Interesting piece on the value of defenders

[Bruce Wayne]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...hy-are-defenders-becoming-more-expensive.html

Interesting article here looking at the value of defenders to a team, which I thought was quite pertinent given our own troubles at the back this season. Three things from it stood out for me.

1) Strikers get sold for much more, therefore it would make financial sense to focus the academy on producing good strikers than good defenders. We seem to have done the opposite in recent times, with a number of decent defenders and midfielders, but not many strikers (see the difference in fee between Vic and Duffy for instance).

2) It also reinforced how defending is increasingly a team activity. Barca popularised the press very high up the pitch, so if the ball even got through to the defence, then the team had failed. In that kind of scenario, the defenders are almost as much attack starters as they are the last line of defence, with the strikers and attacking midfield players charged with doing much more to stop the opposition attacking at source.

3) The number of goals conceded as a result of losing possession in our own half. The Chelsea goal after Besic's poor back-heel being a prime example. Really emphasises the importance of our defenders being good on the ball.

Anyway, I thought it was an interesting read and worth checking out over your morning cuppa.

 

[Durham Toffee]

Looks like a great article and really drills down to the issue. When considering the domestic game in England, defenders are sold for a comparatively low price.

I wonder if there are leagues in Europe where that evens out and, as such, there is emphasis put on all areas.

I'd say Bundesliga defenders are probably high value domestically...

 

[Walken]

On point 3 I'd say in our system it is or will become essential that at least one CH is good on the ball, not just in terms of conceding goals, but in how effective we become in possession. It puts untold pressure on barry and mccarthy when jags and distin cannot bring the ball out, as I've stated elsewhere when a CH is good enough to seize an opportunity to carry the ball, it commits opposition players, effects their shape, so once the ball reaches our own midfield we are no longer faced with a team in a perfect defensive position, and thats were all our side to side passing comes from. Weve seen the evolution of full backs, and the way football is moving we will see it in center halves too, no more of this 'they are defenders first' nonsense, they are going to have to be footballers first. It's also why I believe Stones should play.

 

[ilikecheese]

On point 3 I'd say in our system it is or will become essential that at least one CH is good on the ball, not just in terms of conceding goals, but in how effective we become in possession. It puts untold pressure on barry and mccarthy when jags and distin cannot bring the ball out, as I've stated elsewhere when a CH is good enough to seize an opportunity to carry the ball, it commits opposition players, effects their shape, so once the ball reaches our own midfield we are no longer faced with a team in a perfect defensive position, and thats were all our side to side passing comes from. Weve seen the evolution of full backs, and the way football is moving we will see it in center halves too, no more of this 'they are defenders first' nonsense, they are going to have to be footballers first. It's also why I believe Stones should play.

Cue John Stones...

 

[Durham Toffee]

On point 3 I'd say in our system it is or will become essential that at least one CH is good on the ball, not just in terms of conceding goals, but in how effective we become in possession. It puts untold pressure on barry and mccarthy when jags and distin cannot bring the ball out, as I've stated elsewhere when a CH is good enough to seize an opportunity to carry the ball, it commits opposition players, effects their shape, so once the ball reaches our own midfield we are no longer faced with a team in a perfect defensive position, and thats were all our side to side passing comes from. Weve seen the evolution of full backs, and the way football is moving we will see it in center halves too, no more of this 'they are defenders first' nonsense, they are going to have to be footballers first. It's also why I believe Stones should play.

Agreeing.

You look at some of the better defenders in the world right now and they are very controlled and comfortable on the ball. They can ping a pass and make some quick technical decisions without any panic setting in. Their defending still remains solid, but they do lack a little "grit" I would say. However, with an evolving game, it's looking more likely that a good technical defender will be far more useful to a squad than a guy who can put you into Row Z, but is unlikely to be able to play out of danger.

David Luiz is one such player - but we all saw how much that failed him whenever he played against teams that retained their shape and played quite stoically against a rampaging run. It meant that the risks he took often saw him out of position rather than committing opposition players. We saw how Germany remained solid in exploiting this.

Puyol was more reserved and thus, better at that type of run. If he didn't have opposition players drawn towards him, he'd soon abandon the ball, ping a pass and retreat back.

Technical defenders like that have got to possess a good awareness of risk. They have to have a hubris balance - something that allows them to bomb forward confidently without plowing into a ridiculous gamble. That requires such quick thinking and good intelligence.

 

[degsy]

On point 3 I'd say in our system it is or will become essential that at least one CH is good on the ball, not just in terms of conceding goals, but in how effective we become in possession. It puts untold pressure on barry and mccarthy when jags and distin cannot bring the ball out, as I've stated elsewhere when a CH is good enough to seize an opportunity to carry the ball, it commits opposition players, effects their shape, so once the ball reaches our own midfield we are no longer faced with a team in a perfect defensive position, and thats were all our side to side passing comes from. Weve seen the evolution of full backs, and the way football is moving we will see it in center halves too, no more of this 'they are defenders first' nonsense, they are going to have to be footballers first. It's also why I believe Stones should play.

I agree

 

[Zatara]

I now know that Brad Pitt invented moneyball.

Seriously though, interesting in pieces, I think the ball playing defender has always commanded a large fee though -- see Rio Ferdinand (a decade ago?).

As others have said, Stones should play.

 

[polish]

Great article.

 

[davek]

I dont get it. The argument is that defenders are accounting for a higher proportion of team expenditure now. The table and graph they produce actually shows the trend going down for years with only a huge spike upwards this season.

I'd hardly call that conclusive evidence of a shift in thinking, more an aberration. Probably due to a one off year where a glut of defensive players at top clubs have come to the end of their careers and needed replacing.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I dont get it. The argument is that defenders are accounting for a higher proportion of team expenditure now. The table and graph they produce actually shows the trend going down for years with only a huge spike upwards this season.

I'd hardly call that conclusive evidence of a shift in thinking, more an aberration. Probably due to a one off year where a glut of defensive players at top clubs have come to the end of their careers and needed replacing.

I think it was more saying that defenders tend to be under-valued, and hence go for lower fees than strikers, despite evidence suggesting they have a greater impact upon how many points a club earns than strikers do.

It then went on to suggest why that might be so, with the lack of clear metric to determine how good a defender is, whereas strikers have goals per game as a measure, defenders have no such thing. It used the example of Lyon spending most of their transfer money on defenders, and bringing strikers through their academy.

That was my take anyway.

 

[davek]

I think it was more saying that defenders tend to be under-valued, and hence go for lower fees than strikers, despite evidence suggesting they have a greater impact upon how many points a club earns than strikers do.

It then went on to suggest why that might be so, with the lack of clear metric to determine how good a defender is, whereas strikers have goals per game as a measure, defenders have no such thing. It used the example of Lyon spending most of their transfer money on defenders, and bringing strikers through their academy.

That was my take anyway.

Football is primarily a spectacle and people want to see attacking play and goals. Strikers are at a premium, therefore. I get the objective point about points value of clean sheet v goals scored, but the football industry can be pretty illogical.

 

[Eggs]

.....in yesteryear most full backs were failed wingers. It generally meant they had a bit of quality on the ball and pace. I think this applied to greats like Ray Wilson and Tommy Wright and is probably still worth a consideration. Lets not forget that in more recent times Ian Snodin came as a midfielder but was on the verge of an England call up at FB when his hamstring dilemma started. Tony Hibbert was also a defensive midfielder in a very good EFC Youth Team.

Point I'm making is that there might be value out there for a shrewd coach.

 

[Walken]

I think it was more saying that defenders tend to be under-valued, and hence go for lower fees than strikers, despite evidence suggesting they have a greater impact upon how many points a club earns than strikers do.

It then went on to suggest why that might be so, with the lack of clear metric to determine how good a defender is, whereas strikers have goals per game as a measure, defenders have no such thing. It used the example of Lyon spending most of their transfer money on defenders, and bringing strikers through their academy.

That was my take anyway.

I don't think defenders are undervalued, just the skill set required of a striker or a match winning CM is far rarer and far more technical, so therefor they are more expenisve, that's also why all the most expensive defenders are technical players. The likes of jags and shawcross, theres plenty of them about, with discipline, coaching and some athletic prowess, being a center halve isn't really all that difficult, compared with top class technical players in a number 10 role, or strikers, to get to the top those positions require far more natural gifts, and some real confidence and bravery on the ball

 

[bluemangroup]

I don't think defenders are undervalued, just the skill set required of a striker or a match winning CM is far rarer and far more technical, so therefor they are more expenisve, that's also why all the most expensive defenders are technical players. The likes of jags and shawcross, theres plenty of them about, with discipline, coaching and some athletic prowess, being a center halve isn't really all that difficult, compared with top class technical players in a number 10 role, or strikers, to get to the top those positions require far more natural gifts, and some real confidence and bravery on the ball

I just think there is less emphasis in this league definitely on technical ability, but you still should be a good defender in our system. David Luiz is one of the most technically gifted CBs in the game but he can't defend for shiznit. A balance should be struck.

 

[Walken]

I just think there is less emphasis in this league definitely on technical ability, but you still should be a good defender in our system. David Luiz is one of the most technically gifted CBs in the game but he can't defend for shiznit. A balance should be struck.

which is why in general we produce yard dogs and can't get any effective possession at international level, of course they should be able to defend, they should also not be terrified of having a football at their feet, and david luiz is not the yard stick for a technically gifted defender