Arsenal Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 12/13 MOD POST #232

Fuzzy_Dunlop

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Ignore the league cup and compare his stats with one of the best winger in the league.

Walcott started 10 games but scored in 6 games, goal or assist in 7 games.


In comparison to Bale (who is regarded as one of the best winger in the league) : Started 18 games, scored in 7 games, goal or assist in 8 games.

So even though he had 8 less starts in league, Walcott has matched Bale's goal scoring record.

If we include goals and assists then Bale has 10 (9+1) and Walcott 14 (8+6).

All this with 8 less starts and both have scored in almost same number of games.

Well, when you put it like that...

Giggsy11

Fuzzy_Dunlop wrote: »

Well, when you put it like that...

Well with overuse of word "overrated", there comes time when player will really be underrated by all section of fans and IMO Walcott fits in that category.

He is bit frustrating player to watch but you can't argue against his goal scoring/ assists record. He is a final third player and goals wins you points.

IMO he is underrated player, people go on about how headless chicken he is, completely ignoring what he brings to the team.

greendom

Anyway, now the Walcott saga is over, is there any chance, do you think, that we could bring in an extra couple of players? A strong physical midfielder would be top of my list....

premierstone

dvemail wrote: »

I know Walcott isn't the best but it can't fathom how people are not happy that we've secured the signature of our top scorer for the season so far. We are about half way through the season with 14 goals to his name and for me that is a great return.

It's the new cool thing as an Arsenal fan apparently - to be constantly criticising Theo, it will blow over shortly and we can go back to the Arsene Out threads :rolleyes:

TimeToShine

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Ignore the league cup and compare his stats with one of the best winger in the league.

Walcott started 10 games but scored in 6 games, goal or assist in 7 games.


In comparison to Bale (who is regarded as one of the best winger in the league) : Started 18 games, scored in 7 games, goal or assist in 8 games.

So even though he had 8 less starts in league, Walcott has matched Bale's goal scoring record.

If we include goals and assists then Bale has 10 (9+1) and Walcott 14 (8+6).

All this with 8 less starts and both have scored in almost same number of games.

I specifically said at the end of my post that using stats isn't all that telling...I'm judging by what I see in football games week in week out, how many chances he misses, how many times he falls over himself, how many times he chooses to go alone instead of making the easy pass. Comparing him to Bale on stats alone is ridiculous. If you watch Spurs Bale constantly makes progress up the field, Walcott tends to run himself into a corner and then fall over, there is a fair bit between the two, but if the statistics make up for that then by all means carry on.

I'm not saying he's bad by any means, just that we have the right to expect a bit more.

tayto lover

premierstone wrote: »

It's the new cool thing as an Arsenal fan apparently - to be constantly criticising Theo, it will blow over shortly and we can go back to the Arsene Out threads :rolleyes:

Not new for me. I never rated him. Unlike him i'm consistent.

Giggsy11

TimeToShine wrote: »

I specifically said at the end of my post that using stats isn't all that telling...I'm judging by what I see in football games week in week out, how many chances he misses, how many times he falls over himself, how many times he chooses to go alone instead of making the easy pass. Comparing him to Bale on stats alone is ridiculous. If you watch Spurs Bale constantly makes progress up the field, Walcott tends to run himself into a corner and then fall over, there is a fair bit between the two, but if the statistics make up for that then by all means carry on.

I'm not saying he's bad by any means, just that we have the right to expect a bit more.

I have already said Walcott can be headless chicken at times but he is a final third player. He scores goals and creates chances. I know how frustrating he can be (when I want Arsenal to win against City/Chelsea) but he does produce goods.

He could have been better player for sure but I don't blame him entirely for that. He is not a winger so it's like he was played out of position in his entire Arsenal career.

I'm not saying his allround game is as good as Bale but he scores as many as Bale and has more assists. Stats can be misleading, but you can't ignore Walcott's impressive stats when you take into account he has 8 less starts than Bale.

I don't know how Arsenal fans rate him in general or what they think about his best position, but for me he should be a striker. He played poorly against City but he should be given run of games as he has lot of goals in him.

emergingstar

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Ignore the league cup and compare his stats with one of the best winger in the league.

Walcott started 10 games but scored in 6 games, goal or assist in 7 games.


In comparison to Bale (who is regarded as one of the best winger in the league) : Started 18 games, scored in 7 games, goal or assist in 8 games.

So even though he had 8 less starts in league, Walcott has matched Bale's goal scoring record.

If we include goals and assists then Bale has 10 (9+1) and Walcott 14 (8+6).

All this with 8 less starts and both have scored in almost same number of games.

That's not fair on bale he is playing in a shït team

farna_boy

premierstone wrote: »

It's the new cool thing as an Arsenal fan apparently - to be constantly criticising Theo, it will blow over shortly and we can go back to the Arsene Out threads :rolleyes:

Yeah because of all the Arsenal players, he is the one that they should all aspire to be more like.

Over the last few games Walcott has shown the following:

1. Is far too greedy with the ball: had numerous chances to pass the ball to others (in far better positions) around the penalty area but prefers to shoot himself.

2. Can't take corner kicks.

3. Can't take free kicks.

4. Can be taken completely taken out of a game if we are playing against a reasonably good defence (Man City)

5. Will only play where he wants, not where he is told

6. Never tracks back to cover his wing (when he actually decides to play there).

I can see what you mean though, I wish we had more players like him...

Oranage2

I don't think 90k is a lot of money in the prem theses days.

Id like to know what players from united, pool, spurs, city and chelsea earn 90k.


For a productive player that's not world class i think 90k is right. I for one am happy he's signed since its embarrassing losing good players because we won't pay them the going rate.

Giggsy11

emergingstar wrote: »

That's not fair on bale he is playing in a shït team

Don't want to tempt fate, we are playing them on Sunday

Gringo180

The thing that annoys me about Theo is that you could make 2 seperate compilations up of his best bits and worst bits, best bits he would be a world beater and his bad bits he would look like a sunday league player or even worse. Hes just so frustrating and so inconsistent.

premierstone

farna_boy wrote: »

Yeah because of all the Arsenal players, he is the one that they should all aspire to be more like.

Over the last few games Walcott has shown the following:

1. Is far too greedy with the ball: had numerous chances to pass the ball to others (in far better positions) around the penalty area but prefers to shoot himself.

2. Can't take corner kicks.

3. Can't take free kicks.

4. Can be taken completely taken out of a game if we are playing against a reasonably good defence (Man City)

5. Will only play where he wants, not where he is told

6. Never tracks back to cover his wing (when he actually decides to play there).

I can see what you mean though, I wish we had more players like him...

And the rest of the players have been magnificent :rolleyes: Jack aside I cant think of any other player, Woj possibly, who is blameless for some of the recent performances, but yet if someone hadn't seen any of our last 4 games and came on here and read back through the thread you would think Walcott had been on a Johnny Walters type self destruction blitz.

Of your 6 points only one of them is actually true, I'll let a great analyst of the game like yourself figure out which one.

wonga77

at the very least points 2,3 and 6 are spot on

tayto lover

I am not great at computers or finding stats but how many goals has Walcott scored against the champions Man Utd?

wonga77

I think its obvious over the last few games that Theo has been left do as he pleases to keep him happy. I cant see hime being left near a free kick any time soon anyway. Id be expecting normal service to resume soon and see him out on the wing.
Time for mollycoddling is over

greendom

farna_boy wrote: »

Yeah because of all the Arsenal players, he is the one that they should all aspire to be more like.

Over the last few games Walcott has shown the following:

1. Is far too greedy with the ball: had numerous chances to pass the ball to others (in far better positions) around the penalty area but prefers to shoot himself.

2. Can't take corner kicks.

3. Can't take free kicks.

4. Can be taken completely taken out of a game if we are playing against a reasonably good defence (Man City)

5. Will only play where he wants, not where he is told

6. Never tracks back to cover his wing (when he actually decides to play there).

I can see what you mean though, I wish we had more players like him...

RE point 2 most of our goals from corners this season (I know there haven't been many) have been taken by Walcott.

tayto lover

greendom wrote: »

RE point 2 most of our goals from corners this season (I know there haven't been many) have been taken by Walcott.

Goal from a corner ??? I must have missed that goal

wonga77

greendom wrote: »

RE point 2 most of our goals from corners this season (I know there haven't been many) have been taken by Walcott.

Maybe if someone else was taking corners, we'd have more goals

Roddy23

tayto lover wrote: »

I am not great at computers or finding stats but how many goals has Walcott scored against the champions Man Utd?

United aren't the champions. He did score against United last season though.

tayto lover

Roddy23 wrote: »

United aren't the champions. He did score against United last season though.

Correct. I meant to say the most successful team in the EPL.

Marty McFly

Fcuk it he may not be as consistent as a lot of us like, he may infuriate us all at times but he chips in with his fair share of goals being our top scorer this season has supplied plenty assists over the coarse of the last few season, is still young enough to improve and get more consistent. Im also delighted for once we have signed Theo and not been on the bad end of one of our now famous transfer sagas along with the five players signing new contracts a while back the future may be bright .

More goals and assists I look forward to in the coming seasons. Time for some optimism .

greendom

tayto lover wrote: »

Goal from a corner ??? I must have missed that goal

i think he started with a bang - we scored from a corner he took against Fulham ( I think that was his first game taking them this season) and another against Reading in the league cup

farna_boy

premierstone wrote: »

And the rest of the players have been magnificent :rolleyes: Jack aside I cant think of any other player, Woj possibly, who is blameless for some of the recent performances, but yet if someone hadn't seen any of our last 4 games and came on here and read back through the thread you would think Walcott had been on a Johnny Walters type self destruction blitz.

Of your 6 points only one of them is actually true, I'll let a great analyst of the game like yourself figure out which one.

I never said the rest of the players were blameless. You essentially said that there is no good reason why people are criticising Walcott, they were only doing it because it was "cool".

If you want to actually discuss Walcott's performances I will be happy to reply but if you would prefer to use rolleyes smileys, avoid the issues and have a go at me instead of addressing any of the points I made, I don't think I'll bother.

greendom

wonga77 wrote: »

Maybe if someone else was taking corners, we'd have more goals

Arteta and Cazorla are at least as bad at taking them as he is.

Giggsy11

tayto lover wrote: »

I am not great at computers or finding stats but how many goals has Walcott scored against the champions Man Utd?

Chelsea: 4
Spurs: 5
ManUtd: 1

Barca: 1

tayto lover

greendom wrote: »

Arteta and Cazorla are at least as bad at taking them as he is.

Not enough practice on the training ground as i have continually said.
It can be embarrassing at times.

tayto lover

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Chelsea: 4
Spurs: 5
ManUtd: 1

Barca: 1

I just used Man Utd as they have been at the top for a long time.

Pepe LeFrits

tayto lover wrote: »

Not much in it and when you conside that it's Girouds first season and he has had to adapt to a new team/system. Giroud is a very honest player who tries hard. Theo seems to become anonymous against the big clubs with skillful defenders. His corners and free-kicks are abysmal too.

Ah now, I like Giroud but based on those stats Giroud has contributed a goal or assist every 165 minutes while Walcott has every 65 or so. Giroud plays exclusively as a central striker while Walcott has still spent most of his time on the wing, and is more than 2 years younger.

TimeToShine wrote: »

Walcott's stats are being padded by those two hat-tricks. The matter of the fact is we all have the right to be disappointed by how he has turned out so far. We signed him at 16 with very high hopes and he hasn't progressed as quickly as we'd hoped. Obviously he's still 23 but look at the likes of Hazard and Goetze, that's the kind of player we had every right to expect at 21/22 after all the hype around him. He's not particularly bad, bit of a headless chicken but he does contribute and is quite valuable to us, but using stats to justify his importance isn't really all that telling.

Story of Walcott's life, people criticising him for not meeting their preconceived notions of what he should do, instead of appreciating what he actually he does.

As for using scoring a hat-trick against Newcastle against him, well... ok. Let's at least be consistent and discount our other player's hat-tricks... wait a second...

farna_boy wrote: »

Yeah because of all the Arsenal players, he is the one that they should all aspire to be more like.

Over the last few games Walcott has shown the following:

1. Is far too greedy with the ball: had numerous chances to pass the ball to others (in far better positions) around the penalty area but prefers to shoot himself.

2. Can't take corner kicks.

3. Can't take free kicks.

4. Can be taken completely taken out of a game if we are playing against a reasonably good defence (Man City)

5. Will only play where he wants, not where he is told

6. Never tracks back to cover his wing (when he actually decides to play there).

I can see what you mean though, I wish we had more players like him...

Most of those options apply to all the attacking players in our squad (number 1 being one exception; most players in our squad are shot-shy, and number 5 being the other; that applies to none of them, including Walcott, and is clearly nonsense).

Walcott may have gotten a little bit too much out of us but that's generally the way it goes with the players who make the most difference. The problem with our squad isn't that we're paying Theo Walcott 15 grand a week too much, it's the fortune we're playing to fringe players to do absolutely nothing.

Irish Aris

maybe we could have a poll: Do you agree with Arsenal signing a new contract with Theo Walcott?
It could work as a reality check too:rolleyes:. . . because I think it's kind of surreal to say that (regardless of statistics, goals, performances or inconsistency) the current Arsenal football club could afford to lose Theo Walcott.
Absolutely, there are far more better players than Theo out there. But what are the chances of the board saying to Arsene "hey, here's a 100 million euros, lure in 3-4 of the best players there are in the market"?

tayto lover

Walcott is also playing with this team a lot longer than Giroud who is in his first year Pepe.

Giggsy11

tayto lover wrote: »

I just used Man Utd as they have been at the top for a long time.

Not sure why you asked for it, but when I was searching I looked for Chelsea as they were top team (before Walcott joined Arsenal) and Spurs are your arch rivals.

tayto lover

Giggsy11 wrote: »

Not sure why you asked for it, but when I was searching I looked for Chelsea as they were top team (before Walcott joined Arsenal) and Spurs are your arch rivals.

Well I didn't ask for City who he hasn't scored against.
I wanted his stats against the best team, Man Utd. You can guage against the best.

Pepe LeFrits

tayto lover wrote: »

Walcott is also playing with this team a lot longer than Giroud who is in his first year Pepe.

Yes, as you've said, and you're welcome to assign that so much importance as to discount Walcott's 2.5 times greater output, his comparative youth and his tendency to play in a position where key contributions are harder to come by, but for me, it's nowhere near that important.

As it stands, he justifiably earns more than Giroud.

Glad he's signed... though it doesn't really do a great deal to change my view on what a cluster**** the club is at the moment.

Giggsy11

tayto lover wrote: »

Well I didn't ask for City who he hasn't scored against.
I wanted his stats against the best team, Man Utd. You can guage against the best.

I didn't follow this discussion from start, so was not sure what was the point of that stat.

Assuming it's to prove Walcott chokes against big team, I would say his record is decent considering he scored 9 goals against Chelsea and Spurs and he was a winger.

Comparing against only one team is not the way to go IMO as Drogba's record against United is just 1 league goal IIRC (that he scored in 2010)

emergingstar

We don't need a DM let's give coq a chance
There I said it and I'm not taking It back

farna_boy

Irish Aris wrote: »

maybe we could have a poll: Do you agree with Arsenal signing a new contract with Theo Walcott?
It could work as a reality check too:rolleyes:. . . because I think it's kind of surreal to say that (regardless of statistics, goals, performances or inconsistency) the current Arsenal football club could afford to lose Theo Walcott.
Absolutely, there are far more better players than Theo out there. But what are the chances of the board saying to Arsene "hey, here's a 100 million euros, lure in 3-4 of the best players there are in the market"?

I don't have a problem with Walcott being given a new contract. Yes, I think he got far more than he is worth but, in general, looking at this season alone he is worth keeping. However, I don't think he is good enough to be our main centre forward or that he should be allowed anywhere near a free kick again.

He is a good impact player and would do well to play off Giroud, but I think it says far more that we need Walcott to stay and that we are relying on him so heavily. How many other top teams would Walcott walk into? Barca? Real? Chelsea? City? F*ck it, would he even make it onto the Sp*rs team, no questions asked?

Overall, he is a decent player and probably above average but could easily be replaced if we were willing to spend the money. It is probably important that we hold on to him until the end of the season but I wouldn't have any problem shipping him out in the summer if I thought he would be replaced.

premierstone

farna_boy wrote: »

I never said the rest of the players were blameless. You essentially said that there is no good reason why people are criticising Walcott, they were only doing it because it was "cool".

If you want to actually discuss Walcott's performances I will be happy to reply but if you would prefer to use rolleyes smileys, avoid the issues and have a go at me instead of addressing any of the points I made, I don't think I'll bother.

Apologies I just read back my post and I was a little off, just frustration.

The one about the free kicks is the only one I would agree with tbh, he's corners have been as good as any other Arsenal players, its a problem not exclusive to him, this thread would lead one to believe otherwise though.

The one about shooting too often baffles me aswell as this Arsenal team are constantly accused of trying to pass the ball into the net and score the perfect goal, can't win it seems, and all good forwards/strikers are greedy.

tayto lover wrote: »

Walcott is also playing with this team a lot longer than Giroud who is in his first year Pepe.

Who out of the forward/midfield players has he really played that much more with and certainly not as a unit.

tayto lover

premierstone wrote: »

Apologies I just read back my post and I was a little off, just frustration.

The one about the free kicks is the only one I would agree with tbh, he's corners have been as good as any other Arsenal players, its a problem not exclusive to him, this thread would lead one to believe otherwise though.

The one about shooting too often baffles me aswell as this Arsenal team are constantly accused of trying to pass the ball into the net and score the perfect goal, can't win it seems, and all good forwards/strikers are greedy.



Who out of the forward/midfield players has he really played that much more with and certainly not as a unit.

Obviously playing with Arsenal for 6/7 seasons is an advantage compared to a new-comer like Giroud.

Irish Aris

farna_boy wrote: »

I don't have a problem with Walcott being given a new contract. Yes, I think he got far more than he is worth but, in general, looking at this season alone he is worth keeping. However, I don't think he is good enough to be our main centre forward or that he should be allowed anywhere near a free kick again.

He is a good impact player and would do well to play off Giroud, but I think it says far more that we need Walcott to stay and that we are relying on him so heavily. How many other top teams would Walcott walk into? Barca? Real? Chelsea? City? F*ck it, would he even make it onto the Sp*rs team, no questions asked?

Overall, he is a decent player and probably above average but could easily be replaced if we were willing to spend the money. It is probably important that we hold on to him until the end of the season but I wouldn't have any problem shipping him out in the summer if I thought he would be replaced.

We agree. We are not Barca, Real, Chelsea or City (I think that he would fit in the current Tottenham), that's why I said that we need to keep him. There already is lots of criticism of Arsenal being a retail shop, not able to keep any decent player, selling or letting them go.
It's rather unlikely that we are going to "break the bank" in the summer. I hope I am wrong, I don't hold high expectations though. . .

jordainius

Another way of looking at it, 100k a week over 3.5 years comes to £18.2M, signing on fee rumoured to be £3M, so a total outlay of about £21M. If he left for nothing in the summer, we'd probably spend a lot more on a replacement in terms of wages + transfer fee, so economically speaking this is a good investment.

premierstone

tayto lover wrote: »

Obviously playing with Arsenal for 6/7 seasons is an advantage compared to a new-comer like Giroud.

Its a completely new team though and I don't where the comparisons with Giroud have come from tbh? Not fair on either player imo.

wonga77

Johan Djourou starts for Hannover against Schalke tonight. Interesting to see how he gets on

12gauge dave

He was worth keeping in the hopes he improves in next 2 seasons!
100k a week is alot less than what hed earn at any other club hed go to so bargain really

JPA

JPA wrote: »

Good for Arsenal that he signed but it seems like it was very much on his terms.

He wanted 100k a week for 5 years, and Arsenal eventually offered him 90k a week for 5 years but he said he'd prefer 3.5 years at 100k plus 3 mill signing on fee.

Seems to be very much on his terms and the club didn't want another big name to go.

So they're giving him 10k per week more than he demanded? Wow Arsenal are bad at negotiating.

Irish Aris

Deleted User wrote: »

So they're giving him 10k per week more than he demanded? Wow Arsenal are bad at negotiating.

?????? you lost me here. . .

Irish Aris

Irish Aris wrote: »

?????? you lost me here. . .

It's maths. They gave him the 100k per week he wanted but also 3million over 3.5 years which is between 9k and 10k per week.

Fuzzy_Dunlop

Deleted User wrote: »

It's maths. They gave him the 100k per week he wanted but also 3million over 3.5 years which is between 9k and 10k per week.

There would have been a signing on fee either way, it's not hard to understand.

iainconlon12

Deleted User wrote: »

So they're giving him 10k per week more than he demanded? Wow Arsenal are bad at negotiating.

Do you honestly believe that? haha! Highly doubt Arsenal offered him more than he demanded after the last year of negotiating.


Let's hope he earns the 100k per week now anyway. I can see him going back to his old frustrating self now though :P

Mr.Micro

iainconlon12 wrote: »

Do you honestly believe that? haha! Highly doubt Arsenal offered him more than he demanded after the last year of negotiating.


Let's hope he earns the 100k per week now anyway. I can see him going back to his old frustrating self now though :P

Indeed, he needs to show he is worth all the fuss and expense. Personally I think he is not, after all his years at Arsenal. Still if he plays through the middle as he is now he may get better as he can unsettle any defence with his speed, so I hope he grasps the opportunity. He is probably our signing for January