Skip to main content

Talentless buffoon

Talentless buffoon

sf said:
End of the day, our tactics require a battering ram up top and Grayson thinks Hugill is our best option for that role (which he is because he's far more mobile than Makienok).
Click to expand...

Yep, and as I said on this thread last night, this is our problem up top at the moment, the competition just isn't there for Hugill.

It's clear that Grayson doesn't see Makienok as a viable alternative for Hugill due to, as you say, lack of mobility. As a result, Hugill continues to start every game even if he's been playing badly for weeks.

I actually quite like Makienok and what he offers, but if Grayson isn't going to use him much then he shouldn't sign him full time and should instead invest in a proper Hugill alternative to increase the competition for his place.
 
Nishtar36 said:
Hugill takes an almost identical number of shots to score as Jonathan Kodjia, according to Whoscored.com. (6.3 shots compared to 6 shots). Most people on here would class Kodjia as a clinical striker whilst claiming that Hugill is crap.
Click to expand...

So you believe Hugill is just as good as Kodjia?
 
Kingy said:
Kodjia would score so, so many more for us than Jordan Hugill has done. That simple really.
Click to expand...

Not if the place in the team he took was Hugills. Do not under estimate how important his role is in leading the line and creating the space for the others to exploit. Take that out of the team and we would not create nearly as many chances. The fact he has scored double figures as well is a bonus for me.
 
The guy is our joint top scorer and does the unnoticed and unappreciated job of occupying the centre halves to give our more creative players space and freedom which is what he is mostly there to do!

I find it mind boggling that people can actually slate him.
 
Gatsworth said:
The guy is our joint top scorer and does the unnoticed and unappreciated job of occupying the centre halves to give our more creative players space and freedom which is what he is mostly there to do!

I find it mind boggling that people can actually slate him.
Click to expand...

I think there are three people slating him.....everyone else thinks he's doing fine.

And please can we get rid of the thread title and change it to Jordan Hugill or something equally uninspiring, just not something that lays into one of our players.
 
Gatsworth said:
The guy is our joint top scorer and does the unnoticed and unappreciated job of occupying the centre halves to give our more creative players space and freedom which is what he is mostly there to do!

I find it mind boggling that people can actually slate him.
Click to expand...

Hugill has probably exceeded Kingy's expectations (hopes), and Kingy won't accept it. I wonder if he's given Gallagher or Clarke any credit yet either?

Most people without a weird agenda can see that Hugill's overall play is vital to how we play as a team, he is very good at what does (much more effective than Garner) and he has scored 11 goals which is not to be sniffed at.

He isn't a natural finisher and has been jaded in recent weeks but he's still been a great player for us this season.
 
Gatsworth said:
I find it mind boggling that people can actually slate him.
Click to expand...
I haven't slated him, I've just suggested we'll need better next season to make the top 6.

What I notice around Hugill on this forum is a kind of "fanboy" culture, whereby (e.g.) Ron can say Hugill wins games for us singlehandedly when he scores, but when he misses sitters it's all about the team and no one player does anything singlehandedly.

I also can't find Nishtar's stat about "shots per goal" on the whoscored website, maybe he can post a link for us all?

Looking at all the stats I have found on the site, Kodjia beats Hugill hands down in virtually all areas, but especially goals scored.
 
Thracia said:
I haven't slated him, I've just suggested we'll need better next season to make the top 6.

What I notice around Hugill on this forum is a kind of "fanboy" culture, whereby (e.g.) Ron can say Hugill wins games for us singlehandedly when he scores, but when he misses sitters it's all about the team and no one player does anything singlehandedly.

I also can't find Nishtar's stat about "shots per goal" on the whoscored website, maybe he can post a link for us all?

Looking at all the stats I have found on the site, Kodjia beats Hugill hands down in virtually all areas, but especially goals scored.
Click to expand...

Hugill shots per game = 1.8 ... 1.8 x 39 = 70.2 shots ... 70.2 shots/ 11 goals = 6.38 shots/ goal

Kodjia shots per game = 3.4 ... 3.4 x 36 = 122.4 shots ... 122.4 shots/ 18 goals = 6.77 shots/ goal

Revised calculations show Hugill takes marginally less shots. Even so, nobody is denying that Kodjia is a better striker, but the myth that Hugill misses dozens of sitters compared to other strikers is agenda based.

https://www.whoscored.com/Players/68862/Show/Jonathan-Kodjia
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/139334/Show/Jordan-Hugill
 
Nishtar36 said:
Hugill shots per game = 1.8 ... 1.8 x 39 = 70.2 shots ... 70.2 shots/ 11 goals = 6.38 shots/ goal

Kodjia shots per game = 3.4 ... 3.4 x 36 = 122.4 shots ... 122.4 shots/ 18 goals = 6.77 shots/ goal

Revised calculations show Hugill takes marginally less shots. Even so, nobody is denying that Kodjia is a better striker, but the myth that Hugill misses dozens of sitters compared to other strikers is agenda based.

https://www.whoscored.com/Players/68862/Show/Jonathan-Kodjia
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/139334/Show/Jordan-Hugill
Click to expand...
Thanks for the stats - didn't realise you'd gone to the trouble of back-calculating them.

The fact (not myth) that Hugill misses sitters will not be reflected in those stats though, because those stats do not indicate the quality of the shots taken - we don't know whether any of those shots were sitters or not, just from looking at those numbers.

Whereas I have seen with my own eyes on far too many occasions this season Hugill fluff sitter after sitter and one-on-one after one-on-one.
 
Thracia said:
Thanks for the stats - didn't realise you'd gone to the trouble of back-calculating them.

The fact (not myth) that Hugill misses sitters will not be reflected in those stats though, because those stats do not indicate the quality of the shots taken - we don't know whether any of those shots were sitters or not, just from looking at those numbers.

Whereas I have seen with my own eyes on far too many occasions this season Hugill fluff sitter after sitter and one-on-one after one-on-one.
Click to expand...

True. Also depends what a "sitter" is classed as. I wouldn't class last nights at a sitter, but many probably would.
 
Nishtar36 said:
True. Also depends what a "sitter" is classed as. I wouldn't class last nights at a sitter, but many probably would.
Click to expand...

I would calculate his penalty at Wigan as 'a sitter' but it had the same outcome as 58 of his other shots this season and 150 of his dreadful headers....no goal to celebrate and moaners like me wishing he had signed for Ipswich.

You seem to all have me wrong, I wish he took chances, I wish he didn't spend most 2nd halves of games chewing the grass and I hope I'm proved wrong. But 5 months on from my first post, his goal scoring record has gone downhill, his assists have dried up and he looks goosed after an hour.

Press the Refresh button Simon.
 
roofer32 said:
I would calculate his penalty at Wigan as 'a sitter' but it had the same outcome as 58 of his other shots this season and 150 of his dreadful headers....no goal to celebrate and moaners like me wishing he had signed for Ipswich.

You seem to all have me wrong, I wish he took chances, I wish he didn't spend most 2nd halves of games chewing the grass and I hope I'm proved wrong. But 5 months on from my first post, his goal scoring record has gone downhill, his assists have dried up and he looks goosed after an hour.

Press the Refresh button Simon.
Click to expand...

Considering he's so bad, he's done well to be the joint 11th top scorer in the second division of English football. Wish I was as bad as him 🙂
 
Nishtar36 said:
True. Also depends what a "sitter" is classed as. I wouldn't class last nights at a sitter, but many probably would.
Click to expand...
It didn't surprise me that he missed it, let's put it that way.

There's another problem with your stats, which is they don't take into account shots on or off target. Your numbers are basically all shots in total, whether on or off target.

On that same website, you can go Detailed>Sub-category: Accuracy, and see stats for on and off target.

At Villa (I can't be arsed factoring in his Bristol City stats, and you can't just add them together as the whoscored site does), Kodjia had these stats (if we use your back-calculation method, ignore the decimals, this whole approach is a bit messy):

Off target: 38.4 Hit post: 3.2
Blocked: 22.4 On target: 51.2
(And the calculated Total if we add these up is 115.2)

This means we can work out Kodjia's on target ratio (which I assume is on target + blocked shots) = 73.6/115.2 = 63.9% on target, 36.1% off target.

Whereas for Hugill:
Off target: 35.1 Hit post: 0
Blocked: 11.7 On target: 23.4
(And the Total is 70.2)

So Hugill gets 50% of his efforts on target, 50% off target.

Which is why people say (rightly, I think) Hugill is not a clinical finisher.

He shoots (or heads) less often in total, and gets fewer of his efforts on target, compared to Kodjia (and probably a bunch of other strikers in this league). Also he has scored fewer goals, of course.

Using these weird averages and multiplying them up is obviously not very elegant, but the BBC site also has numbers for shots on/off target, and they have Kodjia at 53%, whereas I remember when Hugill used to be on this list, his shots on target ratio was about 40%. So the difference between the players of about 13% is the same at least. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/championship/top-scorers
 
Thracia said:
It didn't surprise me that he missed it, let's put it that way.

There's another problem with your stats, which is they don't take into account shots on or off target. Your numbers are basically all shots in total, whether on or off target.

On that same website, you can go Detailed>Sub-category: Accuracy, and see stats for on and off target.

At Villa (I can't be arsed factoring in his Bristol City stats, and you can't just add them together as the whoscored site does), Kodjia had these stats (if we use your back-calculation method, ignore the decimals, this whole approach is a bit messy):

Off target: 38.4 Hit post: 3.2
Blocked: 22.4 On target: 51.2
(And the calculated Total if we add these up is 115.2)

This means we can work out Kodjia's on target ratio (which I assume is on target + blocked shots) = 73.6/115.2 = 63.9% on target, 36.1% off target.

Whereas for Hugill:
Off target: 35.1 Hit post: 0
Blocked: 11.7 On target: 23.4
(And the Total is 70.2)

So Hugill gets 50% of his efforts on target, 50% off target.

Which is why people say (rightly, I think) Hugill is not a clinical finisher.

He shoots (or heads) less often in total, and gets fewer of his efforts on target, compared to Kodjia (and probably a bunch of other strikers in this league). Also he has scored fewer goals, of course.

Using these weird averages and multiplying them up is obviously not very elegant, but the BBC site also has numbers for shots on/off target, and they have Kodjia at 53%, whereas I remember when Hugill used to be on this list, his shots on target ratio was about 40%. So the difference between the players of about 13% is the same at least. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/championship/top-scorers
Click to expand...

Steady now, or you will be joining me in the naughty corner!!
 
Thracia said:
It didn't surprise me that he missed it, let's put it that way.

There's another problem with your stats, which is they don't take into account shots on or off target. Your numbers are basically all shots in total, whether on or off target.

On that same website, you can go Detailed>Sub-category: Accuracy, and see stats for on and off target.

At Villa (I can't be arsed factoring in his Bristol City stats, and you can't just add them together as the whoscored site does), Kodjia had these stats (if we use your back-calculation method, ignore the decimals, this whole approach is a bit messy):

Off target: 38.4 Hit post: 3.2
Blocked: 22.4 On target: 51.2
(And the calculated Total if we add these up is 115.2)

This means we can work out Kodjia's on target ratio (which I assume is on target + blocked shots) = 73.6/115.2 = 63.9% on target, 36.1% off target.

Whereas for Hugill:
Off target: 35.1 Hit post: 0
Blocked: 11.7 On target: 23.4
(And the Total is 70.2)

So Hugill gets 50% of his efforts on target, 50% off target.

Which is why people say (rightly, I think) Hugill is not a clinical finisher.

He shoots (or heads) less often in total, and gets fewer of his efforts on target, compared to Kodjia (and probably a bunch of other strikers in this league). Also he has scored fewer goals, of course.

Using these weird averages and multiplying them up is obviously not very elegant, but the BBC site also has numbers for shots on/off target, and they have Kodjia at 53%, whereas I remember when Hugill used to be on this list, his shots on target ratio was about 40%. So the difference between the players of about 13% is the same at least. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/championship/top-scorers
Click to expand...

Fair enough, Hugill does blaze a lot of shots over the bar. Just don't understand why the same few constantly pick up on his negatives, when he's clearly had a good season and has been good for us. He does need a rest though.
 
Back
Top