Transfer Rumours Arrivals / Departures lounges, Summer 2023.

That makes no sense. We need a centre back who can defend. Hanley is head and shoulders (if you’ll pardon the pun) above every other defender in our squad in that respect - physicality, positioning, anticipation, communication (which often gets forgotten - only Zimmermann comes close on that), low frequency of errors etc etc.

Deselecting him on one attacking attribute is madness and suggests you are just clutching at straws to defend (ho ho) your increasingly indefensible and risible dogmatic irrational opinion of Hanley.

If he were the complete package, he’d be Virgil van Dijk and we would be Liverpool (or rather we just wouldn’t be able to get him…

Our squad has to have compromises throughout. Weakening our defence is totally the wrong one. I suspect you’re on a wind up. The giveaway is probably pretending to cite Dean Smith’s desires, when Smith himself has shown no indication of anything other than the highest praise for Hanley.

 

So Gibson is better than Hanley in a Dean Smith team.

Excuse me, but we have been a Dean Smith team for 22 league games now and I think you are probably the only person who thinks that Gibson has performed better than Hanley during this time. Maybe you will counter that you have never said that Gibson has played better; merely that Hanley has not been up to PL standard. In that judgement of Hanley, I would suggest that you are again in a minority.

In case you pedantically point out that you state 'will have us play', I will ask how you magically know how Dean Smith will have us playing in the future, even if he hasn't often had us playing this way to date, and that Hanley will not be good enough for this way of playing.

 

No, I said only that Gibson is better than Hanley in that particular respect, not better full stop.

 

This - 'the crucial signings this summer would be a McGinn-like AM and a right-sided CB with better feet than Grant Hanley - definitely suggests that you think replacing Hanley is more urgent than replacing Gibson. I suspect you are the only person who thinks this.

 

please log in to view this image

 

Er, I think that’s really what Gozo said when he said better “in a Dean Smith team”. And you definitely were focusing on the Dean Smith part.

And your only example was long balls, which Gibson does - what - three times a game? I wouldn’t be surprised if Hanley does nearly as many.

 

I think we need upgrades on both of them by the time our next season in the top flight kicks off.

 

I agree that we should only sell Pukki if he wants out. Given the character of the bloke I think that Norwich ( the place) seems to suit his lifestyle. Where is Farke now btw? There was talk of Stoke. I do wonder if we don't get a good start whether we should think about chasing him up.

 

Re. Pukki similarity to Watkins, this is a comparison from Soccerment Analytics, current season:

 

That’s interesting, I always thought Watkins was taller (or Pukki was a bit shorter).

The stats seem to underrate the benefits of assists and all round work rate to the team - I think of Pukki as more mucking in than Watkins, though equally you could argue that may be due to our having to defend more.

It’s also interesting their stats are so similar when you think Villa will have been more dominant in more matches than us, which just goes to show how important Pukki is to us.

 

Yeah that would be a really great decision from Webber. Replace one of our most reliable and key players over the last few years, particularly when we've been in the championship, as a priority. It's not as though whenever he's been out for any length of time the team hasn't fell apart. I'm going to need to get a chair with arms on it, just to be able to read some of your comments, as I'm in danger of falling off my current chair laughing at the stupidity of your posts. I always took the view that I shouldn't put anyone on ignore on the bases that even a broken clock is right twice a day, but some of the nonsense you write really is testing my resolve.

 

Yep yet another comment deliberately written so that at some point in the future you can argue both ends against the middle. Why don't you just list our CB's in order of who you think is best overall and then everyone will be clear what your views are and won't mis-represent them.

 

The question my comment addressed was what our recruitment priorities should be in order to make the likely style of play under Dean Smith work best. My answer was an attacking midfielder in the mould of McGinn, and a RCB who is better on the ball than Grant Hanley. Hanley's stats show he does certain things very well -- winning aerial duals, blocking shots, making clearances; he's better in those respects than any other CB in our squad. It's what he doesn't do so well that I was focussing on.
Last summer we were seriously interested in Ajer. Why? We ended up bringing in Kabak on loan. Why? The answer is that Farke was well aware of Hanley's limitations and wanted a right-footed CB who could contribute more to our progressive play (just as he preferred a progressive-minded midfielder like Billings or Normann over a specialist DM in the style of Ollie Skipp).

 

Assists (and creative play generally -- e.g. through balls, chances created, second assists etc.) provide the data for Soccerment's "Vision" index. Re. "mucking in", that empty centre panel at the foot of the page I posted should have displayed their comparative contributions to the three phases of play Defence, Build Up and Attack. Watkins scores slightly higher than Pukki in all three. Re. Villa enjoying more dominance than us, if you accept average possession as an indicator of dominance, there's only 3% difference over the season (43% to 46%).

 

For me, one of the big dangers with using statistics in football is that there are so many available. This means that people will always be able to find one that confirms their existing opinion. The final conclusion looks scientific because it is backed up by data, but the process of reaching that conclusion is often the very opposite of scientific induction - someone has their opinion, and then they look around for data to support it.

 

Indeed, which is why, just like any opinion, you have to look at each one on its merits, indiscriminate rejection being no more justified than indiscriminate acceptance.
Re. how people form opinions, that really doesn't matter; what matters is whether the opinion, however formed, is true or false. On here, I try to take no notice of who posts this or that opinion. For the most part, none of us know anything about each other; who knows or cares how the opinion is reached? What matters is the opinion itself. It's as if you're walking along a beach and come across a bottle with a message in it; when you open it up the message simply reads e.g. "Grant Hanley isn't EPL quality". The question isn't "Who says?", but "Is it true?"

 

Does anyone seriously believe that Cantwell will not be with us still at the beginning of next season? He has contributed a grand total of zilch, nada, f all since joining Bournemouth in January. Wigan may be interested in signing him for £600,000 (ok, maybe not true, I may have invented that bit) . His stature in the game is at an all time low. And with his perceived attitude problems why would anyone be interested. But he would be a better CB than Hanley.

 

If Bournemouth are promoted I believe they are obligated to buy him for £11m.
Such a disappointing place to be from this time last year when it looked like he was really kicking on and becoming an integral part of the team.

 

According to Michael Bailey writing in The Athletic, Bournemouth have an option but not an obligation. It sounds, from what he said, that Norwich are open to offers this summer if Bournemouth decide against taking up the option.

 

Ah fair enough, I wasn't completely sure from memory.

Perhaps Bournemouth feel they can get promotion and are attempting to drive his price down by parking him on the bench.