Lucas

[JohnDoe]

So Lucas conceding averaging 2 free kicks a game is considered a fair stick to beat him with - does anyone know how this would compare with someone like Mascherano who is considered one of the best tacklers in the game?

It's a fair stick to beat him with when he makes 4-5 successful tackle on average ALL GAME. He basically concedes a free kick or gets skinned on 50% of his attempts to tackle this season. If he won 12 tackles a game and conceded 2 free kicks, it would be a different story.

[JohnDoe]

That's a fair point.

Fair point for someone who has nothing better to say.

[rudedog]

It's a fair stick to beat him with when he makes 4-5 successful tackle on average ALL GAME. He basically concedes a free kick or gets skinned on 50% of his attempts to tackle this season. If he won 12 tackles a game and conceded 2 free kicks, it would be a different story.

Thats what I'm asking though - if we use Mascherano as the benchmark for the best tackler, what were his stats? How many free kicks did he give away, what was his percentage of successful tackles? How many tackles a game did he make?

The point I'm trying to make is that its wrong to look at stats in isolation - you need to compare them to something or they don't mean anything.

[Neil Young]

Fair point for someone who has nothing better to say.

Just out of interest like, is that directed at rudedog or me or both of us? I want to know whether I should feel withered or not.

TIA advance

[rudedog]

Just out of interest like, is that directed at rudedog or me or both of us? I want to know whether I should feel withered or not.

TIA advance

I think it was an attempt at a double wither.

[Redspin]

Yes. I've also seen hundreds of times when Lucas could not handle a player going past him and tripping him over in a dangerous position. You could pinpoint a few examples to back up any argument but what matters is efficiency over a long period. Lucas is not a very good tackler.

As last season's stats showed that Lucas committed on average fewer than two fouls a game, that would suggest he is in fact a good tackler, in contrast to your biased view seems to be telling you. So please inform us all of instances where a bad Lucas tackle actually led to our conceding a goal out of the "hundreds of times" you saw him being unable to handle a player going past

[Mattshark]

Thats what I'm asking though - if we use Mascherano as the benchmark for the best tackler, what were his stats? How many free kicks did he give away, what was his percentage of successful tackles? How many tackles a game did he make?

The point I'm trying to make is that its wrong to look at stats in isolation - you need to compare them to something or they don't mean anything.

Mascherano and Lucas were both in the top 5 tacklers last season (in volume and success rate).
Mascherano commited 67 fouls in the PL last season (in 31 games) which is very similar to Lucas' 64 in 32.

[JohnDoe]

Edit: posted in wrong thread

[JohnDoe]

Mascherano and Lucas were both in the top 5 tacklers last season (in volume and success rate).
Mascherano commited 67 fouls in the PL last season (in 31 games) which is very similar to Lucas' 64 in 32.

So Lucas is as good a tackler as Mascherano according to stats.

Stats immediately lose all credibility.

[JohnDoe]

I think it was an attempt at a double wither.

Nah, it was just directed at you.

[rudedog]

So Lucas is as good a tackler as Mascherano according to stats.

Stats immediately lose all credibility.

nice one - you use stats to try and prove a point and then when it backfires come out with that stats aren't credible anyway.

[danperkins]

That's one of the most stupid arguments I've ever read. At least he was there? That's the best phrase to describe Lucas actually, he's there.



Scholes gives them away at the halfway line, Lucas does it at the edge of the box.



Lucas doesn't "own" anything and doesn't dominate anyone other than Newcastle and Eastern European minnows.



As I said, good ball chaser.



Doesn't mean a damn thing, if he had better competition, he wouldn't be playing. Hodgson brought in Poulsen to start over him but Poulsen is so ****, he shouldn't play a minute.



Meireles and Lucas is our "best" central pair on paper but they're going to get dominated by good sides because neither of them is a physical presence.



He's excellent at keeping possession because there is barely any penetration in his passing.



See above.

As long as we have players like Lucas being regulars for us, we're never going to be close to where we we want to be. Never ever. Our team is so crap right now that Lucas is looking like a shining light but it's an illusion. Our possession percentages are abysmal, and there are long periods where we don't have the ball even against **** sides. Lucas looks good when he doesn't have the ball, I've always said that and it won't change. When Rafa was here, he looked good in games against top sides when we were compact and didn't dominate possession. Under Hodgson it happens almost every game, that is the secret of Lucas' "improvement".

But I guess if we're so desperate for positives this season, we can pinpoint Lucas' artificial rise to stardom. When we're good again, he won't be in starting line up, take that one to the bank.

with everything JohnDoe is saying.

P.S. Mikel is the best passer in the league this season, gotta love those opta stats , you only have to look at the games to see whats going on & i agree Lucas does have a tendancy to give free kicks away in very dangerous positions.

[JohnDoe]

As last season's stats showed that Lucas committed on average fewer than two fouls a game, that would suggest he is in fact a good tackler, in contrast to your biased view seems to be telling you. So please inform us all of instances where a bad Lucas tackle actually led to our conceding a goal out of the "hundreds of times" you saw him being unable to handle a player going past

My entire point is that trying to analyze a game or a player, merely by looking at stats is lunacy. People brought up stats to back up their argument and I used stats to pick holes in them. The truth is that the only way to see for sure if someone is good at something is watching the game. Like a pass, every tackle is different. Different players with varying abilities will attempt different things of different levels of difficulty. That's not so hard to comprehend. Lucas does what he feels he can do, and he sticks at it, which is fair enough to him, but what he does is not good enough for a player in a top side in my opinion.

That is all.

[JohnDoe]

nice one - you use stats to try and prove a point and then when it backfires come out with that stats aren't credible anyway.

See my above post.

[danperkins]

My entire point is that trying to analyze a game or a player, merely by looking at stats is lunacy. People brought up stats to back up their argument and I used stats to pick holes in them. The truth is that the only way to see for sure if someone is good at something is watching the game. Like a pass, every tackle is different. Different players with varying abilities will attempt different things of different levels of difficulty. That's not so hard to comprehend. Lucas does what he feels he can do, and he sticks at it, which is fair enough to him, but what he does is not good enough for a player in a top side in my opinion.

That is all.