Naismith 3 year extention

[blue4eva77]

And what is that? Third highest scorer at his club for two consecutive seasons?

A professional footballer who has played as a forward and striker for his career. It's expected of him to be able to slot.

 

[Tubey]

good popcorning, cahill had his limitations for sure, he was a better footballer and athlete than naismith though, a better version in general

Not popcorning - they are similar types of players, even if Cahill is obviously the superior one all round. Cahill wasn't a technical footballer at all, but his movement was top drawer and he had the knack of being in the right positions by playing the shadow striker role; just like Naismith.

Evertonians underrate Naismith - his work rate is often an asset and he's got a good footballing brain. Not a starter for me, no, but an excellent squad player.

 

[blue4eva77]

Don't know for sure but hasn't he got about 10 goals this season ? Thats more than barkley sterling coutinho or fabregas.I don't really understand how scoring goals can be brushed off as unimportant

Not brushing it off.

I'm simply saying Naismith does not belong in our first 11 and certainly not as a #10. I want my # 10 to be able to create, be able to link the midfield and forward lines together, bring others into play... Naismith can do none of these. He doesn't have the footballing brain and ability to play in this position.

 

[Tubey]

Don't know for sure but hasn't he got about 10 goals this season ? Thats more than barkley sterling coutinho or fabregas.I don't really understand how scoring goals can be brushed off as unimportant

Tim Cahill only got more than 10 goals a season once during his time here, yet is idolised (rightfully).

Naismith is a shadow striker in the same mold. He does well by getting almost 1 in 4 - the same return as Cahill had over his spell here. I don't necessarily care if he can hold the ball up, as that isn't what he's meant to be doing; he's supposed to be playing off the forward and making a nuisance of himself offensively and defensively, and he does that well.

 

[Tubey]

Not brushing it off.

I'm simply saying Naismith does not belong in our first 11 and certainly not as a #10. I want my # 10 to be able to create, be able to link the midfield and forward lines together, bring others into play... Naismith can do none of these. He doesn't have the footballing brain and ability to play in this position.

It depends entirely on what system you play. If you go early to the striker and play off him, you don't need the type of number ten you describe - you need a shadow striker.

If you pass through the middle, then you need the Barkley type who will hold the ball, look for the pass or drive into space and so on (which he'll get better at over the next two years, I'm convinced of it).

I don't see the harm in having both types of players in a squad, especially if both types of player are both good at what they do and effective in offering a Plan A & B.

 

[Walken]

Not popcorning - they are similar types of players, even if Cahill is obviously the superior one all round. Cahill wasn't a technical footballer at all, but his movement was top drawer and he had the knack of being in the right positions by playing the shadow striker role; just like Naismith.

Evertonians underrate Naismith - his work rate is often an asset and he's got a good footballing brain. Not a starter for me, no, but an excellent squad player.

fair enough tubes, as you say though cahill was superior, so the comparison doesn't stand for me, certainly not in terms of the games he has started this season, often at the expense of the teams shape. I would term naismith as a useful squad man, but when he becomes the first name on the team sheet as he appeared to be for some time, I don't thinks thats progressive, and the improved energy and balance in his absence is notable, for all his work rate he not a tremendous athlete

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

Evertonians underrate Naismith - his work rate is often an asset and he's got a good footballing brain. Not a starter for me, no, but an excellent squad player.

Agreed

 

[Tubey]

fair enough tubes, as you say though cahill was superior, so the comparison doesn't stand for me, certainly not in terms of the games he has started this season, often at the expense of the teams shape. I would term naismith as a useful squad man, but when he becomes the first name on the team sheet as he appeared to be for some time, I don't thinks thats progressive, and the improved energy and balance in his absence is notable, for all his work rate he not a tremendous athlete

Doesn't need to be; he just has to have a sharp brain to know what space to move into and when.

Cahill had the athleticism to make his aerial prowess count towards his movement, so he scored headers too. Naismith does the same exact thing, but without that aerial ability.

I think rather than scapegoat Naismith, we need another centre forward that will work with him. Barkley/Lukaku are both out of form generally, but I know for sure that partnership will work when we're playing fluidly as a team again. But we also need a "battering ram" partnership for when teams push us high and interrupt our passing game. Lukaku has proven time and time again that he can't be relied on to hold the play up, so we need someone like Kone but not ultra gash who can take a ball in and have Naismith play off him.

I think Martinez identified that need with Traore, strangely enough, but that didn't work out.

 

[meagher94]

Wouldn't let him go unless someone offered more than he's worth. We need rid of the deadwood more than players like Naismith.

 

[Eric Djemba-Djemba]

A lot of people on here are saying he's not good enough for a team with ambitions to finish in the top 4.Thats fair comment. Does that mean we can also say coleman baines Jagielka mirallas pienaar and barkley aren't good enough for the club . They've all got history of finishing outside the top 4

No.

 

[Furey1878]

8 goals (plus he's had a few that were awarded as OGs) is a good return considering he's played pretty much the whole of the 2nd half of the season on the left.

 

[blue4eva77]

It depends entirely on what system you play. If you go early to the striker and play off him, you don't need the type of number ten you describe - you need a shadow striker.

If you pass through the middle, then you need the Barkley type who will hold the ball, look for the pass or drive into space and so on (which he'll get better at over the next two years, I'm convinced of it).

I don't see the harm in having both types of players in a squad, especially if both types of player are both good at what they do and effective in offering a Plan A & B.

Our game is based on counter attack. Thats where we are most effective and dangerous. To play the counter attack well, you need players who can run with the ball and have a much wider ability to pick out the pass. Thats why the likes of Mirallas, Barkley and now Lennon are dangerous on the counter as they can all run at pace with the ball, have the ability to unlock a defence.

So many times Naismith has ended a good break because he can't run with the ball, is too slow in his decision making with the ball and most importantly, is woeful at passing to a team mate.

 

[Tubey]

Our game is based on counter attack. Thats where we are most effective and dangerous. To play the counter attack well, you need players who can run with the ball and have a much wider ability to pick out the pass. Thats why the likes of Mirallas, Barkley and now Lennon are dangerous on the counter as they can all run at pace with the ball, have the ability to unlock a defence.

So many times Naismith has ended a good break because he can't run with the ball, is too slow in his decision making with the ball and most importantly, is woeful at passing to a team mate.

You also need players who can find space, run off the ball and score important goals against stubborn defences.

Naismith has started 12 games as a shadow striker this season and scored 5 goals, including against Manchester City, Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Dynamo Kiev.

Hardly woeful to me.

 

[Walken]

Doesn't need to be; he just has to have a sharp brain to know what space to move into and when.

Cahill had the athleticism to make his aerial prowess count towards his movement, so he scored headers too. Naismith does the same exact thing, but without that aerial ability.

I think rather than scapegoat Naismith, we need another centre forward that will work with him. Barkley/Lukaku are both out of form generally, but I know for sure that partnership will work when we're playing fluidly as a team again. But we also need a "battering ram" partnership for when teams push us high and interrupt our passing game. Lukaku has proven time and time again that he can't be relied on to hold the play up, so we need someone like Kone but not ultra gash who can take a ball in and have Naismith play off him.

I think Martinez identified that need with Traore, strangely enough, but that didn't work out.

possibly, martinez'z evolution as a manager could be defined by how he uses these players, he has undoubtedly misused his squad this season for me, I personally think Lukaku is essential but that's another argument, if martinez can alter his selection and tactics to get the best out of squad members like naismith, barry etc, rather than turning them into a negitive then he may well still be the man for the job, some very big questions to be answered next season

 

[blue4eva77]

You also need players who can find space, run off the ball and score important goals against stubborn defences.

Naismith has started 12 games as a shadow striker this season and scored 5 goals, including against Manchester City, Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Dynamo Kiev.

Hardly woeful to me.

There is certain things in a player you can over look as they bring others to the table to compensate. He might not be the most technical of players but then i appreciate his work rate.

The one thing that cannot be over looked and is probably the most important attribute to have as a footballer, is passing. He is absolutely woeful at passing. Its pretty much non-existent.