6 minutes ago, Stim said:

And clearly to eliminate the mistakes from his game he should be sold and replaced by a 29 year old.

Unless Christensen becomes a 'net positive' player next season, absolutely. The team's performance matters more than an individual's career development.

Edited June 27, 20188 yr by the special one

29 minutes ago, the special one said:

Unless Christensen becomes a 'net positive' player next season, absolutely. The team's performance matters more than an individual's career development.

How do you describe net positive, does positive defensive actions count I.e preventing goals or even his distribution and composure on the ball helping in the build up to a goal or is it literally in your mind just goals only that make up for the actually very few mistakes over the course of the season he made.

Just now, PedroMendez said:

How do you describe net positive, does positive defensive actions count I.e preventing goals or even his distribution and composure on the ball helping in the build up to a goal or is it literally in your mind just goals only that make up for the actually very few mistakes over the course of the season he made.

Goals and assists are the only aspects that make up a players game apparently, regardless of position and role.

1 hour ago, the special one said:

Unless Christensen becomes a 'net positive' player next season, absolutely. The team's performance matters more than an individual's career development.

You are everything thats wrong with football.

2 hours ago, the special one said:

Unless Christensen becomes a 'net positive' player next season, absolutely. The team's performance matters more than an individual's career development.

What does that actually mean, sounds like one of those stupid americanisms that are creeping into soccerball

He doesn’t score many goals because he’s not expecting the ball to arrive as we take another short corner, pass it around the corner flag for a bit then send it back down the pitch to Tibo. 

He’s probably fallen asleep by the time the ball actually makes it in to the box. 

The heck is a net positive player?

17 minutes ago, Deino said:

The heck is a net positive player?

Let's use SMART and RUMBA formulas for that

44 minutes ago, Deino said:

The heck is a net positive player?

Sorry my bad - granted it's just a term that probably only makes sense to me (it's a term I use in my work, i'm a statistical analyst in financial services by trade).

What I mean, for example, if Christensen doesn't score from a set piece despite being given a clear chance to do so it effectively just becomes a wasted set piece (in other words, Christensen hasn't contributed positively to the team).

JT can be considered 'net positive' and as a result has the legend status he does in so far he always turned up when the club needed someone to deliver.

Generally speaking factors such as positive defensive actions, distribution, composure on the ball are actually irrelevant - what defines whether a player is net positive is how they contribute to the team's performance - do they give more than they give back or vice versa?

For me Christensen didn't excel last season, he simply met expectations.

Edited June 27, 20188 yr by the special one

Which for a Chelsea youth player is a bloody miracle.

2 hours ago, the special one said:

3 hours ago, Deino said:

 

Sorry my bad - granted it's just a term that probably only makes sense to me (it's a term I use in my work, i'm a statistical analyst in financial services by trade).

If ever I saw a case of several how not to.....,what not to....,why you shouldn't...... all together in one sentence.  SMH (It's an abbreviation I have seen used and sometimes use myself to indicate I am shaking my head)

I find it strange that fans want to see youth integrated in the team, but then don't show patience when they make a few mistakes. 

Christiensen is a top prospect, I'm sure they likes of city an Barcelona would be sniffing round if we were to sell him. 

He is also club trained and homegrown for registration purposes, so it is very beneficial for us to show faith in him, or we will end up spending big money overrated English players just to fill the quota. 

I thought he was excellent during our best period last season, and then he got injured, and seemed to lose his momentum. 

There's loads of areas for him to improve, but he is very young, and how many centre backs are there around Europe his age or younger, that are closer to the finished article? 

Centre backs tend to peak later than most outfield players, because so much of what makes a top defender is about reading the game. 

Christiensen will only improve with experience and as his body develops. 

4 hours ago, Munkworth said:

He doesn’t score many goals because he’s not expecting the ball to arrive as we take another short corner, pass it around the corner flag for a bit then send it back down the pitch to Tibo. 

He’s probably fallen asleep by the time the ball actually makes it in to the box. 

Dont see the issue with the short corners myself, we have scored a few goals and created chances that way but i am someone who can't stand crosses into the box. 

25 minutes ago, Argo said:

Dont see the issue with the short corners myself, we have scored a few goals and created chances that way but i am someone who can't stand crosses into the box. 

They’re great the few times they come off but more often than not they lead to no more than the ball going back in to our own half. 

It’s more pernient about the discussion about our centre backs not scoring much though. How can they score when one of their limited opportunities to do so are wasted?

12 minutes ago, Munkworth said:

They’re great the few times they come off but more often than not they lead to no more than the ball going back in to our own half. 

I'd say even that's preferable to the usual outcome when it's being lumped in the box, which 19/20 results in the opposition regaining possession one way or another.

4 hours ago, the special one said:

Sorry my bad - granted it's just a term that probably only makes sense to me (it's a term I use in my work, i'm a statistical analyst in financial services by trade).

What I mean, for example, if Christensen doesn't score from a set piece despite being given a clear chance to do so it effectively just becomes a wasted set piece (in other words, Christensen hasn't contributed positively to the team).

JT can be considered 'net positive' and as a result has the legend status he does in so far he always turned up when the club needed someone to deliver.

Generally speaking factors such as positive defensive actions, distribution, composure on the ball are actually irrelevant - what defines whether a player is net positive is how they contribute to the team's performance - do they give more than they give back or vice versa?

For me Christensen didn't excel last season, he simply met expectations.

 

44 minutes ago, Argo said:

I'd say even that's preferable to the usual outcome when it's being lumped in the box, which 19/20 results in the opposition regaining possession one way or another.

To be fair me and my old man used to have a bet on whether or not the corner would beat the first man so I get your point 

 

Does this mean Christensen is net positive? 120 positives to 5 negatives leaving a NET of +115?

Just trying to get my head around these new metrics.

To be fair me and my old man used to have a bet on whether or not the corner would beat the first man so I get your point [emoji3]

Do our corners ever beat the first man? I feel like the last time that happened it resulted in Drogbas goal in the cl final.

4 hours ago, CFCholland said:

15 hours ago, Munkworth said:

To be fair me and my old man used to have a bet on whether or not the corner would beat the first man so I get your point 

Do our corners ever beat the first man? I feel like the last time that happened it resulted in Drogbas goal in the cl final.

In recent years, our corners have been sh*t. Cesc and Willian barely ever beat the first man. A lot of the times it's been a scramble or just a hit and hope someone gets on the end of it. 

32 minutes ago, Deino said:

In recent years, our corners have been sh*t. Cesc and Willian barely ever beat the first man. A lot of the times it's been a scramble or just a hit and hope someone gets on the end of it. 

Our bet goes back to the days of Lamps taking them. We’ve never been very good at them!

Mata was really good at corners.

No one's really that good at corners or crossing tbf. Even if you have De Bruyne, Trippier or Beckham most still go to waste.

Edited June 28, 20188 yr by Argo

Corners into the box are generally wasted. A negative net contribution if you like. Short corners are always better.

36 minutes ago, Total-Football said:

Corners into the box are generally wasted. A negative net contribution if you like. Short corners are always better.

Get the f**k out before @RIP Mourinho see’s this