Ollie Watkins

[Dave]

What's this 17 in 54? He's scored 16 in 36. 16 the season before that, 19 before that and 15 before that. He's not a 12 a season scorer.

Last season, with the perfectly decent league record warped by one goal in twelve Champions League games.

[PeterWithesShin]

League record is the key for me, it's a consistent format to judge a player especially against their peers. Cup games have a number of variables that while of course we want lots of cup goals they don't tell the story that league goals do.

As an example 10 goals in 4 cup games sounds great. But those games were against Kiddy, Walsall, South Shields and Southend.
2 goals in 12 cup games sounds cack especially in comparison, but maybe there were a bunch of weaker line ups, sub appearances, the games were all against elite sides etc. You don't get that range of variables in a league season year after year.

Exhibit A is Simon Stainrod. from memory he got 11 cup goals one season but only 1 was against a top flight side and that was Oxford.

[RamboandBruno]

From another thread, but perhaps food for thought!

I do the bodybuilding

I back away quietly into the weedy corner

[KevinGage]

21 goals in all competitions from our first choice forward in a successful season. Plus five assists.

A forward who rarely misses games (and as we've seen in other positions, availability is a quality all of its own) despite the heavy workload.

He'll do until we can find a modern version of Emilio Butragueno or Gary Penrice.

With better service or gaps opening up from a speedy new winger or two he might get even better, who knows. 

[Beard82]

I would say in his last 3 or 4 games of the season he was outstanding - against forest he was as good as I have seen a forward play for villa.

[paul_e]

What's this 17 in 54? He's scored 16 in 36. 16 the season before that, 19 before that and 15 before that. He's not a 12 a season scorer.

Last season, with the perfectly decent league record warped by one goal in twelve Champions League games.

Even then that champions league record is slightly misleading because 5 of those were as a sub.

[Smithy]

What's this 17 in 54? He's scored 16 in 36. 16 the season before that, 19 before that and 15 before that. He's not a 12 a season scorer.

Last season, with the perfectly decent league record warped by one goal in twelve Champions League games.

Even then that champions league record is slightly misleading because 5 of those were as a sub.

Yep, after the January, when Asensio and Rashford came in, he was on the bench in the Champions League.

[brontebilly]

What's this 17 in 54? He's scored 16 in 36. 16 the season before that, 19 before that and 15 before that. He's not a 12 a season scorer.

Last season, with the perfectly decent league record warped by one goal in twelve Champions League games.

He could have had twelve that night v Celtic. That's Ollie.

[Somniloquism]

Even his league stats for 24/25 is misleading as he played less minutes that year and when working it out on goals per minutes played, was actually on a better strike rate then the 23/24 season.

[eamonn]

I would say in his last 3 or 4 games of the season he was outstanding - against forest he was as good as I have seen a forward play for villa.

What, even more than Yorkie ?

[Rory]

All comps Benteke was almost a 1 in 2 game goalscorer, 49 goals in 101 appearances in a team that finished 15th, 15th and 17th in his three glorious seasons with us.

I liked Benteke, but he only managed to get into double figures twice in the next seven seasons with Liverpool and Palace, and was basically finished as a PL striker by the time he was Watkins’ age.

Certain players suit certain styles of play. It's why Unai let Malen go, not because he isn't a quality centre forward but because he apparently didn't suit Unai's "structure". Benteke for us could score every type of goal possible, maybe Liverpool just didn't know what to do with him.

I never thought Benteke was all that.

This thread is full of people arguing that good goalscorers often correspond with weaker team performances. But the fact we were shit when he played for us is seen as a positive for Benteke.

He was nothing before he joined us, was good while we were shit, then went on to be shit elsewhere.

Totally overrated, for me.

[ADVILLAFAN]

At his best, Benteke was unplayable. Remember him bullying Manure. Smalling tried to barge him over, bounced off and fell to the floor. Benteke shrugs and then looks up to pick out Albrighton for a goal.

Injuries stopped him from being as good.

[Olneythelonely]

From another thread, but perhaps food for thought!

I do the bodybuilding

You know what they say, “the bigger they are, the harder they criticise one of our best players over the past 3 decades.”

[Percy McCarthy]

All comps Benteke was almost a 1 in 2 game goalscorer, 49 goals in 101 appearances in a team that finished 15th, 15th and 17th in his three glorious seasons with us.

I liked Benteke, but he only managed to get into double figures twice in the next seven seasons with Liverpool and Palace, and was basically finished as a PL striker by the time he was Watkins’ age.

Certain players suit certain styles of play. It's why Unai let Malen go, not because he isn't a quality centre forward but because he apparently didn't suit Unai's "structure". Benteke for us could score every type of goal possible, maybe Liverpool just didn't know what to do with him.

I never thought Benteke was all that.

This thread is full of people arguing that good goalscorers often correspond with weaker team performances. But the fact we were shit when he played for us is seen as a positive for Benteke.

He was nothing before he joined us, was good while we were shit, then went on to be shit elsewhere.

Totally overrated, for me.

I remember bits of the Bent/Benteke debate on here. There was one school of thought that blamed Bent’s demise on us selling his supply line - Young and Downing.

Another school of thought said that showed how limited he was, and that a better player could get goals despite not having the team entirely set up for them to do so. Enter Benteke.

I was in the latter group. I thought Bent (although an accomplished tap-in merchant) made us score less as a team, as he had at Sunderland.

[AV82EC]

All comps Benteke was almost a 1 in 2 game goalscorer, 49 goals in 101 appearances in a team that finished 15th, 15th and 17th in his three glorious seasons with us.

I liked Benteke, but he only managed to get into double figures twice in the next seven seasons with Liverpool and Palace, and was basically finished as a PL striker by the time he was Watkins’ age.

Certain players suit certain styles of play. It's why Unai let Malen go, not because he isn't a quality centre forward but because he apparently didn't suit Unai's "structure". Benteke for us could score every type of goal possible, maybe Liverpool just didn't know what to do with him.

I never thought Benteke was all that.

This thread is full of people arguing that good goalscorers often correspond with weaker team performances. But the fact we were shit when he played for us is seen as a positive for Benteke.

He was nothing before he joined us, was good while we were shit, then went on to be shit elsewhere.

Totally overrated, for me.

All hail the return of the Artist Formerly Known As Stuart 445.

(Only joking Rory.)