One variable: Hegeler / Baker?

[MarkRed!]

3 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

I honestly think Wright/Baker is an improvement from Flint/A.N.Other.  I also think that Hegeler playing yesterday we would have lost.
That's not to say I don't like him as CB , and against footballing teams he'd do OK, but yesterday their single simple tactic pulled our defence apart in a way that would exposed Heglers lack of pace. Where he would have improved us is taking the ball forward into the MF space left when CM spread. I thought that Baker and Wright did ok at this , but Hegeler would have been better. It would also mean more space for that long ball to their forwards .

For the Watford game I'd like to see LJ try a MF 3 , Hegeler in the middle with 2 runners either side. This may lead to one up front which I know annoys some, but with Eliasson and ODowda on the wings with licence to push on we may not loose too much attacking threat. 
If He's is to play CB I can only see it in a 3 as those last ditch tackles yesterday would be less likely simply due to his pace.

Watford - I would play (4321)

 

Lucic, Kelly, Magnússon, Baker, Pisano, O'Neill, Hegeler, Brownhill, Odowda, Eliason, Woodrow

[Red-Robbo]

I think Baker had a pretty sound game yesterday. When I got back from the match, I was surpised to hear people on the radio having a go at the defence. They'd just defended 16 corners and kept Millwall largely confined to long range shots. I don't think anyone was brilliant, but if a defender's main job is to keep the opponents from scoring, that's what they did.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Don't think the defence was the issue yesterday. It was because we got bullied in midfield and then the ball just kept coming back! When that happens, even a great defence will be troubled. Hegeler between the back 4 and the midfield could have helped sweep up,  to put out the fires. Or indeed as part of a 3.

The Hegeler v Baker thing... It's interesting and hard to say. What we gain with Hegeler is his composure on the ball and a vital out ball when the ball keeps coming back. However we lose aerial ability. Baker's not bad on the ball but he's good in the air and physically- like a more 'pure defender'.

An 'out' ball can help relieve pressure but Baker's strengths were definitely useful yesterday. Hard to say what's best overall!

[gavlin]

Defensively yesterday LJ got it right because he knew Millwall would lump the high balls into their forwards but it showed the soft underbelly of the team, our midfield struggled to pick up the second balls from the defenders clearances and were out muscled by more physical opponents. In Pack, Smith the central midfield pair were overpowered and showed no  real bite , Paterson  and Brownhill looked lightweight.  If we play Hegelar In the back four at least his distribution can relieve the pressure at the back but we need more muscle in midfield like a Gerry Gow , or a Marvin Elliott . My advice go and buy Romain Sawyers.

[Berkshire Red]

Could hegeler not drop into the midfield in place of pack or Smith? Bring the ball forward from defensive positions while still keeping it tight in defence. He was good enough to play in champions league / Europa league and bundesliga so surely can't be struggling too badly with pace of championship 

[wendyredredrobin]

With Wright club captain and always likely to start, we are well endowed with centre backs and I am happy to see Flint, Hegeler or Baker alongside.  They are all decent centre halves.

But from what I've seen so far, Hegeler gets my vote due to his better ball playing and passing.  It's a fairly close call though.

[Phileas Fogg]

2 hours ago, MarkRed! said:

Watford - I would play (4321)

 

Lucic, Kelly, Magnússon, Baker, Pisano, O'Neill, Hegeler, Brownhill, Odowda, Eliason, Woodrow

Agree but we can't play Woodrow as he played for Fulham in the cup I believe.

Same team but Diedhiou for me.

[Full nelson]

17 hours ago, Tom Fleuriot said:

I'd be interested in knowing the thoughts on the below of people who have attended at least three league games. I went to Barnsley only. 

General consensus seems to be that first two league matches = 60% ish quality, second two = 10% if that. 

The only change in line up in those matches is Hegeler for Baker. 

Another poster (apologies - forgot who) suggested that Hegeler's superior ability to bring the ball out means the midfield can push further up / look for better space to receive the ball. This makes them less likely to get overrun in dangerous places / lose the ball / come deep and be unable to get the pass and move going. 

So my question is: is that plausible as a reason the football looks a lot worse now?

Would be great if people could not reply with alternatives like "no it's just that LJ is shit". He may well be, but I'm interested about that specific point.

Hegeler for Pack/Smith ?!? 

[wendyredredrobin]

We will need a 5 man midfield to get anything out of our next few games.

[shelts]

Hegeler should be in . Centre half with Baker or in for Korey or Pack.

[MarkRed!]

1 hour ago, shelts said:

Hegeler should be in . Centre half with Baker or in for Korey or Pack.

LJ has basically said he can't play in a midfield 2. I would have him in the team either as CB or as a three in midfield. Don't think LJ will do the latter.

[WayOutWest]

2 hours ago, MarkRed! said:

LJ has basically said he can't play in a midfield 2.

Bizarre!!!  If that is the case, then why bring him to the club.  He is not going to play in a regular Central Defensive pair.  He "cant" play in a midfield 2.  It appears he is not going to play in behind the front 2.  He ain't no left or right side midfield player.

Why bring in a player you either A) dont know what do with or B) rate

Stevo

[REDOXO]

22 hours ago, WayOutWest said:

I don't think you can drop Wright or Baker. I would like to see Hegeler replacing Korey Smith. 

In that deeper midfield role in front of our back 4.

 

 It's obvious he is good with the ball at his feet. He is a calm presence and would like to see him dictate play. 

I don't think he has convinced LJ enough to play that role. 

To answer your question,  our football has suffered in terms of creativity with the loss of Hegeler but we seem more solid at the back. 

I don't think Hegeler will dislodge Baker. It will be interesting once the Flint situation is resolved. 

He best route to be in first 11 would be Korey Smith's place in my opinion. 

Stevo

ABSOLUTELY! 

[Fiale]

8 hours ago, gavlin said:

Defensively yesterday LJ got it right because he knew Millwall would lump the high balls into their forwards but it showed the soft underbelly of the team, our midfield struggled to pick up the second balls from the defenders clearances and were out muscled by more physical opponents. In Pack, Smith the central midfield pair were overpowered and showed no  real bite , Paterson  and Brownhill looked lightweight.  If we play Hegelar In the back four at least his distribution can relieve the pressure at the back but we need more muscle in midfield like a Gerry Gow , or a Marvin Elliott . My advice go and buy Romain Sawyers.

 

Millwall played fewer long balls than us. They also seemed to have at least a plan, one of which was if they had no options a runner would go down the wings and get played  into the space behind our fallbacks. They did this a lot in the first half resulting in a lot of crosses, and balls into our box.

[Garland-sweden]

Our defence is working with Baker and Wright. Hegeler in midfield? Does any know what position Hegeler played in Germany?

[BobBobSuperBob]

30 minutes ago, Garland-sweden said:

Our defence is working with Baker and Wright. Hegeler in midfield? Does any know what position Hegeler played in Germany?

 

[Spud55]

20 hours ago, city2015 said:

Could hegeler not drop into the midfield in place of pack or Smith? Bring the ball forward from defensive positions while still keeping it tight in defence. He was good enough to play in champions league / Europa league and bundesliga so surely can't be struggling too badly with pace of championship 

I'd have him in for Smith, then depending on the situation depends who else you play, teams you are expecting to dominate you can take pack out as well and play Pato at the head of a diamond with Elliason and O'Dowda if you want to go balls out behind Reid and Deidhou, or games where you are expecting to be pressured you keep Pack in the middle and drop Bobby in behind Dedihou and move to a midfield 5 with bobby between the midfield and the striker.

On the subject of the defence yesterday, to be fair they did try to play out initially, but the midfield were that bad that I think after 20 / 30 minutes they had given up all hope of being able to give the ball to midfield and not have it come back almost immediately, their only option of a player to give it to who generally managed to hold onto the ball was Reid, so they started trying to bypass the midfield and get it to him.

[Mr Popodopolous]

@Garland-sweden

Chances are, and I'm only guessing here, but chances are he didn't play in a 2, in a 4-4-2 in Germany.

He clearly seems to be lacking something in that position, but brings positive attributes to team. Best in a midfield 3, a defensive midfield or perhaps as CB but I would think as a midfield 3, or DM his best position tbh.

[BobBobSuperBob]

1 hour ago, Spud55 said:

I'd have him in for Smith, then depending on the situation depends who else you play, teams you are expecting to dominate you can take pack out as well and play Pato at the head of a diamond with Elliason and O'Dowda if you want to go balls out behind Reid and Deidhou, or games where you are expecting to be pressured you keep Pack in the middle and drop Bobby in behind Dedihou and move to a midfield 5 with bobby between the midfield and the striker.

On the subject of the defence yesterday, to be fair they did try to play out initially, but the midfield were that bad that I think after 20 / 30 minutes they had given up all hope of being able to give the ball to midfield and not have it come back almost immediately, their only option of a player to give it to who generally managed to hold onto the ball was Reid, so they started trying to bypass the midfield and get it to him.

Understand your thinking in a 'creative midfield sense'

But as everyone has muted that we got bullied in the middle of the park on Saturday and cries for a midfield enforcer / dominant central midfielder you think Hegeler and Patterson ( Aided by Ellison and O'Dowda) would be physical enough  ?

Nice idea but majorly flawed IMHO

[Nibor]

One way to avoid getting bullied is to take less time on the ball or have a bit more quality when you bring it forward, opponents who know you can beat them or pass around them will either stand off more or foul.  I think Hegeler has the quality to take the ball forward and can pick a pass based on what little we saw last season, but to be honest it won't matter who is in the middle if all your outlets just stand still.  I don't understand the "can't play in a two" comment.  Has he really managed to have a career mostly in the German top flight without being capable of playing in a midfield two? 

On Saturday's showing Smith would get dropped for O'Neill or Hegeler.  Depends who is more likely to make 90 minutes.

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 minutes ago, Nibor said:

One way to avoid getting bullied is to take less time on the ball or have a bit more quality when you bring it forward, opponents who know you can beat them or pass around them will either stand off more or foul.  I think Hegeler has the quality to take the ball forward and can pick a pass based on what little we saw last season, but to be honest it won't matter who is in the middle if all your outlets just stand still.  I don't understand the "can't play in a two" comment.  Has he really managed to have a career mostly in the German top flight without being capable of playing in a midfield two? 

On Saturday's showing Smith would get dropped for O'Neill or Hegeler.  Depends who is more likely to make 90 minutes.

4-4-2, certainly how we play it, isn't terribly big in Germany.

I reckon this country of say the top 8 or 10 European Leagues is fairly unique- and that is changing fast too- in terms of prevalence of a 4-4-2. It's becoming a lot less common at this level too. In fact barring a few sides even at this level, I don't even think it's so big in England either now. So chances are he may not have played in that setup in Germany too much.

[Spud55]

1 minute ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Understand your thinking in a 'creative midfield sense'

But as everyone has muted that we got bullied in the middle of the park on Saturday and cries for a midfield enforcer / dominant central midfielder you think Hegeler and Patterson ( Aided by Ellison and O'Dowda) would be physical enough  ?

Nice idea but majorly flawed IMHO

I don't think we were particularily bullied by millwall, we just couldn't keep hold of the ball in the middle as Smith and to a lesser extent the rest of midfield were just giving it to Millwall at every opportunity, Patterson was wondering around and was rarely on the left meaning Bryan had to try to take on at least 2 players to get anywhere, when Patterson got the ball in the middle him and Ried were working together brilliantly and were the players who looked capable of unlocking the Millwall defence.  So we lost all width as neither Brownhill or Patterson were making the runs out wide and neither were getting in positions often that could allow the full backs to break beyond them.  

When O'Dowda came on we looked generally better (although i still question his end product) I really don't think O'neil is the answer, I dont think you need an enforcer if you have players that can actually pass the ball, most of the "good" things that milwall did came as a direct result of our midfield being incapable on the whole of being able to pass 5 yards, it wasn't that they were missing pin point passes, it was an inability to give it to a bloke a few yards away without mis-placing the ball 2 yards behind him meaning he has to turn back and by the time we had the ball they would have a Millwall player in their face.

Also with nothing out wide Millwall were able to play a high press as they had nothing to fear, they could simply just compress the field and get on top of our players, because they know as well as everyone else that we do not have the ability to break quickly and get in behind.

I think our defence is solid enough, we defended well and other than one occasion where we had the ball in our own box and from the SS it looked as if O'Neil decided to charge down the clearance and then it ended up with us giving Millwall the ball in our own box, i'm still not entirely sure what happened there.  For all their corners I never really felt as if they were threatening to score (previously the thought of an opposition corner was terrifying) and the previous occasion excluded.

I genuinely believe that most of our problems come from our central midfield and we are generally under pressure of our own creation, I think Hegeler has the ability to get his foot on the ball and slow everything down when we are under the Kosh, but also the nous to carry the ball and pick up the pace when necessary, defensively our central midfield do not help, both Pack and Smith have the tendency to just back off and become part of the defence rather than protecting them, we have got better at stopping teams getting into the box (even against Brentford where we were battered, I would have been dissapointed if Frankie has conceded any of their efforts on goal the 2 goals aside, the save from Sawyers was his best but he was hardly pulling worldies out of his arse all game) but Pack a smith still give opposition players too much space, also their general positioning is poor, on saturday we won the vast majority of first balls, but almost none of the second balls as the midfield are just nowhere to be seen.

I think that Hegeler could solve a lot of these problems and Pato seems best in the attacking midfield role, and with actual wingers we have an outlet when we are under pressure, and i think the personel are less likley to put us under the pressure in the first place as they may either keep the ball or at least run at the opposition.

Using that midfield away against a better side would be suicide, but with a bit of tweaking (pulling bobby back and adding in Pack for Pato) you get a 5 man midfield that still retains the outlets out wide, but also has players in the middle who can keep the ball under a bit of pressure.

This is not to say that we shouldn't look to strengthen in the middle, we absolutely should and we have been sorely remiss by not doing so considering that many of our defensive frailties have come from the Midfield rather than the defence themselves.

[Nibor]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

4-4-2, certainly how we play it, isn't terribly big in Germany.

I reckon this country of say the top 8 or 10 European Leagues is fairly unique- and that is changing fast too- in terms of prevalence of a 4-4-2. It's becoming a lot less common at this level too. In fact barring a few sides, I don't even think it's so big in England either now.

Yes I know there's been a trend away from 4-4-2, you could hardly miss that but LJ has decided to play it.  Honestly the role of a central midfielder is not that different between the two, not enough to question to whether a player is capable of it or not.  Hegeler played for Hertha and Nurnberg in the top flight - top 10 sides.  That league is far and away better than the Championship in quality and it's got just as much pace and physicality.  The guy is 6 ft 4, decent on the ball and has a range of passing and comes across on the pitch and off as an intelligent person.  I think the claim he can't play in a two is extremely hard to believe.

[BobBobSuperBob]

8 minutes ago, Spud55 said:

I don't think we were particularily bullied by millwall, we just couldn't keep hold of the ball in the middle as Smith and to a lesser extent the rest of midfield were just giving it to Millwall at every opportunity, Patterson was wondering around and was rarely on the left meaning Bryan had to try to take on at least 2 players to get anywhere, when Patterson got the ball in the middle him and Ried were working together brilliantly and were the players who looked capable of unlocking the Millwall defence.  So we lost all width as neither Brownhill or Patterson were making the runs out wide and neither were getting in positions often that could allow the full backs to break beyond them.  

When O'Dowda came on we looked generally better (although i still question his end product) I really don't think O'neil is the answer, I dont think you need an enforcer if you have players that can actually pass the ball, most of the "good" things that milwall did came as a direct result of our midfield being incapable on the whole of being able to pass 5 yards, it wasn't that they were missing pin point passes, it was an inability to give it to a bloke a few yards away without mis-placing the ball 2 yards behind him meaning he has to turn back and by the time we had the ball they would have a Millwall player in their face.

Also with nothing out wide Millwall were able to play a high press as they had nothing to fear, they could simply just compress the field and get on top of our players, because they know as well as everyone else that we do not have the ability to break quickly and get in behind.

I think our defence is solid enough, we defended well and other than one occasion where we had the ball in our own box and from the SS it looked as if O'Neil decided to charge down the clearance and then it ended up with us giving Millwall the ball in our own box, i'm still not entirely sure what happened there.  For all their corners I never really felt as if they were threatening to score (previously the thought of an opposition corner was terrifying) and the previous occasion excluded.

I genuinely believe that most of our problems come from our central midfield and we are generally under pressure of our own creation, I think Hegeler has the ability to get his foot on the ball and slow everything down when we are under the Kosh, but also the nous to carry the ball and pick up the pace when necessary, defensively our central midfield do not help, both Pack and Smith have the tendency to just back off and become part of the defence rather than protecting them, we have got better at stopping teams getting into the box (even against Brentford where we were battered, I would have been dissapointed if Frankie has conceded any of their efforts on goal the 2 goals aside, the save from Sawyers was his best but he was hardly pulling worldies out of his arse all game) but Pack a smith still give opposition players too much space, also their general positioning is poor, on saturday we won the vast majority of first balls, but almost none of the second balls as the midfield are just nowhere to be seen.

I think that Hegeler could solve a lot of these problems and Pato seems best in the attacking midfield role, and with actual wingers we have an outlet when we are under pressure, and i think the personel are less likley to put us under the pressure in the first place as they may either keep the ball or at least run at the opposition.

Using that midfield away against a better side would be suicide, but with a bit of tweaking (pulling bobby back and adding in Pack for Pato) you get a 5 man midfield that still retains the outlets out wide, but also has players in the middle who can keep the ball under a bit of pressure.

This is not to say that we shouldn't look to strengthen in the middle, we absolutely should and we have been sorely remiss by not doing so considering that many of our defensive frailties have come from the Midfield rather than the defence themselves.

Good , well argued reasons / post that Spud 

The ability to keep the ball and thus not having to win it back is  a reasonable / fair / good one (And well argued) and you may be right that it's worth trying at some point

 

Id still have real,concerns away from home or in games where we are likely to be out of possession and  under the cosh for periods though !

If we are going PF to try and utilise JH initially Id prefer to see us try a narrower midfield three alongside two of MP / KS / GON / JB with two (COD / NE / JP ?) making a 4-5-1 out of possession and a 4-3-3 in possession

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, Nibor said:

Yes I know there's been a trend away from 4-4-2, you could hardly miss that but LJ has decided to play it.  Honestly the role of a central midfielder is not that different between the two, not enough to question to whether a player is capable of it or not.  Hegeler played for Hertha and Nurnberg in the top flight - top 10 sides.  That league is far and away better than the Championship in quality and it's got just as much pace and physicality.  The guy is 6 ft 4, decent on the ball and has a range of passing and comes across on the pitch and off as an intelligent person.  I think the claim he can't play in a two is extremely hard to believe.

Perhaps he is a bit lacking in pace.

I am not doubting Hegeler has quality, I just think he would be best either in a central 3 or in front of the back 4. Like a 4-1-4-1 sort of formation, or maybe split a bit further into 4-1-2-3- two wide forwards/pushed high wingers and a striker begin the latter 3.

[Sir Colby-Tit]

On ‎19‎/‎08‎/‎2017 at 22:34, WayOutWest said:

I don't think you can drop Wright or Baker. 

I would like to see Hegeler replacing Korey Smith. 

In that deeper midfield role in front of our back 4.

 

 It's obvious he is good with the ball at his feet. He is a calm presence and would like to see him dictate play. 

I don't think he has convinced LJ enough to play that role. 

To answer your question,  our football has suffered in terms of creativity with the loss of Hegeler but we seem more solid at the back. 

I don't think Hegeler will dislodge Baker. It will be interesting once the Flint situation is resolved. 

He best route to be in first 11 would be Korey Smith's place in my opinion. 

Stevo

Have to agree with this.

For me, Korey is a weak link. I accept he is well loved, and generally avoids criticism, but he always takes too long on the ball, takes a touch too many and invariably gives possession away, or slows down an attack.

(Tin hat on)

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, Nibor said:

Yes I know there's been a trend away from 4-4-2, you could hardly miss that but LJ has decided to play it.  Honestly the role of a central midfielder is not that different between the two, not enough to question to whether a player is capable of it or not.  Hegeler played for Hertha and Nurnberg in the top flight - top 10 sides.  That league is far and away better than the Championship in quality and it's got just as much pace and physicality.  The guy is 6 ft 4, decent on the ball and has a range of passing and comes across on the pitch and off as an intelligent person.  I think the claim he can't play in a two is extremely hard to believe.

Perhaps he is a bit lacking in pace.

I am not doubting Hegeler's quality, I just think he would be best either in a central 3 or in front of the back 4. Like a 4-1-2-3 sort of formation (the three up top being 2 wingers/wide forwards and obviously a central striker).

[Nibor]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Perhaps he is a bit lacking in pace.

I am not doubting Hegeler has quality, I just think he would be best either in a central 3 or in front of the back 4. Like a 4-1-4-1 sort of formation, or maybe split a bit further into 4-1-2-3- two wide forwards/pushed high wingers and a striker begin the latter 3.

I don't disagree he might be better that way but given we're not playing that system the question ought to be, is he better than Pack or Smith in the midfield as it is now? After Saturday I'd be hard pressed to say he shouldn't have the chance! 

[Nibor]

5 minutes ago, Sir Colby-Tit said:

Have to agree with this.

For me, Korey is a weak link. I accept he is well loved, and generally avoids criticism, but he always takes too long on the ball, takes a touch too many and invariably gives possession away, or slows down an attack.

(Tin hat on)

 

Last season or two he's been hit and miss and just about used up all the substantial credit he banked with fans by being exceptional in the first one. I think he's capable of more but nobody should be guaranteed a place and he needs competition. Now is the time IMO. 

[Spud55]

8 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Good , well argued reasons / post that Spud 

The ability to keep the ball and thus not having to win it back is  a fair / good one and you may be right that it's worth trying at some point

 

Id still have real,concerns away from home or in games where we are likely to be under the cosh for periods though !

If we are going PF to try and utilise JH initially Id prefer to see us try a narrower midfield three alongside two of MP / KS / GON / JB with two (COD / NE / JP ?) making a 4-5-1 out of possession and a 4-3-3 in possession

 

Yea i think that could work, I'm just trying to find a midfield that works largely in both situations, as although I don't mind it if LJ makes 2/3 changes in midfield most weeks to best fit the situation, i know many people do not like that and there are benefits to having a settled side,  I have always been a fan of the 4-5-1 as when done properly like you say it's a 4-3-3 in attacking and a 4-5-1 when defending so maybe this would work,

---------------Fielding-----------------

Pisano--Baker--Wright--Bryan

--------Hegeler---------Pack--------------

Eliason-----------------------------Pato/COD

------------------Reid/Pato---------------------

-------------------Deidhou-------------------------

I think that gives you the best of both worlds, you could start every game with that 11 and then depending on the situation you can swap sacrifice one of Hegeler or Pack of a striker and play a diamond, or you can crowd the midfield and keep the ball, but still retain outlets out wide, I would also like to see what Brownhill could do alongside Hegeler as i think he could be an exceptional box to box midfielder and replace Pack in time.