How Much Difference Does One Player Make?

[White Noise]

http://cravencottagenewsround.wordpress.com/2011/05/03/how-much-difference-does-one-player-make/



How much difference does one player make?

Filed under: General — rich @ 10:47 am


We beat Sunderland without Hangeland, Dempsey and Dembele.  If a big club were to sign three of our players it probably wouldn't be these three, but they'd all be in the discussion.  So how did we manage it?

My thinking:

A single player doesn't make that much difference in any single game.  Over a season the small variations in ability add up, but in a single game you can cover for most absences reasonably well, particularly if the squad is of a uniformly decent standard.

The exception to this is when a player's contribution cannot be replaced, either because he is unusually good, or he plays a certain way that cannot be replicated.

When you look at it this way, the Fulham team is actually quite nicely set up.  There is only one player in the squad (Zamora) that we can't adequately cover:

If, for the sake of argument, you take our first XI as: Schwarzer, Baird, Hughes, Hangeland, Salcido, Davies, Sidwell, Murphy, Dempsey, Dembele, Zamora we can put forward the following as useful alternatives:

Stockdale, Paintsil, Halliche, Senderos, Kelly, Kakuta, Etuhu, Greening, Duff, Gudjohnson, Johnson (A).

Now you might argue that the first list of players is better than the second by some way, and perhaps it is, but all of those players have a history of meaningful contribution to football.  Stockdale we know can do a job, Kelly has done so for Fulham whatever his critics might suggest, same for Paintsil. Halliche played well in the world cup and we must assume could do a fair short-term cover job for Fulham. Senderos you would hope could do a longer-term cover job, as he has history in the league and ought to be approaching a similar level to Hangeland and Hughes. Baird can cover anywhere, and there would be no concern if Etuhu was needed to fill in for Murphy or Sidwell. Duff and Davies is a toss-up anyway, and Gudjohnson could reasonably start every week (and may deserve to do so).  We have no obvious replacement for Salcido, but of all the positions full-back is probably the easiest to cover, particularly short-term.

In retrospect, the only thing this squad couldn't have got over this season was a long-term injury to Zamora. Why is Zamora harder to replace than Hangeland?  Brian Quarstad once put it to me that defending is like making bread (you follow a set recipe exactly), attacking is like making dessert (you can improvise).  Put another way: when you defend, you defend. Within various parameters the job is the job, it's reactive, it's replicable.  Attack is the opposite: proactive, variable.  Take away the main defender and you can substitute in a slightly lesser version of the same thing. Take away the main attacker and the whole team's attacking dynamic changes because all the things you like to do, you can't.  Zamora is so good and so unique that we couldn't cover him.  But we've done okay anyway. (NB Gudjohnson does seem to share

If he stays fit next season we might reasonably expect to be hunting for those 8th/9th positions again.  (see how easily optimism can be conjured up when things are going well!).

[HatterDon]

I can't believe I didn't think of this before  just leave those three home for every away match next season and we get 57 points just on the road.

Rich, I like analysis as much as the next guy, but the Sunderland match is a poor candidate for anything. We played better on the road against Wolves, Man City, and Liverpool and didnt win any of them. The fact is that once the first goal went in against Sunderland, they basically quit. They played like they were on a pre-season tour in Australia.

Fully agree that the one irreplaceable man in our squad right now is Zamora. I think he MUST be in the England squad for the next bit of Euro 2008 qualifying. The idea of Zamora and Bent or Zamora and Rooney or -- whisper it softly -- Zamora, Bent, and Rooney in attack is pretty exciting.

[FatFreddysCat]

I can't believe I didn't think of this before  just leave those three home for every away match next season and we get 57 points just on the road.

Rich, I like analysis as much as the next guy, but the Sunderland match is a poor candidate for anything. We played better on the road against Wolves, Man City, and Liverpool and didnt win any of them. The fact is that once the first goal went in against Sunderland, they basically quit. They played like they were on a pre-season tour in Australia.

Fully agree that the one irreplaceable man in our squad right now is Zamora. I think he MUST be in the England squad for the next bit of Euro 2008 qualifying. The idea of Zamora and Bent or Zamora and Rooney or -- whisper it softly -- Zamora, Bent, and Rooney in attack is pretty exciting.

2008? Franco would not have allowed these errors.

[HatterDon]

I can't believe I didn't think of this before  just leave those three home for every away match next season and we get 57 points just on the road.

Rich, I like analysis as much as the next guy, but the Sunderland match is a poor candidate for anything. We played better on the road against Wolves, Man City, and Liverpool and didnt win any of them. The fact is that once the first goal went in against Sunderland, they basically quit. They played like they were on a pre-season tour in Australia.

Fully agree that the one irreplaceable man in our squad right now is Zamora. I think he MUST be in the England squad for the next bit of Euro 2008 qualifying. The idea of Zamora and Bent or Zamora and Rooney or -- whisper it softly -- Zamora, Bent, and Rooney in attack is pretty exciting.

2008? Franco would not have allowed these errors.

Or even 2012 qualifying. Damn it, Fred. Caught me again.

[Tom]

I think we have two irreplaceable players in Bobby and Clint right now.

[Lighthouse]

A player in form is missed. George Best in his prime was missed and had nobody that came close for instance. Nowadays I think the game is far more tactical. Which makes me wonder why some players are bought and then played out of their best position.

Right now we would miss Simon Davies. He is bang in form. Footballers are not pegs to put in holes. Clearly Senderos is a centre half and has experience. But has he ever or could he ever be as good as Hangeland? When BZ was injured we didn't have any replacement for a player that was like BZ. We didn't have a player to hold the ball for one thing. Now Guddy is sort of in the same type bracket. But nowhere near as good. But nor was BZ a few seasons ago.

Which is why under Roy, a player like Gera could function well. Roy was forced into a system and Gera slotted in well. Under Hughes the system is looser. Gera simply doesn't fit as well. Now we have our best squad for years. Simply because we have players good enough to play in several positions. Simon Davies again for instance. So a player in form makes all the difference I think.

[sipwell]

Obviously somebody who isn't to be found in the kitchen very often. Desserts are probably the toughest on following the recipe: 1 spoon of sugar too much and your cake won't rise. Nearly every cooking program points out that the slightest difference in any of the ingredients and your dessert will fail. Unless the author considers improvisation as: shall we go for vanilla ice cream or strawberries?

I do think one player can make a difference, if it is not physically it is most certainly mentally. Defenders who know they have a reliable goalkeeper in their back will play more at ease than if they have Heurelio Gomes standing there. If they play more at ease, they will play better.

[jarv]

I tend to think that one player can make a huge difference. Lots of teams have a main guy. Injuries (the like of BZ) can provide useful insight. However, Arsenal can look rubbish without fabergas, where would spuds be without Modric and without Scott parker, hammers look like going down.
On the flip side, manyoo are about to win the league with the most "average" team in recent years. Never really replaced Keane, but somehow, their system works.

[ImperialWhite]

I tend to think that one player can make a huge difference. Lots of teams have a main guy. Injuries (the like of BZ) can provide useful insight. However, Arsenal can look rubbish without fabergas, where would spuds be without Modric and without Scott parker, hammers look like going down.
On the flip side, manyoo are about to win the league with the most "average" team in recent years. Never really replaced Keane, but somehow, their system works.

That's the genius of Ferguson I think - how many times has he managed now to build up winning teams from the remnants of old teams once the stars have retired? (post- Cantona, Keane, Ronaldo etc). Now Giggs/Scholes/VDS et al are leaving - but with young (or youngish) players in Rooney, Hernandez, the da Silvas, Nani etc he's probably going to bequeath a rather talented team to successor, assuming he leaves soon.

Not an especially likeable man, but one of the best managers in our lifetimes.

[LordNelson]

I believe it is difficult to take too much from a match against a club with no strikers/forwards in their starting 11.

[The Equalizer]

Obviously somebody who isn't to be found in the kitchen very often. Desserts are probably the toughest on following the recipe: 1 spoon of sugar too much and your cake won't rise. Nearly every cooking program points out that the slightest difference in any of the ingredients and your dessert will fail. Unless the author considers improvisation as: shall we go for vanilla ice cream or strawberries?

I do think one player can make a difference, if it is not physically it is most certainly mentally. Defenders who know they have a reliable goalkeeper in their back will play more at ease than if they have Heurelio Gomes standing there. If they play more at ease, they will play better.

You sure you don't support Norwich? Come on, let's be 'avin you!