It’s Mike H.
I can’t hate facts that much seeing as I’m reeling them off in here mush.
- Status
It’s Mike H.
I can’t hate facts that much seeing as I’m reeling them off in here mush.
Carlito
Player Valuation: £40m
I'll never understand why Koeman was so obsessed with bringing in the least Dutch-like attacking midfielder imaginable.
If Brands is the Paul Atreides character that everyone makes him out to be, he'll surely conclude that the cost of building a functioning team around Sigurdsson would far outweigh whatever hit would have to be taken by selling him.
If Brands is the Paul Atreides character that everyone makes him out to be, he'll surely conclude that the cost of building a functioning team around Sigurdsson would far outweigh whatever hit would have to be taken by selling him.
...I like this fella, but I think it was the City game where we looked reasonably balanced and busy when he was left out. Sometimes a manager stumbles on a selection that works because the players compliment each other. I suppose the downside of that game was the lack of creativity and chances, but perhaps the formation is worth another go.
evertonarntwe
Player Valuation: £35m
then he got brought straight back into the team next game, disappeared and we lost again
sounds about right
blueconverse
Player Valuation: £35m
K mikeh
He's not a bad player. However, he requires a very, very specific set up to work. We do not have that setup at Everton. So he's a bad player for Everton.
It would take too much money and time to get that set up together at Everton. He has never proven his quality at the top level to justify even trying, and added to that he's 30 next season.
In any other system, he's a liability rather than an asset. He's not good enough to play for a top six side, and he's too expensive for sides below us or for most clubs abroad who would possibly be interested in him.
Therefore, to summarise, here's all of the outcomes below:
The other possible solution is to have him as a 'super sub' hoping for a screamer in the last 20 minutes to get us in a game, but for the wages he's on and, yes, the transfer fee he commanded, that simply isn't going to happen.
It would take too much money and time to get that set up together at Everton. He has never proven his quality at the top level to justify even trying, and added to that he's 30 next season.
In any other system, he's a liability rather than an asset. He's not good enough to play for a top six side, and he's too expensive for sides below us or for most clubs abroad who would possibly be interested in him.
Therefore, to summarise, here's all of the outcomes below:
- He was a bad signing, because he wasn't bought for any kind of plan - he was bought because stats said so without any context for how those stats actually came about. It was an elaborate panic buy to cover for losing Barkley.
- We can't build a side around him as it's not viable.
- We can't shift him on without a massive loss.
The other possible solution is to have him as a 'super sub' hoping for a screamer in the last 20 minutes to get us in a game, but for the wages he's on and, yes, the transfer fee he commanded, that simply isn't going to happen.
But spreadsheets say he’s boss and we’d be relegated without his 4 consolation goals.
Scored a quarter of Evertons goals this season, but he's damaging to the bigger picture.
Just like Lukaku was, right?...
Honestly...
Just like Lukaku was, right?...
Honestly...
The interesting thing with the stats is that it shows how non-malleable he is. He's doing a job but not the job that's needed for what we're doing.
That's why I don't call him a playmaker, because a playmaker "makes play" - Sigurdsson doesn't; he relies on others making him play.
In a very specific team, he'd be very good. But he still wouldn't be an elite level player - not even close - so what's the point in persisting with him, because by the time we got the side together to accommodate him, he's 33/34 and we'd be barely nudging the European places in a best case scenario anyway.
I simply feel his fans on here are defending Sigurdsson in theory rather than in practice.
Here's the Walcott ones:
- Southampton (home)
- Arsenal (away)
- Fulham (home)
- Palace (home)
- Chelsea (away) - said at the time tbf this was a hard chance but really all Walcott had to do was take a better touch
- Watford (away)
I'm sure there's more, tbh, those were just the ones I was thinking of.
And well you may be right, but I genuinely think that it's because the alternatives are so poor at actually offering a threat against a decent defence.
Look at the City game. Yeh we battled, but didn't create anything in the first half. We didn't create much after he came on either, but I suppose that's the battle Silva faces.
The players that have come in for most stick recently are Gylfi and Richarlison, who have over half of our goals between them.
Not saying either are playing well atm - they aren't - but it's not helped that they have to play because none of the others offer anything.
Yes mate. Watch us play.
Add to that, Sigurdsson also has no striker/target-man, really in front of him.
The critics never really comment on that...
There's a natural tendency for fans to blame the players' responsible for goals when a team is struggling, as goals obviously win you games. It's a surface level response.
For me personally, that's not a factor when criticising Sigurdsson. It's the reason I don't criticise Richarlison - there's little to criticise; he's out of form, that's it. For Gylfi, my belief is that it's a much deeper issue than form.
He doesn't. That's a massive issue.
But Lukaku wouldn't have solved this issue, much as Lukaku didn't solve Pogba's issues.
Sigurdsson would need a Llorente type striker to do well. But that comes back to what I'm actually saying - Sigurdsson needs a very, very specific set-up to perform. Is it worth even attempting to get that set-up together at this point?
- Status
