15,5th game). I think even if he played every game he wouldnt score more than 3 or 4.

9 years is a very long time to look back into his peak.

Look at the recent end of his career. 8 starts for Liverpool since 2019.

 

[BN9 BHA]

With finishing of chances, we’d be 6th, ten points ahead of Leeds.

View attachment 134191

Is anyone else Bamboozled by this whole thread ?

This is all I can see.

 

[Perfidious Albion]

All that goes to show is that ‘ expected goals’ don’t count for diddly squat if they don’t go in the net. You can be top of the league for chances created but still go down . The record books only show real goals .

“With finishing of chances, we’d be 6th, ten points ahead of Leeds. ”
And if we had some ham we could have some ham and eggs, if we had any eggs that is .......

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

All that goes to show is that ‘ expected goals’ don’t count for diddly squat if they don’t go in the net. You can be top of the league for chances created but still go down . The record books only show real goals .

Agree - statistics gone mad.

I’m interested in goals and points. Feck % possession as well.

 

[hoof hearted]

If he's bringing on AJ to either create a goal or score, then I'm not sure he's too good for Brighton just yet. He's got the team playing good football and are well organised, but some of his subs are still baffling. It would be interesting to see how he does with much better players at his disposal one day (hopefully while still at Brighton!).

 

[Swansman]

Hard for players to score when they are not on the pitch. I guess a more meaningful comparison for the midfielders you reference would be goals per minutes played.

I’ve no doubt the comparison would still stand up, but I feel part of the issue concerning goal production from our midfielders is that until very recently it seemed non of them got a consistent run in the team and were being chopped and changed on a frequent basis.

Its a bit of a hen and egg thing. Players might need to get a consistent run to perform, but do they deserve a consistant run if they are not performing? If we take Welbeck as the example: some people say he should got an extended run in the team instead of Maupay. In November and December he had a run where he started seven out of 8 games, resulting in 6 points - 1 win, 3 draws - from these starts (7 if you include the eight game, a sub appearance vs Sheffield), producing no more goals per minute than Maupay did prior to or post that. How many games do you need to give him before he becomes this free-scoring supadupah-muchbetterthanMaupay-striker some say he is? 10 starts before producing more than Maup? 15? Thats a lot of time getting into a "consecutive run".

Or if we take Alexis. He started the last 7 out of 8 games (injured vs Pool). While results have been pretty good, how many goals did Alexis produce over these games? 0. I think he's been ok, but how long can you keep him in a lineup before he starts producing a goal every fourth game or so like other AMC:s in teams that produce a lot of chances?

Its a difficult balance act.

 

[Swansman]

9 years is a very long time to look back into his peak.

Look at the recent end of his career. 8 starts for Liverpool since 2019.

Removing the first 5 years or so of that really wont help him look like a dangerous goal scorer so the point is pretty much the same.

 

[hoof hearted]

I’d be interested in why Lallana is so shit at finding the target, arguably had our best chances in the last two games and hasn’t even hit the target with any of them. We aren’t going to get better players than England Internationals. Why is he SSOOOO shit at finishing?

Personally, I'd rather the club had signed a different type of attacking midfielder, someone who is fast and can go past players (or at least win a penalty!). There's still a lack of pace in the squad, which is why Lamptey was such a breath of fresh air when he arrived.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Good thread, but perhaps the realistic question should be "does xG really mean anything"?

When I did my coaching badge level one the instructor spent time with us explaining how "unlucky" can be misused with youngsters. Obviously you're trying to encourage them and let them have fun but saying "unlucky" when they have done something fundamentally wrong is not helping them. You need to find a way of correcting the mistake without upsetting or discouraging (not easy, trust me). So is our xG fail bad luck, bad skill, inflexible coaching or a mix of the last two (if you accept that "unlucky" is really an outlier where a really stupid deflection happens or the ref gets in the way)?

For me the answer lies with the Villa game. An xG of 2.44 yet at no point did we look like scoring. A mixture of an opposition keeper in very good form and lots of shots from the wrong place (long range, on the turn when covered) meant that we were always in for a frustrating evening. xG doesn't take into account just how good Martinez has been since signing for Villa, nor that this restricted our attackers to poor decisions, nor that the coaching staff appeared unconcerned that we were mostly happy to hit it at the keeper (or if they were, they failed to get the message over adequately).

Now, what would make an interesting and well researched article would be to analyse the reasons why we underachieved in each game that we did, seeing as it is an obvious pattern, but that would take a long time, lots of work and potentially not leave you with such a dramatic headline.

However, I note [MENTION=38333]Swansman[/MENTION] 's post with interest. On the positive (and please note Swanny that Monday has not shifted me back against Potter, I genuinely can see improvements over the last few weeks still) there is the physical conditioning (noticeable that we kept up with Leeds on a bad pitch). That bodes well for the future. But Bielsa is also a coach who has got the most out of an average striker. Bamford had a career as a journeyman Championship striker, mostly on loan. Now he's already beaten Maupay's best tally with 13 games to play. So you can coach a striker - or, if you can't, then you can give him better quality chances. That may be the actual difference. Bloom's risk will be whether he caves in to demands for a £50 million striker (VERY unlikely) or whether he gambles that just as we're about a year behind Leeds in approach play, that year will lead to us creating chances we simply cannot miss.