2018/19 Gylfi Sigurdsson

[Tubey]

And unfortunately - and the stats back this up - he isn't good enough in the final third. Maybe that's more down to position (?) but it's like we've got two players who do actually compliment each other well when on form (which we saw in our decent run) but actually it's two players doing the job that one real quality player could do on their own.

The answer is to switch system, and as I've said if that means no Gylfi then so be it, but it does mean Gomes - and Davies etc - have got to step up.

He's a deep lying playmaker, and unfortunately a patchy one at that as it stands in terms of form.

But I believe the system is easier to fix with Gomes - as in we have the personnel for it. Gana holding, Gomes central as playmaker, Davies as a runner from deep as an attacking midfielder/second striker. Sigurdsson doesn't have the dynamism to play the same role as Davies in that system, even though Davies isn't exactly fantastic. It's all about role suitability.

 

[BlueToff]

He's a deep lying playmaker, and unfortunately a patchy one at that as it stands in terms of form.

But I believe the system is easier to fix with Gomes - as in we have the personnel for it. Gana holding, Gomes central as playmaker, Davies as a runner from deep as an attacking midfielder/second striker. Sigurdsson doesn't have the dynamism to play the same role as Davies in that system, even though Davies isn't exactly fantastic. It's all about role suitability.

I'd have two systems.

In a 4-3-3 I don't think Gylfi works given our current form. We need legs in there and Davies offers that. We need solidity with Gana and a ball-carrier in Gomes.

In a 3-4-3 - which I'd like to see us play - I do think there's room in certain situations (like we saw v Burnley) to play him in a central two. The other option is a 3-4-1-2 and he plays as the '1'.

But really we just need to settle on a system that works and stick with it and not shoehorn players in.

 

[stannyr]

I'd have two systems.

In a 4-3-3 I don't think Gylfi works given our current form. We need legs in there and Davies offers that. We need solidity with Gana and a ball-carrier in Gomes.

In a 3-4-3 - which I'd like to see us play - I do think there's room in certain situations (like we saw v Burnley) to play him in a central two. The other option is a 3-4-1-2 and he plays as the '1'.

But really we just need to settle on a system that works and stick with it and not shoehorn players in.

Shocking that you can figure this out and our 2M pound a year head coach cannot.

 

[Goat]

Shocking that you can figure this out and our 2M pound a year head coach cannot.

Im almost certain hes on double that.

 

[Goat]

Ask anyone who the best player outside the top 6 is and it won't be long before the name Gylfi Sigurdsson is mentioned.

He seems to score or assist, or at least go close, in most games.

And if you only watch the highlights you'll see him either setting up or getting on the end of chances.

Whenever Sky Sports do a graphic of top scoring midfielders over the last few years Gyfi will always be in there, near the top of the list. Most Everton fans enjoy watching him play, he has a classy touch and scores some absolutely brilliant goals. There is no doubt that he is far better this year than last.

Ask neutrals where he plays, or indeed most fans of his club, and they'll say he is a classic number 10, or an attacking midfielder.

At the risk of attracting the wrath of some particularly vociferous Gylfi fans this article is not about him being a bad player. Far from it he has a very good range of skills. This isn't even about whether Everton overpaid for him.

It is just that he isn't a midfielder by any normal definition of the role.




What does a midfielder do?

I suppose the first thing to look at would be the typical positioning of a midfielder. You would expect to find a midfielder between the defence and the attack. Yet every positional map I've seen this season has Gylfi as the furthest forward player. Not in itself a problem, particularly with the all action Richarlison dropping back and wide more often than a traditional striker.

Another thing we might consider is the involvement in build up play.

Most midfielders would typically be involved in the build up to chance creation. And if you look at the raw numbers of assists and key passes he shows up fairly well.

2.3 key passes a game (7th highest in the league)
2 assists
3.23 xA (15th in the league)

I think most people would also consider the role of a midfielder would be to pass the ball and get involved in build up play.

So lets look at the total passing numbers per 90 for players in more or less the same role.

David Silva 65.7
Hazard 51
Bernardo Silva 48
Ozil 47
Felipe Anderson 43
Maddison 42
Eriksen 39
Firmino 34
Delle Alli 32
Glyfi Sigurdsson 24

Obviously team style plays a part in it but if we look at two teams in Leicester and Everton with almost identical team totals for passing we can see the Leicester #10 is passing the ball almost twice as often.

Barkley too was averaging 45 passes per 90 in his seasons as the Everton #10.

If we look at other players who average a similar amount of passes per 90 we typically find wingers and centre forwards. No other attacking midfielder operating in a central area touches it less.

In terms of accurate short passes (indicating those from open play) per 90 Gylfi is in the bottom 10% of players in his position.

But given he does create chances and score goals what does he do with the ball? Well when he does touch the ball he either shoots or attempts to create a chance. Of his 24 passes he is averaging more accurate and more inaccurate crosses than any other player - a total of over 6 a game. This could indicate these are coming from set pieces, I can't tell from the data.

Likewise his key passes seem to come from dead balls not open play with Understat showing almost 50% of his xA coming from set pieces.

Tackles and interceptions

One thing people like to praise Gylfi for is his workrate. This seems fair.

If I search for attacking midfielders and forwards, with at least 10 appearances, then Gylfi intercepts the ball the third most of any of them.

He is also 5th on the list for attempted tackles.

Shooting

So if Glyfi doesn't profile like a midfielder in terms of passing how does he compare in shooting?

Well of players thought of as midfielders only Hazard and Pogba shoot more times per 90 minutes.

In terms of penalty area shots only Hazard and Pererya have more shots per 90.

So what is he and does it matter?

He plays where strikers play.

He passes like a striker.

He shoots like a striker.

His game involvement is like a striker.

He tackles and intercepts like a midfielder.

To me he profiles like a second striker in a high pressing team. Which is what his role actually is.

Does this matter then?

Only in terms of judging players by output. A 10 goal a season midfielder who also passes and creates like a midfielder is worth a lot more to a team than a 10 goal a season striker.

There are plenty of Josh King or Ayoze Perez type players who are rightly rated as decent but unspectacular players. They profile almost exactly the same as Gylfi as high pressing forwards with similar passing and pressing stats. Take out set pieces and Gylfi drops from highly creative to average.

People rate Gylfi Sigurdsson highly because of his high scoring rate from midfield and the odd wonder goal.

But it shows the importance of looking deeper into what a player actually does when ranking players on simple numbers like goals and assists.

When is a midfielder not a midfielder?

Ask anyone who the best player outside the top 6 is and it won't be long before the name Gylfi Sigurdsson is mentioned. He seems to score ...

stopbunching.blogspot.com

 

[sageyefc]

Ask anyone who the best player outside the top 6 is and it won't be long before the name Gylfi Sigurdsson is mentioned.

He seems to score or assist, or at least go close, in most games.

And if you only watch the highlights you'll see him either setting up or getting on the end of chances.

Whenever Sky Sports do a graphic of top scoring midfielders over the last few years Gyfi will always be in there, near the top of the list. Most Everton fans enjoy watching him play, he has a classy touch and scores some absolutely brilliant goals. There is no doubt that he is far better this year than last.

Ask neutrals where he plays, or indeed most fans of his club, and they'll say he is a classic number 10, or an attacking midfielder.

At the risk of attracting the wrath of some particularly vociferous Gylfi fans this article is not about him being a bad player. Far from it he has a very good range of skills. This isn't even about whether Everton overpaid for him.

It is just that he isn't a midfielder by any normal definition of the role.




What does a midfielder do?

I suppose the first thing to look at would be the typical positioning of a midfielder. You would expect to find a midfielder between the defence and the attack. Yet every positional map I've seen this season has Gylfi as the furthest forward player. Not in itself a problem, particularly with the all action Richarlison dropping back and wide more often than a traditional striker.

Another thing we might consider is the involvement in build up play.

Most midfielders would typically be involved in the build up to chance creation. And if you look at the raw numbers of assists and key passes he shows up fairly well.

2.3 key passes a game (7th highest in the league)
2 assists
3.23 xA (15th in the league)

I think most people would also consider the role of a midfielder would be to pass the ball and get involved in build up play.

So lets look at the total passing numbers per 90 for players in more or less the same role.

David Silva 65.7
Hazard 51
Bernardo Silva 48
Ozil 47
Felipe Anderson 43
Maddison 42
Eriksen 39
Firmino 34
Delle Alli 32
Glyfi Sigurdsson 24

Obviously team style plays a part in it but if we look at two teams in Leicester and Everton with almost identical team totals for passing we can see the Leicester #10 is passing the ball almost twice as often.

Barkley too was averaging 45 passes per 90 in his seasons as the Everton #10.

If we look at other players who average a similar amount of passes per 90 we typically find wingers and centre forwards. No other attacking midfielder operating in a central area touches it less.

In terms of accurate short passes (indicating those from open play) per 90 Gylfi is in the bottom 10% of players in his position.

But given he does create chances and score goals what does he do with the ball? Well when he does touch the ball he either shoots or attempts to create a chance. Of his 24 passes he is averaging more accurate and more inaccurate crosses than any other player - a total of over 6 a game. This could indicate these are coming from set pieces, I can't tell from the data.

Likewise his key passes seem to come from dead balls not open play with Understat showing almost 50% of his xA coming from set pieces.

Tackles and interceptions

One thing people like to praise Gylfi for is his workrate. This seems fair.

If I search for attacking midfielders and forwards, with at least 10 appearances, then Gylfi intercepts the ball the third most of any of them.

He is also 5th on the list for attempted tackles.

Shooting

So if Glyfi doesn't profile like a midfielder in terms of passing how does he compare in shooting?

Well of players thought of as midfielders only Hazard and Pogba shoot more times per 90 minutes.

In terms of penalty area shots only Hazard and Pererya have more shots per 90.

So what is he and does it matter?

He plays where strikers play.

He passes like a striker.

He shoots like a striker.

His game involvement is like a striker.

He tackles and intercepts like a midfielder.

To me he profiles like a second striker in a high pressing team. Which is what his role actually is.

Does this matter then?

Only in terms of judging players by output. A 10 goal a season midfielder who also passes and creates like a midfielder is worth a lot more to a team than a 10 goal a season striker.

There are plenty of Josh King or Ayoze Perez type players who are rightly rated as decent but unspectacular players. They profile almost exactly the same as Gylfi as high pressing forwards with similar passing and pressing stats. Take out set pieces and Gylfi drops from highly creative to average.

People rate Gylfi Sigurdsson highly because of his high scoring rate from midfield and the odd wonder goal.

But it shows the importance of looking deeper into what a player actually does when ranking players on simple numbers like goals and assists.

When is a midfielder not a midfielder?

Ask anyone who the best player outside the top 6 is and it won't be long before the name Gylfi Sigurdsson is mentioned. He seems to score ...

stopbunching.blogspot.com

Tl;Dr

 

[Tubey]

Ask anyone who the best player outside the top 6 is and it won't be long before the name Gylfi Sigurdsson is mentioned.

He seems to score or assist, or at least go close, in most games.

And if you only watch the highlights you'll see him either setting up or getting on the end of chances.

Whenever Sky Sports do a graphic of top scoring midfielders over the last few years Gyfi will always be in there, near the top of the list. Most Everton fans enjoy watching him play, he has a classy touch and scores some absolutely brilliant goals. There is no doubt that he is far better this year than last.

Ask neutrals where he plays, or indeed most fans of his club, and they'll say he is a classic number 10, or an attacking midfielder.

At the risk of attracting the wrath of some particularly vociferous Gylfi fans this article is not about him being a bad player. Far from it he has a very good range of skills. This isn't even about whether Everton overpaid for him.

It is just that he isn't a midfielder by any normal definition of the role.




What does a midfielder do?

I suppose the first thing to look at would be the typical positioning of a midfielder. You would expect to find a midfielder between the defence and the attack. Yet every positional map I've seen this season has Gylfi as the furthest forward player. Not in itself a problem, particularly with the all action Richarlison dropping back and wide more often than a traditional striker.

Another thing we might consider is the involvement in build up play.

Most midfielders would typically be involved in the build up to chance creation. And if you look at the raw numbers of assists and key passes he shows up fairly well.

2.3 key passes a game (7th highest in the league)
2 assists
3.23 xA (15th in the league)

I think most people would also consider the role of a midfielder would be to pass the ball and get involved in build up play.

So lets look at the total passing numbers per 90 for players in more or less the same role.

David Silva 65.7
Hazard 51
Bernardo Silva 48
Ozil 47
Felipe Anderson 43
Maddison 42
Eriksen 39
Firmino 34
Delle Alli 32
Glyfi Sigurdsson 24

Obviously team style plays a part in it but if we look at two teams in Leicester and Everton with almost identical team totals for passing we can see the Leicester #10 is passing the ball almost twice as often.

Barkley too was averaging 45 passes per 90 in his seasons as the Everton #10.

If we look at other players who average a similar amount of passes per 90 we typically find wingers and centre forwards. No other attacking midfielder operating in a central area touches it less.

In terms of accurate short passes (indicating those from open play) per 90 Gylfi is in the bottom 10% of players in his position.

But given he does create chances and score goals what does he do with the ball? Well when he does touch the ball he either shoots or attempts to create a chance. Of his 24 passes he is averaging more accurate and more inaccurate crosses than any other player - a total of over 6 a game. This could indicate these are coming from set pieces, I can't tell from the data.

Likewise his key passes seem to come from dead balls not open play with Understat showing almost 50% of his xA coming from set pieces.

Tackles and interceptions

One thing people like to praise Gylfi for is his workrate. This seems fair.

If I search for attacking midfielders and forwards, with at least 10 appearances, then Gylfi intercepts the ball the third most of any of them.

He is also 5th on the list for attempted tackles.

Shooting

So if Glyfi doesn't profile like a midfielder in terms of passing how does he compare in shooting?

Well of players thought of as midfielders only Hazard and Pogba shoot more times per 90 minutes.

In terms of penalty area shots only Hazard and Pererya have more shots per 90.

So what is he and does it matter?

He plays where strikers play.

He passes like a striker.

He shoots like a striker.

His game involvement is like a striker.

He tackles and intercepts like a midfielder.

To me he profiles like a second striker in a high pressing team. Which is what his role actually is.

Does this matter then?

Only in terms of judging players by output. A 10 goal a season midfielder who also passes and creates like a midfielder is worth a lot more to a team than a 10 goal a season striker.

There are plenty of Josh King or Ayoze Perez type players who are rightly rated as decent but unspectacular players. They profile almost exactly the same as Gylfi as high pressing forwards with similar passing and pressing stats. Take out set pieces and Gylfi drops from highly creative to average.

People rate Gylfi Sigurdsson highly because of his high scoring rate from midfield and the odd wonder goal.

But it shows the importance of looking deeper into what a player actually does when ranking players on simple numbers like goals and assists.

When is a midfielder not a midfielder?

Ask anyone who the best player outside the top 6 is and it won't be long before the name Gylfi Sigurdsson is mentioned. He seems to score ...

stopbunching.blogspot.com

A lot of that absolutely nails it.

As I said to Dan earlier, he's absolutely not a playmaker. In fact he's pretty unique - and that's ironically his biggest weakness, because you need a unique setup to accommodate him.

 

[nsno-chris]

hes still crap

 

[Tubey]

I'd have two systems.

In a 4-3-3 I don't think Gylfi works given our current form. We need legs in there and Davies offers that. We need solidity with Gana and a ball-carrier in Gomes.

In a 3-4-3 - which I'd like to see us play - I do think there's room in certain situations (like we saw v Burnley) to play him in a central two. The other option is a 3-4-1-2 and he plays as the '1'.

But really we just need to settle on a system that works and stick with it and not shoehorn players in.

I don't think the 3-4-3 would work. In that system the two midfielders cover the wing-backs either side of Sigurdsson and, again, he doesn't have the dynamism for the deeper role.

The 3-4-1-2 is better suited - as would be a 4-4-2 diamond - but even then you'd need a hold up striker and a Lukaku type. Indeed, it's the formation I advocated when solving the Barkley/Lukaku conundrum, because Barkley needed a striker to play to feet and Lukaku needed a striker to do the legwork and create gaps so he can play in behind. It'd also mean the likes of Richarlison and Lookman being completely redundant.

So again, it comes down to whether it's worth completely rebuilding the squad from scratch over two years to accommodate a 30 year old player - and bare in mind that if we did and he got injured, we'd be utterly screwed.

For me, that's a flat out no. I get you rate him, but as I said earlier I think you're rating what he could theoretically do rather than what he is doing, and you therefore find yourself scrambling around for stats like raw goal and assist output to justify him. I do get it; I just think it's the wrong angle to look at the situation.

 

[COYBL25]

Ask anyone who the best player outside the top 6 is and it won't be long before the name Gylfi Sigurdsson is mentioned.

He seems to score or assist, or at least go close, in most games.

And if you only watch the highlights you'll see him either setting up or getting on the end of chances.

Whenever Sky Sports do a graphic of top scoring midfielders over the last few years Gyfi will always be in there, near the top of the list. Most Everton fans enjoy watching him play, he has a classy touch and scores some absolutely brilliant goals. There is no doubt that he is far better this year than last.

Ask neutrals where he plays, or indeed most fans of his club, and they'll say he is a classic number 10, or an attacking midfielder.

At the risk of attracting the wrath of some particularly vociferous Gylfi fans this article is not about him being a bad player. Far from it he has a very good range of skills. This isn't even about whether Everton overpaid for him.

It is just that he isn't a midfielder by any normal definition of the role.




What does a midfielder do?

I suppose the first thing to look at would be the typical positioning of a midfielder. You would expect to find a midfielder between the defence and the attack. Yet every positional map I've seen this season has Gylfi as the furthest forward player. Not in itself a problem, particularly with the all action Richarlison dropping back and wide more often than a traditional striker.

Another thing we might consider is the involvement in build up play.

Most midfielders would typically be involved in the build up to chance creation. And if you look at the raw numbers of assists and key passes he shows up fairly well.

2.3 key passes a game (7th highest in the league)
2 assists
3.23 xA (15th in the league)

I think most people would also consider the role of a midfielder would be to pass the ball and get involved in build up play.

So lets look at the total passing numbers per 90 for players in more or less the same role.

David Silva 65.7
Hazard 51
Bernardo Silva 48
Ozil 47
Felipe Anderson 43
Maddison 42
Eriksen 39
Firmino 34
Delle Alli 32
Glyfi Sigurdsson 24

Obviously team style plays a part in it but if we look at two teams in Leicester and Everton with almost identical team totals for passing we can see the Leicester #10 is passing the ball almost twice as often.

Barkley too was averaging 45 passes per 90 in his seasons as the Everton #10.

If we look at other players who average a similar amount of passes per 90 we typically find wingers and centre forwards. No other attacking midfielder operating in a central area touches it less.

In terms of accurate short passes (indicating those from open play) per 90 Gylfi is in the bottom 10% of players in his position.

But given he does create chances and score goals what does he do with the ball? Well when he does touch the ball he either shoots or attempts to create a chance. Of his 24 passes he is averaging more accurate and more inaccurate crosses than any other player - a total of over 6 a game. This could indicate these are coming from set pieces, I can't tell from the data.

Likewise his key passes seem to come from dead balls not open play with Understat showing almost 50% of his xA coming from set pieces.

Tackles and interceptions

One thing people like to praise Gylfi for is his workrate. This seems fair.

If I search for attacking midfielders and forwards, with at least 10 appearances, then Gylfi intercepts the ball the third most of any of them.

He is also 5th on the list for attempted tackles.

Shooting

So if Glyfi doesn't profile like a midfielder in terms of passing how does he compare in shooting?

Well of players thought of as midfielders only Hazard and Pogba shoot more times per 90 minutes.

In terms of penalty area shots only Hazard and Pererya have more shots per 90.

So what is he and does it matter?

He plays where strikers play.

He passes like a striker.

He shoots like a striker.

His game involvement is like a striker.

He tackles and intercepts like a midfielder.

To me he profiles like a second striker in a high pressing team. Which is what his role actually is.

Does this matter then?

Only in terms of judging players by output. A 10 goal a season midfielder who also passes and creates like a midfielder is worth a lot more to a team than a 10 goal a season striker.

There are plenty of Josh King or Ayoze Perez type players who are rightly rated as decent but unspectacular players. They profile almost exactly the same as Gylfi as high pressing forwards with similar passing and pressing stats. Take out set pieces and Gylfi drops from highly creative to average.

People rate Gylfi Sigurdsson highly because of his high scoring rate from midfield and the odd wonder goal.

But it shows the importance of looking deeper into what a player actually does when ranking players on simple numbers like goals and assists.

When is a midfielder not a midfielder?

Ask anyone who the best player outside the top 6 is and it won't be long before the name Gylfi Sigurdsson is mentioned. He seems to score ...

stopbunching.blogspot.com

Riccccccccccccccccccccccky likes this.

 

[Neiler]

He’s only played for turd teams ever, so there’s nothing really to suggest that he’ll make us any better when he has a different striker in front of him.

Not sure about that Iceland gave a few teams a whopping in Euro 2016.

 

[MikeH72]

Not sure about that Iceland gave a few teams a whopping in Euro 2016.

They were essentially a Tony Pulis pub side in international football.

 

[Lelouch]

He's too much of a luxury for the way we want to play, It just doesn't work unless he's in the midfield next to Gomes/Gana.

 

[mkrudden]

Keep seeing this comparison with Eriksen.
Firstly, Eriksen is the better player.
Not that's out of the way, Eriksen's influence on the game generally (3x more passes than Gylfi) might, just MIGHT, have something to do with the fact he drops so deep to get on the ball. Watching last night for instance, he continuously picked the ball up from the CBs.
Gylfi, whether the haters want to admit it or not, is being told by management to stay high up the pitch. So service in to him is imperative unlike Eriksen. If there is no supply line, which we can all agree isn't there given Gomes isn't playing particularly well and Gueye can't pass more than 5 yards, then Sigurdssen doesn't get the ball.
Alternatively, we should be able to get the ball to a front man who then involves our number 10. But our strikers, bar a couple of games, have been absolutely terrible.
THEN, living off actual scraps, Gylfi plays in Walcott at 0-0 vs Wolves (i think) who hits it bang at the keeper, and plays in Tosun vs Watford who is offside.
Where he has been poor recently is his general distribution. He's given away some of the easy passes too frequently. Oh and also he looks a busted flush when it comes to pressing.
But you're absolutely mad if you think
A) he should be marauding around the pitch given his instructions from Silva.
B) a playmaker doesn't need a decent number 9
C) that, given we are AIDS and he's contributed 9 league goals, he's the LEAST of our problems

 

[Ameen]

He's not the best player outside of the top 6, that mantle goes to Wilfried Zaha