Are we a one man team?

[ToffeeDan]

And it's Romelu, Romelu Lukaku FC... we're by far the greatest one man team the world has ever seen..

 

[ToffeeDan]

Yep. I dare say such stats cut across the headline figures. Other factors to bear in mind is how well serviced these top players are. I think Lukaku is serviced, but not with the quality other star men are used to regularly and that can balance out the games played qualification a bit.

Just coming up for his annual service now.. just as the engine has started making spluttering noises like "need Champions League, pay rise, where's my agent.." - check if he's blown another gasket, have a look at the exhaust and replace the air filter and spark plugs..

 

[Jreverton1]

Yes Dave we are. Close thread.

 

[Blues Harp]

.....inconvenient trolling.......

 

[bignev23]

Think it's a bit ridiculous to suggest that we're a one man team because our main striker is top goal scorer and has scored the vast percentage of our goals doing what he's paid to do, if anything it could suggest that we're functioning fine as a team and everyone is doing a decent job that they've been allocated as we don't ship a shed load of goals at our end every week with Lukaku pulling us out the crap, however it goes without saying that Lukaku will be sorely missed when he leaves us but time will tell how damaging that will be.

 

[Kenshin]

Yes we are a one man team.

Considering how good that player is and how bad the squad has been it's not really a suprise

 

[davek]

So in your humble opinion who do we sign to share the goalscoring burden ?
Bare in mind in would impact on Rom's goalscoring ratio.

If we retained Lukaku we should get Sigurdsson. Without Lukaku I think we'd have to go for a forward that slot into a way of attacking that Koeman prefers: ball knocked out wide by Schneiderlin to Lookman/Bolasie and into the box from there. No idea who that will be, possibly someone brought in from the Dutch League as he did with Pelle.

 

[davek]

If Spurs didnt have Kane they would be 17th.

What a very strange thread.

Did you look at the stats? Kane means much less to them than Lukaku does to us from a goalscoring point of view, and behind Kane there is both Alli and Eriksen who contribute 30% and 28% of goals and assists respectively to their team.

 

[Nymzee]

Did you look at the stats? Kane means much less to them than Lukaku does to us from a goalscoring point of view, and behind Kane there is both Alli and Eriksen who contribute 30% and 28% of goals and assists respectively to their team.

But if you add them up Kane, Alli and Eriksen contribute to 99% of Spurs goals and they've only scored a few more in total this season so are we not in a better position as a team with the spread?

 

[blulouie]

If we retained Lukaku we should get Sigurdsson. Without Lukaku I think we'd have to go for a forward that slot into a way of attacking that Koeman prefers: ball knocked out wide by Schneiderlin to Lookman/Bolasie and into the box from there. No idea who that will be, possibly someone brought in from the Dutch League as he did with Pelle.

Here in lies the problem , a quality striker isnt going to be interested in playing 2nd fiddle to Rom .He's been afforded carte blanche by Koeman & Martinez even on his Emile Heskey days.IMO Ener Valencia is the only type of cover we will get while Rom is still with us.
Fwiw I posted my concerns about not signing extra firepower in January & September.

 

[davek]

But if you add them up Kane, Alli and Eriksen contribute to 99% of Spurs goals and they've only scored a few more in total this season so are we not in a better position as a team with the spread?

If they lose one or more of them then yes, but they wont.

This is the point being made: if we lose Lukaku we are up that well known creek without a paddle.

 

[Eggsyblueskin]

No.

 

[davek]

Here in lies the problem , a quality striker isnt going to be interested in playing 2nd fiddle to Rom .He's been afforded carte blanche by Koeman & Martinez even on his Emile Heskey days.IMO Ener Valencia is the only type of cover we will get while Rom is still with us.
Fwiw I posted my concerns about not signing extra firepower in January & September.

Why not? Dont other "realistic" CL chasing clubs have more than one quality striker? Surely such a club can attract one and pay for one?

 

[Nymzee]

If they lose one or more of them then yes, but they wont.

This is the point being made: if we lose Lukaku we are up that well known creek without a paddle.

How can you state that as fact though? Lukaku's injury record is impeccable.

If they aren't going to lose one or more of those 3 then we're not going to lose Lukaku.

Unless you're saying lose as in sell in which case that's just stating the obvious.

 

[Catfish Blues]

An accusation against this side (and it is a cause for concern as far as I'm concerned) is that we rely too heavily on one player - a player on the verge of leaving if a massive change of heart isn't found between now and the summer transfer window.

I, and others, take the view that the barb "Lukaku + luggage" is dangerously near the truth. Many others take the view that we aren't as reliant on him as we think (and it's fair to say the Liverpool Echo in all its idiocy has been trying over the last fortnight to run insanely down a road that portrays him as not the be all and end all of Koeman's Everton team...who can forget the bizarre 'Everton and CL football without Lukaku's goals" numb-nuts piece last week?!)

But what are the facts?

Below I set out the measure of 'one man team' as far as an attacker is concerned by measuring the only two factors worth a good God damn: goals and assist. The findings are shocking, and they firmly underline the extent to which we are imbalanced as a football team and ill-equipped to progress without Lukaku.

Using the top 7 teams who have a small points gap on West Brom, and who are a cut above the rest of the PL at the moment, here are the stats for star players and their value to their teams.

Goals / assists as a % of key involvement in total number of PL goals scored by club - 2016/17.

Lukaku
21 / 6
53%

Ibrahimovic
15 / 4
48%

Sanchez
18 / 9
44%

Kane
18 / 4
41%

Costa
17 / 5
39%

Mane
12 / 5
28%

Aguero
12 / 0
23%


...and the same metric applied to the next best performers at each of the top 7 clubs:

Alli
13 / 3
30%

Eriksen
5 / 10
28%

Hazard
11 / 4
25%

De Bruyne
4 / 9
25%

Pedro
7 / 7
24%

Lallana
7 /7
23%

Firminho
9 / 4
22%

Barkley
4 / 7
21%

Ozil
5 / 4
16%



From that we can appreciate just how much of an overbalance there is in our team in terms of overall impact spread across it.

Two related observations jump out:

1/ Obviously Lukaku's colossal input into the season has us where we are right now.
2/ The greater depth of significant contribution from 'secondary' players at our rivals is startling.


I dont know whether it's the way we are set up to play in terms of committing less bodies to attack this season, or whether outside of Lukaku are players just aren't confident enough to get up the field and score on a regular basis or a combination of both, but something is very much out of whack in terms of balance, and with the summer looming it is a feature of this team that needs sorting out asap because it is no basis whatsoever for progress.

Thoughts?

Good thread.

I presume your point here isn't so much the contribution Lukaku makes, which is excellent, more the lack of contribution from elsewhere.

Only Barkley, and he stuttured for a month or two, has made a siginificant contribution. But Koeman seems to have brought him on over the last few months.

Apart from Barkley our attacking options mostly involve Mirallas, Bolassie, Lookman, Davies ( ? ), Valencia and Calvert-Lewin. Three of them are new to the Premier League this season, one's on loan, one is crocked and Mirallas has always been a bit inconsistent.

I would expect most of Barkley, Lookman, Calvert-Lewin and Davies to improve next season, but, whether Rom stays or goes, I'd say we need someone else in as an attacking option, either an out and out attacker or someone with a bit of guile in their boots.