Ollie Watkins

[Smirker]

He's scored 87 in 223 ( 1 in 2.5) and 36 assists. Smirker you have a blind spot on this one if you think that isn't good. Can you or anyone else think of someone who is also deemed ''not good'' with a similar or better record?

It's not. That's why you had to add the assists. If the goal record was good you wouldn't have done it.

He's had one good season of goalscoring. The rest are average at best.

People add the asissts because ignoring them is really weird when it's a core part of his game.

The discussion was about goals, and people smush assists into it because they know his goal record isn't good enough. He's our main striker. His job primarily is to score goals as it is for all strikers.

[Monty]

He's scored 87 in 223 ( 1 in 2.5) and 36 assists. Smirker you have a blind spot on this one if you think that isn't good. Can you or anyone else think of someone who is also deemed ''not good'' with a similar or better record?

It's not. That's why you had to add the assists. If the goal record was good you wouldn't have done it.

He's had one good season of goalscoring. The rest are average at best.

People add the asissts because ignoring them is really weird when it's a core part of his game.

The discussion was about goals, and people smush assists into it because they know his goal record isn't good enough. He's our main striker. His job primarily is to score goals as it is for all strikers.

Smirker, lord love you and all, but this is Lawrenson-level simplistic.

[PeterWithesShin]

I honestly think Smirker, and others, believe that 105 goals and 0 assists in 200 games is better than 86 goals and 35 assists in 200 games.

[paul_e]

He's scored 87 in 223 ( 1 in 2.5) and 36 assists. Smirker you have a blind spot on this one if you think that isn't good. Can you or anyone else think of someone who is also deemed ''not good'' with a similar or better record?

It's not. That's why you had to add the assists. If the goal record was good you wouldn't have done it.

He's had one good season of goalscoring. The rest are average at best.

People add the asissts because ignoring them is really weird when it's a core part of his game.

The discussion was about goals, and people smush assists into it because they know his goal record isn't good enough. He's our main striker. His job primarily is to score goals as it is for all strikers.

No it wasn't it was about why he's worth more than £40m. Just because you assign absolutely no value to a huge part of his game doesn't mean the rest of us have to ignore it to indulge your silly opinion.

[Olneythelonely]

Ollie is Yakubu/Beattie/Viduka/Philips level. You wouldn't describe any of those as world class and yet Ollie had been described as such plenty of times. That's just daft.

Ollie is decent for a top 7 PL side but he is not a top striker. If you want to win or at least challenge for honours, you need better.

You said he wasn’t good. Now the argument is that he’s not world class or “top”. Don’t get me wrong, I also want our players to be better, but I’d probably start looking at about 7/8 other positions first.

Presumably, we need better than most of our players if we want to win or challenge for honours? Given that you don’t think we’ve done that with Watkins.

[Clampy]

He's scored 87 in 223 ( 1 in 2.5) and 36 assists. Smirker you have a blind spot on this one if you think that isn't good. Can you or anyone else think of someone who is also deemed ''not good'' with a similar or better record?

It's not. That's why you had to add the assists. If the goal record was good you wouldn't have done it.

He's had one good season of goalscoring. The rest are average at best.

People add the asissts because ignoring them is really weird when it's a core part of his game.

The discussion was about goals, and people smush assists into it because they know his goal record isn't good enough. He's our main striker. His job primarily is to score goals as it is for all strikers.

So we should ignore all his assists? That really is very silly

[Olneythelonely]

I honestly think Smirker, and others, believe that 105 goals and 0 assists in 200 games is better than 86 goals and 35 assists in 200 games.

It’s simple. Buy a better finisher to score 105 in 200 games, then buy better players elsewhere to make up the difference in assists. Our scouts are sleeping on the job.

[PaulWinch again]

The argument isn’t about goals in isolation Smirker, because most modern forwards need to do more. This is about his level as a forward, and goals, assists, and general play are all crucial to that. It’s no coincidence all your comparisons played the game at a different time, the game is very different now.

[Clampy]

I think we can all agree that he should score more than he does but for someone to suggest that his assists paper over the cracks is laughable and I'd further suggest, that person doesn't know much about football.

[PeterWithesShin]

And the one that did play for us scored 4 in 23 PL games.

[Smirker]

What does he have a longstanding, proven record of? It certainly isn't goalscoring, he's had one good season in 5 in that regard.

Read on from here. The discussion was about goalscoring.

[Somniloquism]

Seems you only want it to be about goal scoring. Everyone else sees the bigger picture. You also state last season was his "only" good season for that yet facts show his goals per minute played was even better last season, even with us losing a large source of creation for Ollie in Bailey's form dropping off a cliff.

[Monty]

What does he have a longstanding, proven record of? It certainly isn't goalscoring, he's had one good season in 5 in that regard.

Read on from here. The discussion was about goalscoring.

Everyone else was talking about his valuation.

[Ian.]

He's scored 87 in 223 ( 1 in 2.5) and 36 assists. Smirker you have a blind spot on this one if you think that isn't good. Can you or anyone else think of someone who is also deemed ''not good'' with a similar or better record?

It's not. That's why you had to add the assists. If the goal record was good you wouldn't have done it.

He's had one good season of goalscoring. The rest are average at best.

Pundits always talk about Salah’s assists, as they do when they compare Messi and Ronaldo.

[Smirker]

Seems you only want it to be about goal scoring. Everyone else sees the bigger picture. You also state last season was his "only" good season for that yet facts show his goals per minute played was even better last season, even with us losing a large source of creation for Ollie in Bailey's form dropping off a cliff.

I didn't say that. It was a poor season for that. I would never have said it was good. You must have misread.