Leandro Bacuna - Sold

[OCD]

Bacuna looked decent at right back against Liverpool and had a really good game against Norwich, not giving Redmond a kick. Norwich's biggest threat comes from their flanks and between Guzan and the defence, we dealt with everything. On the evidence of what I've seen from Bacuna so far, I would have full confidence of playing him at right back and in time, he could make a good midfielder too but I wouldn't rush to make that his permanent role.

Tonev was very wasteful and must be very frustrating with someone who shoots whenever they get the ball. I've played with people who did that and it does piss you off. That's not to say I'm writing him off though - he just needs to learn. With experience he will learn when to hold onto the ball, when a pass is on and when to shoot. If it wasn't for injuries, I would give him a little break to think about this and to learn from Saturday's game but he will probably have to play tonight. Hopefully he's a quick learner.

[RussellC]

I really couldn't work Tonev out on Saturday. It was almost like he'd been told to shoot whenever he got the ball. He also played in almost the exact role that would have suited Brett Holman- and with much less effect on the game.

[Concrete John]

I really couldn't work Tonev out on Saturday. It was almost like he'd been told to shoot whenever he got the ball. He also played in almost the exact role that would have suited Brett Holman- and with much less effect on the game.

Some of Lambert's signings from last summer turned out to be slow burners and improved as the season went on.  I'm hoping Tonev will turn out to be in this category, because I must say I haven't been overly impressed so far.

As for Bacuna, if nothing else we now know we have a genuine alternative to Lowton at RB.     

[Mister E]

The market we are shopping in will have more misses than hits.

will it?

Probability suggests so, yes. That's not to say PL is doing a bad job but in reality we cannot expect every signing to come off.

I also think it'll become harder as we improve as there'll be less opportunities for the fringe players to play and prove themselves.

"More misses than hits"? - probability actually suggests 50:50, in totally random slections.
They are not random: PL has shown in his first 12 months or so that he can select more hits than misses: of the ones he's bought so far, which ones have been given enough pitch-time to show that they are complete duffers?

[Toronto Villa]

I really couldn't work Tonev out on Saturday. It was almost like he'd been told to shoot whenever he got the ball. He also played in almost the exact role that would have suited Brett Holman- and with much less effect on the game.

Some of Lambert's signings from last summer turned out to be slow burners and improved as the season went on.  I'm hoping Tonev will turn out to be in this category, because I must say I haven't been overly impressed so far.

As for Bacuna, if nothing else we now know we have a genuine alternative to Lowton at RB.     

And to think after the Liverpool game some were writing off Bacuna.

[PaulTheVillan]

I really couldn't work Tonev out on Saturday. It was almost like he'd been told to shoot whenever he got the ball. He also played in almost the exact role that would have suited Brett Holman- and with much less effect on the game.

Some of Lambert's signings from last summer turned out to be slow burners and improved as the season went on.  I'm hoping Tonev will turn out to be in this category, because I must say I haven't been overly impressed so far.

As for Bacuna, if nothing else we now know we have a genuine alternative to Lowton at RB.     

And to think after the Liverpool game some were writing off Bacuna.

I'm not sure where he was supposed to have played v Liverpool.

[dekko]

I'm not sure where he was supposed to have played v Liverpool.

CM (where he wasn't that good) until Lowton got subbed off.  Then he moved to RB and looked pretty handy.

[paul_e]

The market we are shopping in will have more misses than hits.

will it?

Probability suggests so, yes. That's not to say PL is doing a bad job but in reality we cannot expect every signing to come off.

I also think it'll become harder as we improve as there'll be less opportunities for the fringe players to play and prove themselves.

"More misses than hits"? - probability actually suggests 50:50, in totally random slections.
They are not random: PL has shown in his first 12 months or so that he can select more hits than misses: of the ones he's bought so far, which ones have been given enough pitch-time to show that they are complete duffers?

"More misses than hits" and "50/50" are both factually correct, each individual is 50/50 but that doesn't mean that picking up 100 young players will give you 50 good and 50 bad, if it did everyone would just do a Parma and sign half the kids in their city.

Given that both are true you can't bring probability into it, uncertainty is a far more important concept here, if we do our research and target players based on measurable skills, which seems to the way Lambert does his business, then we limit the uncertainty to being about mental adaptation rather than technical ability.  By doing that, so long as the 'data collection' is valid and suitable (i.e. we've got good scouts) then we move well into a more hits than misses situation.  The current record suggests that we're doing things right so it's fair to assume that 5-6 of the new guys will turn out well, which is roughly in line with last season.

From last year there's only really Bennett and possibly KEA with question marks, Benteke, Lowton, Westwood and Sylla are universally accepted as being good signings who strengthened the squad and Vlaar has mostly turned people round now after a few iffy performances last season.

[Dante Lavelli]

The market we are shopping in will have more misses than hits.

will it?

Probability suggests so, yes. That's not to say PL is doing a bad job but in reality we cannot expect every signing to come off.

I also think it'll become harder as we improve as there'll be less opportunities for the fringe players to play and prove themselves.

"More misses than hits"? - probability actually suggests 50:50, in totally random slections.
They are not random: PL has shown in his first 12 months or so that he can select more hits than misses: of the ones he's bought so far, which ones have been given enough pitch-time to show that they are complete duffers?

"More misses than hits" and "50/50" are both factually correct, each individual is 50/50 but that doesn't mean that picking up 100 young players will give you 50 good and 50 bad, if it did everyone would just do a Parma and sign half the kids in their city.

Given that both are true you can't bring probability into it, uncertainty is a far more important concept here, if we do our research and target players based on measurable skills, which seems to the way Lambert does his business, then we limit the uncertainty to being about mental adaptation rather than technical ability.  By doing that, so long as the 'data collection' is valid and suitable (i.e. we've got good scouts) then we move well into a more hits than misses situation.  The current record suggests that we're doing things right so it's fair to assume that 5-6 of the new guys will turn out well, which is roughly in line with last season.

From last year there's only really Bennett and possibly KEA with question marks, Benteke, Lowton, Westwood and Sylla are universally accepted as being good signings who strengthened the squad and Vlaar has mostly turned people round now after a few iffy performances last season.

Good post Paul e.  I do think there is a third dimension of supply and demand, well price which should be factored in.  By this I mean that the players we are generally buying are very cheap so they must have a question mark against there ability somewhere, whether that is age, the league they've come from, or skill levels.  For example a player can look quick when watching third division football/polish but less so when tested against premier league players.

I agree completely with you and the other posters that Lambert's scouting and research reduces this risk but the context he watches the players means he cannot be certain they'll succeed (beyond just the mental aspect you rightly identify).

[Mister E]

... the context he watches the players means he cannot be certain they'll succeed (beyond just the mental aspect you rightly identify).

And most enlightened coaches believe that the mental aspect is most important; it's not 'just' as an afterthought.

That's why the "more misses than hits" comment is such an interesting one to discuss.

[onje_villa]

Thought he showed promise in the second half tonight. I was impressed with his confidence, he looks to be quite a burly character and ran his socks off. Put in a couple of good balls along with Albrighton and doesn't suffer from the physical frailty of some of our other players.

[Dante Lavelli]

Thought he showed promise in the second half tonight. I was impressed with his confidence, he looks to be quite a burly character and ran his socks off. Put in a couple of good balls along with Albrighton and doesn't suffer from the physical frailty of some of our other players.

I hope he comes good as he seems to have the right ingredients to really compliment Delph and Westwood in a midfield 3.

[fredm]

Don't think his ball control and mental awareness is quick enough for midfield at the present time.  Is too way off the pace.  Perhaps with half a season under his belt he improves and, as with all the others, he has youth on his side.

[paul_e]

... the context he watches the players means he cannot be certain they'll succeed (beyond just the mental aspect you rightly identify).

And most enlightened coaches believe that the mental aspect is most important; it's not 'just' as an afterthought.

That's why the "more misses than hits" comment is such an interesting one to discuss.

I'm not really sure why you've highlighted just in that way, or really what the point of your post is but just in case I'll clarify:

take 100 random people from the street and you may get 1 who has the technical ability or potential to play professional football.  Do the same with 100 14 year olds who all have youth terms with top flight clubs and you're increasing the amount who have the technical skills.  Go further buy players who are playing professionally and are well regarded in their league for having good technical skills and you get much closer to 100% in terms of technical ability.  Only at that point does mental aptitude become important.  So yes, for a professional coach, dealing with professional football players the mental aspect is key, that's because the technical 'filtering' has largely already happened when the players get to them.

Dante: Cost is mostly a combination of the 2, with a bit of reputation thrown in.

[Mister E]

... the context he watches the players means he cannot be certain they'll succeed (beyond just the mental aspect you rightly identify).

And most enlightened coaches believe that the mental aspect is most important; it's not 'just' as an afterthought.

That's why the "more misses than hits" comment is such an interesting one to discuss.

I'm not really sure why you've highlighted just in that way, or really what the point of your post is but just in case I'll clarify:

take 100 random people from the street and you may get 1 who has the technical ability or potential to play professional football.  Do the same with 100 14 year olds who all have youth terms with top flight clubs and you're increasing the amount who have the technical skills.  Go further buy players who are playing professionally and are well regarded in their league for having good technical skills and you get much closer to 100% in terms of technical ability.  Only at that point does mental aptitude become important.  So yes, for a professional coach, dealing with professional football players the mental aspect is key, that's because the technical 'filtering' has largely already happened when the players get to them.

Dante: Cost is mostly a combination of the 2, with a bit of reputation thrown in.

My point - commenting on Dante's post - was the one you rehashed: in the context of pro football selection, the mental aspect is key.