2020/21 James Rodriguez

[Egil Olsen]

It is a risk, but one worth taking. They have given us more than we have lost. Our squad will improve. This isn't FIFA. You build a team over a few years.

Ok, then we agree it's a risk. It's not FIFA? Exactly. It takes time to build a competitive squad, and therefore it is foolish to invest in players who are not here in 2-3 years, and who are exposed to injuries, and have already peaked.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

I agree. JR has some qualities that no one else in Everton has. But you yourself mention the big problem. He plays too little, and there is nothing to indicate that he will start playing more games. His injury history tells the most, and it does not go in the right direction. PL is the most intensive league in the world, so how do you manage to turn this around?

Ideally we would be able to manage his game time and role via squad depth and James being prepared to not be an automatic starter when fit. There have been some games where I'd love to have him coming off the bench to make the difference in the last twenty minutes. Unfortunately that's a luxury we don't have.

 

[trueblue84]

Ok, then we agree it's a risk. It's not FIFA? Exactly. It takes time to build a competitive squad, and therefore it is foolish to invest in players who are not here in 2-3 years, and who are exposed to injuries, and have already peaked.

Rodriguez was a free transfer and is easily the best quality signing we could've made, given that we finished 12th last season. Who would you have signed instead of him?

 

[Egil Olsen]

So, would you rather we just didn't have him at Everton?

No, when he's here we have to get as much out of him as possible. He has some extreme skills, and we must use them. But I disagree with the strategy of buying player profiles like him. Now can you answer my question?

 

[Egil Olsen]

Rodriguez was a free transfer and is easily the best quality signing we could've made, given that we finished 12th last season. Who would you have signed instead of him?

Free or not, he takes his share of the pie. The last 6 seasons we have a median position of 9-10 place, and we can quickly end up in 8-9 place this season. So we'll have to wait and see. I would look at player profiles aged 22 - 26.

 

[arbok]

To be fair I think it's a valid argument. Personally I love him, he's been pretty much the only thing I've enjoyed about our play for the majority of the season and I just love seeing players who can do the things he does. I can totally see the other side of the coin though. He is a bit of a non-entity defensively, and I can understand the argument that he causes more problems than he solves. He's a joy to watch, but maybe it's right that he doesn't actually help us become a better team, I don't know.

I thought last night was the perfect case of James answering his critics... Carlo said he wanted to find more balance in the team, and he got it right last night. I think James was in the team when they played Newcastle and Fulham and we played poor (I don't remember), but I think people were wondering if we were short a player on defense.

I'll give you that he's not the best defensive forward out there, because he probably doesn't have the engine for it for the English game. But nobody is defending with 10 men on the pitch, and I thought last night it was a good case of Carlo and James getting the balance right in the team. The game plan wasn't wrong but they got the subs wrong.

I don't think James is the problem at all, he actually solves the problem of creativity we've been missing for the last few weeks. And they solved the minor deficiencies James has on defence with wingbacks that were more defensive, which also gave the midfield more numbers when needed as well. Godfrey was way out of position for their goal.

 

[wandyr79]

No, when he's here we have to get as much out of him as possible. He has some extreme skills, and we must use them. But I disagree with the strategy of buying player profiles like him. Now can you answer my question?

Signing any player is a risk, that is a fact. Regardless of age, quality, previous injury record.

I would say James, on a free is on the lower scale of risk and is a decent strategy when you consider the profile that he brings to the club. The next big thing may take time to consider us, knowing that we are attractive to higher profile players. For me that kind of attraction along with the obvious quality he has on the pitch lowers the risk factor.

 

[Lanolin]

I thought last night was the perfect case of James answering his critics... Carlo said he wanted to find more balance in the team, and he got it right last night. I think James was in the team when they played Newcastle and Fulham and we played poor (I don't remember), but I think people were wondering if we were short a player on defense.

I'll give you that he's not the best defensive forward out there, because he probably doesn't have the engine for it for the English game. But nobody is defending with 10 men on the pitch, and I thought last night it was a good case of Carlo and James getting the balance right in the team. The game plan wasn't wrong but they got the subs wrong.

I don't think James is the problem at all, he actually solves the problem of creativity we've been missing for the last few weeks. And they solved the minor deficiencies James has on defence with wingbacks that were more defensive, which also gave the midfield more numbers when needed as well. Godfrey was way out of position for their goal.

No I agree with you mate. I'm not saying I think he's a problem, just that I don't necessarily think it's ridiculous to suggest he could be in the long run. I do understand the argument that players like him don't have a place in modern PL football, even if I don't agree with it.

 

[Egil Olsen]

Signing any player is a risk, that is a fact. Regardless of age, quality, previous injury record.

I would say James, on a free is on the lower scale of risk and is a decent strategy when you consider the profile that he brings to the club. The next big thing may take time to consider us, knowing that we are attractive to higher profile players. For me that kind of attraction along with the obvious quality he has on the pitch lowers the risk factor.

Yes, agree. But you can reduce that risk by analyzing relevant factors. This is good scouting, and data-driven models have their place. The injury history of JR is well known, the intensity in PL is well known. A rational question is whether we should give a player with this injury history and in such an intensive league as PL a central role in the team?

 

[TheBigIguana]

29, 29, 27, 22.

I would hardly call those over the hill. And given that the alternatives are Davies and Delph, I would definitely say they were worth it

If you just look at their ages maybe but none have stayed healthy and the two oldest have missed serious time with at least two different injuries.

 

[little elfin]

 

[neil999]

Those crossfield balls to Digne, why can no other player in the team do this?!

 

[royston1878]

Peach of a goal, postage stamp where he could put that ball and he did it with his weaker foot, proper class.

 

[Saint Domingo]

Those crossfield balls to Digne, why can no other player in the team do this?!

No other player can pass it five yards without taking an age to do it.

 

[Egil Olsen]

Just want to say in the end, that I think JR is a very good player. Of course I hope I'm wrong, and I hope JR leads Everton to success. This is more about Everton's strategy than JR as a footballer. Thanks for the discussion, now I'm going to football practice.