ALM Squad Speculation Thread 2024/25 (Part 1)

The Cove
4970

What determines a “goal involvement”?
Is it just scoring or providing the assist?
Does it include making the pass to set up the assist?
Does it include making a run off the ball that takes a defender out of the play?

If a player is put on with 10 to go and told to play on the last man it stands to reason that they will have less goal involvements than the player who was out there for 80 minutes and dropped between the lines to get on the ball and/or played across the front line.
Throw in other variables such as whether a player takes free kicks, corners and/or penalties and they may have more of an opportunity to achieve a goal involvement. Alf takes penalties, Wood doesn’t. Lolley & Mak are involved in the set pieces, Wood isn’t.

While the stat can provide an insight, used in isolation it’s about as insightful as xG.

1 Like
4971

Eyes

Ive seen enough experienced central defenders suck him in by showing a little bit of space, encouraging him to dribble towards the goal line, closing it and then watching him dribble it out for a goal kick.

He’s got a number of good traits that take advantage of bad players (pace and tenacity, and until this year generally good finishing) , but as been mentioned before a team relying on him is a team that is satisfied to be in mid table.

He might have some goal involvements but feels rarely involved in any build up. He’ll never be playing a Kisel ball.

2 Likes
4972

I reckon Wood would have got at least 2 out of 6 in if he took penalties this season…

3 Likes
4973

Not saying that at all. I’m just saying that the data that we have isn’t sufficient to be expressed in a single number that can be used to compare the relative merits of our forwards. And even if it could… I’m not sure how useful it would be.

The discourse here, around Wood, has gotten a little lost in the weeds, I think. It kind of veers off into whether we should be making better use of players we develop and other things that become fairly emotive. This then tries to get resolved with some dodgy statistical comparisons etc.

Strip the fluff away and the the fundamental questions, I think, are has he shown that he has the attributes Sydney FC need from a starting #9 in 2023 and are those attribute of sufficient quality to be a starting #9 for club that should be aiming for a trophy?

The only decent way to evaluate that is to look at his, admittedly relatively few appearances, individually and make a judgement, taking into consideration the circumstances of each appearance.

I think, if we’re going to play a similar system next season, we need CF that can hold the ball up better and can be more of an aerial threat. Are there any instances where Wood has played and I’ve thought - yep, this is the type of player we need. He’s the missing piece of the puzzle? Not that I can remember and any ‘goal involvement’ stat is simply not really going to help make that determination.

Comparison with our competitors doesn’t look favorable either. Consider his direct competitors, based on last season. We’d be putting him up against Maclaren, Zawada, Prijovic, Taggart, Austin, Cummings, etc.
He’s not in the same class. I’m not even sure he’s as good as the second choice strikers those teams have…

Maybe he’s got hidden powers that I’ve just never seen, or some incredible unfulfilled potential just bursting and ready to take his football in a new direction. But it would be an incredible gamble (or a admission of failure) to have him as the #9.

2 Likes
4974

The stats I was using was goals+assists. I do take your point that those don’t measure everything. Lolley’s number is low but that doesn’t account for the work he does in the build up on the flanks combining with Rhyno.

Yes, Wood is unlikely to be the best striker in the league. But half of the forum was up in arms that we don’t take our chance on talented kids. I think Wood is showing at least as much as Tilio did at the same age to justify playing major minutes.

Either we find some mythical league-winning players for the two starting spots that both fit inside the cap (Sainsbury is the great white hope at CB, who is the striker to match?) or we accept that we start the season with one of Wood or Gurd being a first choice, at least until January, and they might cost us points as part of their development.

4975

Is that based on goal involvements?

1 Like
4976

So why is he even in the team? For all of our ability to develop youth, why don’t we have someone better as our #2?

4977

Because he’s a young squaddie?

His role is obvious, I’d think. Come on at the end of games to cause chaos and to fill in and try and take your chance when you are given one.

He’s not a perfect fit, he was brought through when we were playing a pretty different system, but he’s fine for what he is.

Its just not as a starting 9.

I think thats an issue that’s come about from the mismanagement of the squad list last off season, moreso than the quality of our acadamy.

I suspect the club wanted to go in for a big, fuck off marquee #9 and have Le Fondre as the second choice CF. But we couldn’t get it done.

4978

DistantKnobbyDarwinsfox-max-1mb

4979

The other thing counting against Wood is we are currently not playing a system that suits him. A poacher is unlikely to shine in a 4-3-3. The #9 role demands a lot more in that formation than just pace with a bit of finishing. If we were playing the old box midfield with two up front, Wood could play off a second striker or a target man much more effectively.

4980

The system didn’t suit ALF all that well either, but he managed to find a way to bang them in by the end of the season…

1 Like
4981

Agreed. We should learn from our mistakes and not go the majority of the season where the CF is so out of place they can barely contribute.

4982

That could be true. But we’re here now; we have Lolley and Mak combining on the flanks to take up our Marquee money. Either we get mutual with one of the two, or we have ALFs foreign spot and wage (potentially getting a loyalty reduction for cap space if he stayed on our books while loaned to India) to bring in a replacement. Who would be willing to play for that kind of money that’s guaranteed to be better? Maybe we can throw in the squaddie wage of Parsons, if we can flog him off somewhere, although I for one wouldn’t mind keeping him for depth even if we find a replacement.

4983

I don’t think we know that for a fact… But, yes, its the foreign spots that kill us.

There’s a fair few unknowns tbh:

-People are talking like Wilko has retired already - we don’t know whats going on there.
-We don’t exactly know what’s going on with Caballo.
-We don’t know whats going to happen with Lefondre.
-We don’t know who our marquees were last season - I think we had four players on big packets (Mak, Lolley, Bratten and Rodwell). They are all signed for next season. Did we front load any of them significantly? Can they be juggled around to make room for another marquee? I think its possible? Maybe?

We could come out of this with a new marquee foreign #9 and another new foreigner and Wilko plays on. Or we could stick with Caballo and Lefondre and Wilko retires. Or anywhere in between.

1 Like
4984

I think it’s a fair assumption, definitely in the case of Lolley as we paid a transfer fee and if I remember correctly transfer fees count against cap space? Maybe we can move one of them inside the cap this season, in which case we might have real money to throw at a marquee #9. But I don’t think that’s likely unless we get other full wage players off the books too, like Parsons and Donks.

4985

Uhh isn’t he under contract? At least as far as we know?

4986

Caballo, Retre and Donachie were all announced as “two seasons” in the official club release, but listed as expiring next month on the (AFAIK agent-populated) Transfermarkt pages. It might be some kind of 1+1 situation with an extension clause or option.

4987

What fun is a squad speculation thread without the speculation?

4 Likes
4988

I thought Lolley was released by Forest when they were promoted… I didn’t think we paid a transfer fee.

I am usually wrong though

4989

No, we paid an ‘undisclosed’ fee for him.

It was such a big thing because I believe we haven’t actually ever “bought” a player before. At least not counting the measly $5,000 we used to give to old NPL clubs when we’d sign a squaddie.

I think the only other club that has ‘bought’ a player (as opposed to just picking them up on a free transfer) is Melbourne Victory when they bought out Carlos Hernandez from his Costa Rican club.

1 Like