Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
RizLCFC

Andy King

By RizLCFC, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Pookie

Pookie

Posted
Posted

King started 35 league matches for us last season our record was

 

Won 11, Drew 11, Lost 13, For 48, Against 39, 44 points (ave 1.25 points a game)

 

Before I get shot down in flames

 

James started 20 league matches our record was

 

Won 10, Drew 4, Lost 6, For 38, Against 26, 34 points (ave 1.70 points a game)

 

DD started 39 league matches our was

 

Won 17, Drew 8, Lost 14, For 62 Against 38, 59 points (ave 1.51 points a game)

 

In the 2011/12 season King started 24 matches for us and our record was

 

Won 8, Drew 6, Lost 10, For 32 Against 31, 30 points (ave 1.25 points a game)

 

I like King as a player, because he came through the academy, but the stats show we just don't win enough matches when he starts and it might be time to cash in on him?

 

PS The best midfield 4 last season was Marshall/DD/James/Knocky - We enjoyed 6 wins and 1 defeat when these 4 started!

 

Burnley (h) won 2-1, Hull (h) won 3-1, Middlesbro (a) won 2-1, Huddesfield (h) won 6-1, Bristol C (a) won 4-0, Middlesbro (h) won 1-0, Charlton (h) lost 2-1

 

plus, I think all 4 started in 5 man midfield when we won away at Burnley 1-0, can't think of any other matches.

Lambert09

Lambert09

Posted
Posted

Can't argue with that it would seem. Good work on the stats.

well you can. If football was a 1 man game then yes it's accurate, but there are lots of other factors. The only way those stats would prove anything would be if they played against the same teams, with the same other 10 players around them with all the others displaying identical form. In other words, you can take your stats and shove them up your arse
Pookie

Pookie

Posted
Posted

I agree football isn't a one man game, hence putting a PS on our most effective midfield 4 last season.

 

I was just pointing out the teams record when King starts and over the past two 2 seasons (he has started 64% of all our matches) and we have averaged (1.25 points per game)

 

Based on 1.25 points a game is only 57.5 points over 46 matches

 

The past 2 seasons when he hasn't started the team average is 1.67 points a match (77 points a season)

 

Personally I would like to keep all three CM I mentioned and would get shot of Wellens/Danns if we had to sell any!

ealingfox

ealingfox

Posted
Posted

I was most surprised at, and would give the most credit to the most effective midfield stat, even though the Charlton defeat means it wasn't enough to stave off bad form.

 

For what its worth, I think King's a good player, but he doesn't score as much as he used to. I think the best thing for us is to use DD, James and King where necessary as horses for courses. I do hope Pearson hasn't given up on Drinkwater.

morris1234

morris1234

Posted
Posted

well you can. If football was a 1 man game then yes it's accurate, but there are lots of other factors. The only way those stats would prove anything would be if they played against the same teams, with the same other 10 players around them with all the others displaying identical form. In other words, you can take your stats and shove them up your arse

Epic!
FremantleFox

FremantleFox

Posted
Posted

Really good post Pookie.

 

Although stats don't tell the whole story, this further substantiates why he's far more dispensable than a lot of forum contributors think (with the greatest of respect).  3 or 4 very good performances at the end of the season just doesn't justify elevating him to a no.1 choice Centre Mid IMHO. Too many performances where he is ineffectual and invisible. 1.5m and we probably will be tempted to sell.

ScouseFox

ScouseFox

Posted
Posted

I'm not arsed what the stats say, there is absolutely, categorically no fúcking way that Marshall-Drinky-James-Knocky is our best midfield. Not a chance in hell. 

 

Good stat though. 

Bert

Bert

Posted
Posted

I'm not arsed what the stats say, there is absolutely, categorically no fúcking way that Marshall-Drinky-James-Knocky is our best midfield. Not a chance in hell. 

 

Good stat though. 

But stat-wise, it is. Regardless of what you think.

ScouseFox

ScouseFox

Posted
Posted

But stat-wise, it is. Regardless of what you think.

 

Yeah it is, obviously. In reality it's not the best though, is it? Would you play that midfield week in week out given our options? Would Marshall-DD-James-Knockaert be your first choice? 

ealingfox

ealingfox

Posted
Posted

It's no surprise that we are most effective when Marshall and Knockaert play (sorry Lloyd), but the possible combinations of DD, James and King are trickier. Should play all three with one upfront imo.

muzzy1981

muzzy1981

Posted
Posted

James is the key, both king and DD play better alongside him, which is why we need them all to stay plus another James type player as cover and possibly a muzzy type player. I don't want much do I haha

LeicesterAreGoingUp

LeicesterAreGoingUp

Posted
Posted

But stat-wise, it is. Regardless of what you think.

 

thats like saying, stat wise, logan's the best keeper cos he hasnt conceded any, doesnt make it a good midfield just because of stats, and anyway, we only won most of them games cos of the nugent /wood scoring  anyway (on form) cant remember any of them players doing anything in them games

Bert

Bert

Posted
Posted

Yeah it is, obviously. In reality it's not the best though, is it? Would you play that midfield week in week out given our options? Would Marshall-DD-James-Knockaert be your first choice? 

Not personally no, Would have King for Drinky. Close one though for me, but as an example if the team was picked purely on stats we could have no real complaints because "the stats don't lie". What the best midfield is, in other people's opinions is a different matter.

thats like saying, stat wise, logan's the best keeper cos he hasnt conceded any, doesnt make it a good midfield just because of stats, and anyway, we only won most of them games cos of the nugent /wood scoring  anyway (on form) cant remember any of them players doing anything in them games

Why hasn't he conceded? Because he hasn't played. Every other player mentioned has played. Well done though, a good point very well made. I have tasted my own medicine.

 

Barcelona won most of their games because of Messi scoring, does that make their midfield crap?

LeicesterAreGoingUp

LeicesterAreGoingUp

Posted
Posted

Not personally no, Would have King for Drinky. Close one though for me, but as an example if the team was picked purely on stats we could have no real complaints because "the stats don't lie". What the best midfield is, in other people's opinions is a different matter.

Why hasn't he conceded? Because he hasn't played. Every other player mentioned has played. Well done though, a good point very well made. I have tasted my own medicine.

 

Barcelona won most of their games because of Messi scoring, does that make their midfield crap?

 

most of the reason messi scores is because of xavi/inesta/pedro assits, name me a time when one of our midfeilders has done a defence splitting pass (marshalls to wood at bristol was just because of shit defending)

Bert

Bert

Posted
Posted

most of the reason messi scores is because of xavi/inesta/pedro assits, name me a time when one of our midfeilders has done a defence splitting pass (marshalls to wood at bristol was just because of shit defending)

 

 

I remember Bristol City at home when Nugent scored after going one on one after a decent ball. How's that?

 

Or what about the third from Nuge?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ICf1sg8bjw

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zbp0x1V5AyU

 

Few from this game too.

Simo86

Simo86

Posted
Posted

most of the reason messi scores is because of xavi/inesta/pedro assits, name me a time when one of our midfeilders has done a defence splitting pass (marshalls to wood at bristol was just because of shit defending)

So you're saying that none of our midfielders  have done a defence splitting pass throughout the season. We scored 71 goals in the league and created numerous other chances throughout the season which weren't put away, but none of our midfielders made the passes when strikers were put through one on one. Is that what you are saying?

LeicesterAreGoingUp

LeicesterAreGoingUp

Posted
Posted

So you're saying that none of our midfielders  have done a defence splitting pass throughout the season. We scored 71 goals in the league and created numerous other chances throughout the season which weren't put away, but none of our midfielders made the passes when strikers were put through one on one. Is that what you are saying?

 

 

i was referring to the 4 the stats say were the best midfield, and bert that one against bristol was a pass from vardy, not one of the midfielders ( :P) 

 

and i'm not saying they're bad, i'm just saying that in them games that say they are the 'best' they midfielders did nothing, so how does hat make them the best (apart from  james scoring when we were already 3-0 up)

 

i know they can do it, just not regularly enough

 

anyway, i'd keep king :P  

beryllind

beryllind

Posted
Posted

 

 

 

 

 

 But the stats show we just don't win enough matches when he starts and it might be time to cash in on him?

 

Absolutely right  this point,  CASH IN NOW

RedHux

RedHux

Posted
Posted

Any number of reasons. Go check out ltlf for the full list but I think the favourite is late payment of loan fees.

There's not been any actual confirmation or in fact anything at all to suggest we are actually under an embargo but two local journos have tweeted it and now the worlds going to end.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...