8 minutes ago, Mod said:

Always tries to beat 1 player too many!

So, 1?

19 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

I hope we don't push Angelo Gabriel out on loan to keep Sterling in our plans.

If Gabriel cannot get a work permit fair enough but he has a lot more top flight games than Santos so stands a good chance.

At the moment our 4 wide players looke like Mudryk, Sterling, Noni and Gabriel. If we sign that Kudus player from they who shall not be named on this forum where does he fit in?

I agree but I think if the Caciedo deal does go through I can see both Santos and Gabriel going out on loan. Hopefully not. If the do go out I hope they go together and go to a PL team so that they are still in everyone's consciousness.  As they are both young Brazilians it would be could if they could do their loans together.

Hopefully there is room for both of them here. I would much rather be watching Gabriel this season than have another season of being frustrated by Sterling 

On 23/07/2023 at 03:08, axman2526 said:

Happens to players who start early. 15 his debut for Championship QPR. Look at Rooney. He is cooked at the top level.

he's been like this for years though, its how Sterling is. Think its a lazy argument to use burnout. Throughout his entire career he'll get 3 chances and score 1. Good thing about Sterling is that he'll always make these chances himself with his movement. Sterling hasn't really been able to take on a player since he was at Liverpool.

Would not be suprised to see Sterling leave, either this month or December - January window.

1 hour ago, RIP Mourinho said:

he's been like this for years though, its how Sterling is. Think its a lazy argument to use burnout. Throughout his entire career he'll get 3 chances and score 1. Good thing about Sterling is that he'll always make these chances himself with his movement. Sterling hasn't really been able to take on a player since he was at Liverpool.

I don't believe for a moment his chance conversion rate is even remotely close to 1 in 3. If that was the case across his "entire career" he would be recognised as one of the most consistent and lethal finishers in the World. The reality is he hasn't and isn't.

1 minute ago, just said:

I don't believe for a moment his chance conversion rate is even remotely close to 1 in 3. If that was the case across his "entire career" he would be recognised as one of the most consistent and lethal finishers in the World. The reality is he hasn't and isn't.

It's a very easy stat to disprove. 

At Manchester City he was 91 goals from 447 shots in the PL. So "1 in 5" basically.

https://fbref.com/en/players/b400bde0/Raheem-Sterling#all_stats_shooting 

 

21 minutes ago, just said:

I don't believe for a moment his chance conversion rate is even remotely close to 1 in 3. If that was the case across his "entire career" he would be recognised as one of the most consistent and lethal finishers in the World. The reality is he hasn't and isn't.

I kinda feel the point wasn't that 1 in 3 was a good thing, but instead that he gets himself into a lot of positions to score and that means he scores goals despite not being a great finisher. 

33 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

I kinda feel the point wasn't that 1 in 3 was a good thing, but instead that he gets himself into a lot of positions to score and that means he scores goals despite not being a great finisher. 

1 in 5 isn't bad either ... a lot of so-called top forwards had a similar strike rate.

In PL season 2017/18. Harry Kane scored 30 goals but it took him 181 shots (1 in 6). And Mohammed Salah has 137 career PL goals for Liverpool which required 779 shots (rounds to "1 in 6" as well)

Edited July 24, 20232 yr by Sexyfootball

19 hours ago, Mod said:

Always tries to beat 1 player too many!

Yeah, the first player 

Just now, SimonH said:

Yeah, the first player 

Bit harsh ... possibly fair !

11 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

1 in 5 isn't bad either ... a lot of so-called top forwards had a similar strike rate.

In PL season 2017/18. Harry Kane scored 30 goals but it took him 181 shots (1 in 6). And Mohammed Salah has 137 career PL goals for Liverpool which required 779 shots (rounds to "1 in 6" as well)

Shots to goals ratio isn't a great stat to use as it doesn't take into account where those shots happen.

Kane has scored 210 goals from an xG of 182, Salah 172 from an xG of 162 (it was a bigger gap before last season)

Sterling has 104 from an xG of 114. He's not a good finisher. 

39 of sterlings 104 goals have been in 6 yard box. That's way higher as a % than any other player I can compare him to. 

Edited July 24, 20232 yr by bisright1

18 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Shots to goals ratio isn't a great stat to use as it doesn't take into account where those shots happen.

Kane has scored 210 goals from an xG of 182, Salah 172 from an xG of 162 (it was a bigger gap before last season)

Sterling has 104 from an xG of 114. He's not a good finisher. 

39 of sterlings 104 goals have been in 6 yard box. That's way higher as a % than any other player I can compare him to. 

I like Shots to Goals because it is binary and not dependent on some obscure algorithm, or a statistician/geek's take on the quality of a chance. All the competing xG sites have different values for "xG".

According to FBRef, who use Opta data, Sterling's 91 Man City goals came from an xG of 73 ... which suggests he finishes fine.

Which xG site are your stats coming from ?

1 hour ago, just said:

I don't believe for a moment his chance conversion rate is even remotely close to 1 in 3. If that was the case across his "entire career" he would be recognised as one of the most consistent and lethal finishers in the World. The reality is he hasn't and isn't.

that isn't his chance conversion rate because i completely pulled the figures out of the air. The point i was trying to make was that with chances you'd 'expect' him to score he isn't going to score the majority of them. The other point is that from these chances that he misses the majority of other wingers wouldn't be in the position to get the chance. Fantastic at reading the game, average at executing it. In a team that creates lost of chances though, he'll score plenty. There's a reason he was bang average and still managed to be top scorer last season.

27 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

I like Shots to Goals because it is binary and not dependent on some obscure algorithm, or a statistician/geek's take on the quality of a chance. All the competing xG sites have different values for "xG".

According to FBRef, who use Opta data, Sterling's 91 Man City goals came from an xG of 73 ... which suggests he finishes fine.

Which xG site are your stats coming from ?

Understat, having done some reading FBRef are better. Although it's not 91-73 it's 84-79 (you pulled too many seasons to compare and only non pen xG), so +5 over the data at city. The comparison is Kane who is +23 and Salah who is +10 (+13 if you take away last season).

So those players are clearly better finishers by xG, whilst seemingly worse when looking at shots to goals. 

And why is that? It's because he scores a statistically very high % inside the 6 yard box. And that's because to @RIP Mourinho point, he gets in great positions. 

So his shots are more likely to be in a position where it's very difficult to not score than players like Kane or Salah. 

 

As the saying goes...... "too much statistical analysis is a proven cause of acute cerebral paralysis".

 

10 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Understat, having done some reading FBRef are better. Although it's not 91-73 it's 84-79 (you pulled too many seasons to compare and only non pen xG), so +5 over the data at city. The comparison is Kane who is +23 and Salah who is +10 (+13 if you take away last season).

So those players are clearly better finishers by xG, whilst seemingly worse when looking at shots to goals. 

And why is that? It's because he scores a statistically very high % inside the 6 yard box. And that's because to @RIP Mourinho point, he gets in great positions. 

So his shots are more likely to be in a position where it's very difficult to not score than players like Kane or Salah. 

 

Fair enough - I looked at the total line, and looking at the main body of data, it's clear they have the xG completely missing for his first two seasons at City. You really have to check everything in micro levels of detail with all these sites LOL.

Does rather highlight the point about all this xG data. We have no idea whether it is accurate or not ... they even state in the definitions that some data is missing :

He's definitely not 1 goal in 3 from shots though, which was my original point !

Personally I am not a fan of Sterling, as my perception was always that he was a poor footballer (as per the video that Just posted).

11 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Fair enough - I looked at the total line, and looking at the main body of data, it's clear they have the xG completely missing for his first two seasons at City. You really have to check everything in micro levels of detail with all these sites LOL.

Does rather highlight the point about all this xG data. We have no idea whether it is accurate or not ... they even state in the definitions that some data is missing :

He's definitely not 1 goal in 3 from shots though, which was my original point !

Personally I am not a fan of Sterling, as my perception was always that he was a poor footballer (as per the video that Just posted).

Yeah agree, all this data has to be looked at together, can't rely on one stat alone. And by the eye test, sterling is a rank finisher. 

One of many players we've had over the years who love to dribble a shot at the keeper. Give me more of that Jackson finish this season please.

1 hour ago, Sexyfootball said:

1 in 5 isn't bad either ... a lot of so-called top forwards had a similar strike rate.

In PL season 2017/18. Harry Kane scored 30 goals but it took him 181 shots (1 in 6). And Mohammed Salah has 137 career PL goals for Liverpool which required 779 shots (rounds to "1 in 6" as well)

Yes, i think what has to also be taken into account is the types of shots and from where. I maintain that Sterling is a one trick pony and that trick is arriving at the back post late and fair play to him to be able to do that. Therefore the majority of his shots are close range and/or one v one with the keeper, which makes his finishing ratio much worse in reality, imo.

I still belive that when City were able to get Gundogan to convert those back post sweeping up goals, with everything elsde that Gundogan had to offer, that was pretty much Sterlings card marked.

Needs to pick it up. Pochettino won't have any qualms benching him for a younger player with something to prove. 

I don’t get or understand all this data / analytics stuff, or understand the argument for him that he creates , I don’t know what.  All I see as a ‘football / Chelsea fan’ is a bang average wasteful overpaid player. 
ps. The way he minces along is getting embarrassing. So as not to offend, just my opinion, to his fan boys. 

16 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

Yes, i think what has to also be taken into account is the types of shots and from where. I maintain that Sterling is a one trick pony and that trick is arriving at the back post late and fair play to him to be able to do that. Therefore the majority of his shots are close range and/or one v one with the keeper, which makes his finishing ratio much worse in reality, imo.

I still belive that when City were able to get Gundogan to convert those back post sweeping up goals, with everything elsde that Gundogan had to offer, that was pretty much Sterlings card marked.

He managed to fit in that Man City squad but they were fine letting him go, that alone tells you a whole lot. Usually you don't let what it seems to be on paper a dangerous goal-scorer to your rival unless he himself wants to leave and nobody in Man City got worried when they lost Sterling.

Haaland scored only one time from outside the box so he also took away whatever Sterling was trying to do in their system.

1 hour ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Needs to pick it up. Pochettino won't have any qualms benching him for a younger player with something to prove. 

I wish I could share that conviction.

So much is being made in the football media, (and indeed from many posters on here), about us not having enough "mature", "experienced" players that I feel this will get him the nod from Pochettino for a starting berth over possible younger, raw, hungry players who ultimately will provide a lot more than Sterling in the long term and quite possibly even immediately.

5 hours ago, strider6004 said:

Would not be suprised to see Sterling leave, either this month or December - January window.

40 minutes ago, just said:

I wish I could share that conviction.

So much is being made in the football media, (and indeed from many posters on here), about us not having enough "mature", "experienced" players that I feel this will get him the nod from Pochettino for a starting berth over possible younger, raw, hungry players who ultimately will provide a lot more than Sterling in the long term and quite possibly even immediately.

Would be a shame then, because Sterling deserves the least time out of any player. Most experienced, highest wages, and looked at as the role model for others. 

I know its preseason but he continues to play with such complacency and have that chip on his shoulder attitude. It would make no sense to continue to give him minutes when we know he can't get any better whilst the likes of Mudryk, Angelo, Madueke, Olise/Kudus will likely offer more. 

Not a big fan. Think he could be useful playing off of Jackson in some situations, don't think he should be a starter though.