Jump to content
IGNORED

The Massengo Conundrum


Midlands Robin
 Share

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Prinny said:

That's not it. I'm specifically debunking a claim that he's significantly contributed to a top half team by going through games played for said team and showing that we don't pick up points when he plays.

 

Might be wrong here and correct me if I am. You base considerable contributions solely on points then? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Out of interest, how did you evaluate Marlon Pack or Korey Smith in their time here at Championship level?

You first!

This is a bunch of IMOs of course.

Brownhill>Smith>Pack

Pack I thought was a player massively affected by what was going on around him. A non difference maker. except in a very specific situations, like when he had a bunch of space and a bunch of runners. Did the simple things right! Backwards and sideways, large % of passes complete! Wasn't upset to see him go especially for the alleged fee.

Smith pre and post multiple injuries was different. I really liked him, when he was able to run around. The last season and currently for Swansea, he's just a guy (JAG), doesn't make a huge difference as a footballer when he plays. Wasn't upset to see him go. But if he's stayed as a squad player, fine.

If you liked Pack, ok, if you liked Smith ok, then why was our midfield the way it was when they played together? Everyone else/ LJ? I had no problem after seeing Pack and Smith get overrun constantly with us trying to revamp the central midfield with Nagy and Massengo. if they were much better. However the value is very different, Pack outdid his transfer fee. Smith assumedly did too. AN, and HNM haven't at all.

It's not that these level of players are terrible, and you can't win with them in the squad, (see Smith and Swansea) it's that you shouldn't fill your squad with them, and you shouldn't spend large resources on them. You can get a Smith for free. Johnson and Holtby who we just played are both out of contract in the summer, they're fine. You can find these players, you don't have to pay £2.5 million for them. Same with Nagy btw. these mid tier (money) signings go against the squad building philosophy I want the club to have.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gmac said:

Might be wrong here and correct me if I am. You base considerable contributions solely on points then? 

No, you obviously can play well and lose a game, and play badly in a winning team. I'm very much against the idea that results = performance. Again, results are not an indicator of personal ability in a team sport. even sports where you have much more control like a QB in the American football. Wins aren't regarded as a QB stat.

But, you can't be in a team that is in relegation form when you play and it be said that you are significantly contributing to that teams success. Because there's little to no success when you play. (again excluding contributions off the pitch etc).

You can claim that we might have been more successful if he's played every game if you want, but there isn't anything to support that as an idea except "I think he is good". which is fine right? It's just an opinion.

So that's the difference between claiming something which is just an opinion "We'd be top of the league if he'd played every game!" which I just have to accept and I can't prove that wrong and "the facts are that he's been making significant contributions to our team" when the actual facts are, we have a terrible record when he plays. If instead in the game he started, we lost every one of them 100-0. that's only 5 points less of game state when he went off and a much worse goal difference. 

You can totally have the opinion that he's the greatest player ever and it's just a pure coincidence we lose when he plays because all the other players are crap and the manager is crap and it's not his fault at all. I don't think sensibly you can look at our position, and points total, and claim he's made a comparatively significant positive contribution to it. The data doesn't support it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

I am not living in doom and gloom though, so stop quoting my own signatures to me because it's irrelevant to this discussion.

People don't just tell people to get a life when they post their reasoning if they're not unhappy with themselves. I'm attempting to illuminate you from your gloom.

Your, no doubt selective stats really mean **** all to me. Swearing too? Must be the gloom, or is it the doom? Feel free to select ANY stat that shows the opposite.


I use my eyes, and they tell me the kid is a player, and I have seen enough players over a 55 year period to recognise one. Your 55 years of ??? told you that 13th is top half of a 24 team table. It told you that he was significantly contributing to us being a top half of the table team when we're actually in relegation form when he plays.

He might not be the most creative when it comes to his final pass, but that may come. Agreed! and hopefully, I want him to succeed, he's here after all. Only benefits the club if he does,

Currently he is good enough that Pearson is ready to play him ahead of others, and at 19 and having less than 2 years in a new country, learning a new style of football and all that entails he has done a fine job. I think he will only get better, I just hope he sticks with us long enough to see it first hand.

He's good enough that when Bakinson is in the doghouse and he has no other fully fit options he plays. We'll see when everyone is fit where he really is. Pearson also seems to have the same pecking order policy that Holden does, where if you win you stay in (except for fitness) so we have to take that into account when players are selected. 

I hope he gets better, I hope we see it or sell him for a massive profit. On that we can agree I hope. Cheer up!

 

Edited by Prinny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Bard said:

What on earth has happened to this thread?

Got weird hasn’t it 🤨

I kind of respect the hustle in a way. Prinny typing mini essays on Massengo’s price tag and Pack/Smith’s relative contributions at championship level at 6am. That’s dedication to the debate. I imagine him to be like this:

jim carrey typing GIF

Edited by Phileas Fogg
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Prinny said:

You first!

This is a bunch of IMOs of course.

Brownhill>Smith>Pack

Pack I thought was a player massively affected by what was going on around him. A non difference maker. except in a very specific situations, like when he had a bunch of space and a bunch of runners. Did the simple things right! Backwards and sideways, large % of passes complete! Wasn't upset to see him go especially for the alleged fee.

Smith pre and post multiple injuries was different. I really liked him, when he was able to run around. The last season and currently for Swansea, he's just a guy (JAG), doesn't make a huge difference as a footballer when he plays. Wasn't upset to see him go. But if he's stayed as a squad player, fine.

If you liked Pack, ok, if you liked Smith ok, then why was our midfield the way it was when they played together? Everyone else/ LJ? I had no problem after seeing Pack and Smith get overrun constantly with us trying to revamp the central midfield with Nagy and Massengo. if they were much better. However the value is very different, Pack outdid his transfer fee. Smith assumedly did too. AN, and HNM haven't at all.

It's not that these level of players are terrible, and you can't win with them in the squad, (see Smith and Swansea) it's that you shouldn't fill your squad with them, and you shouldn't spend large resources on them. You can get a Smith for free. Johnson and Holtby who we just played are both out of contract in the summer, they're fine. You can find these players, you don't have to pay £2.5 million for them. Same with Nagy btw. these mid tier (money) signings go against the squad building philosophy I want the club to have.

Perhaps I should’ve asked “how to you form your basis for evaluating the performance of Pack and Smith”, I wasn’t asking you to rate them / rank them per se, it was a question of “how you do it” not “what are the results of your method”, if that makes sense.

For example, some poster’s method of evaluating a striker is purely to look at number of goals scored.  Some go various stages further, e.g. goals per game / start, some go goals per minute, some go goal contributions (g + a), etc, etc.  Some look at less tangible things.

Thats what I’m trying to understand.

With Massengo you’ve used a results method, which appears different to what you’d normally post....so trying to work out your method for other players, or is your method mixed depending on player, position, etc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Perhaps I should’ve asked “how to you form your basis for evaluating the performance of Pack and Smith”, I wasn’t asking you to rate them / rank them per se, it was a question of “how you do it” not “what are the results of your method”, if that makes sense.

For example, some poster’s method of evaluating a striker is purely to look at number of goals scored.  Some go various stages further, e.g. goals per game / start, some go goals per minute, some go goal contributions (g + a), etc, etc.  Some look at less tangible things.

Thats what I’m trying to understand.

With Massengo you’ve used a results method, which appears different to what you’d normally post....so trying to work out your method for other players, or is your method mixed depending on player, position, etc?

I would guess it's whatever suits the argument at the time. :)

  • Like 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Perhaps I should’ve asked “how to you form your basis for evaluating the performance of Pack and Smith”, I wasn’t asking you to rate them / rank them per se, it was a question of “how you do it” not “what are the results of your method”, if that makes sense. Sorry misunderstood.

For example, some poster’s method of evaluating a striker is purely to look at number of goals scored.  Some go various stages further, e.g. goals per game / start, some go goals per minute, some go goal contributions (g + a), etc, etc.  Some look at less tangible things.

Thats what I’m trying to understand.

With Massengo you’ve used a results method, which appears different to what you’d normally post....so trying to work out your method for other players, or is your method mixed depending on player, position, etc?

The bit about results is specifically referring to a comment made about Massengo's FACTUAL contribution to the teams league position. It's not about the evaluation of the player.

image.thumb.png.d105ff6d5c0fcfbb449c4de3c2a34687.png

I don't think I can be clearer than I was in a previous response on the thread.

image.thumb.png.9d98c6ac49c35b20db4925d4d976c1b4.png

There's two separate issues.

1: How I view the player. Pure opinion. I look at the player and give my view. That's it. Han Noah Massengo is ok! Don't see the special*

2: The factual contribution he's made to the league position of the team. You can argue about that if we had won a bunch with him in the team right? Who is responsible for how much of a victory? And you can't judge how much a single player is at fault in a loss, or it's hard to. But you can say, when he's played we haven't picked up many points, so he's definitely* not significantly positively contributing to the top half league position of 13th. He's very low on your tables when it comes to +/- points for example. Again specifically replying to a point made, and it's absolutely not a we lose Massengo = bad.

I thought that was wrong, so I proved it wrong, and showed the working.

Hope that clears up the confusion. 

Edited by Prinny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

I would guess it's whatever suits the argument at the time. :)

Yeah, absolutely you tailor responses to what people say and how they try to prove it. There's this great quote I read.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts" - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

So when someone makes up a fact like you did, I will use actual data to prove them wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Got weird hasn’t it 🤨

I kind of respect the hustle in a way. Prinny typing mini essays on Massengo’s price tag and Pack/Smith’s relative contributions at championship level at 6am. That’s dedication to the debate. I imagine him to be like this:

jim carrey typing GIF

I just find it weird that people spend so much time making stuff up about me!

As long as this is the only way you imagine me I guess it's ok!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Prinny said:

image.thumb.png.d105ff6d5c0fcfbb449c4de3c2a34687.png

I don't think I can be clearer than I was in a previous response on the thread.

image.thumb.png.9d98c6ac49c35b20db4925d4d976c1b4.png

There's two separate issues.

1: How I view the player. Pure opinion. I look at the player and give my view. That's it. Han Noah Massengo is ok! Don't see the special*

2: The factual contribution he's made to the league position of the team. You can argue about that if we had won a bunch with him in the team right? Who is responsible for how much of a victory? And you can't judge how much a single player is at fault in a loss, or it's hard to. But you can say, when he's played we haven't picked up many points, so he's definitely* not significantly positively contributing to the top half league position of 13th. He's very low on your tables when it comes to +/- points for example. Again specifically replying to a point made, and it's absolutely not a we lose Massengo = bad.

I thought that was wrong, so I proved it wrong, and showed the working.

Hope that clears up the confusion. 

Ta. I wasn’t challenging your view / opinion, just wondering how you reached it.  So your evaluation is that he’s nothing special (cool) and you can point to team results as a form of evidence (cool too).

FWIW, I don’t think you’ve proved anything / anyone is wrong, you’ve proved to yourself that you’ve got something to hang your evaluation on and provide a discussion point.

What do you think of his last 2 performances as standalone performances?


 

 

Re my +/- charts, it’s a concept, a model.  It’s “interesting” imho, it’s certainly not defining.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Ta. I wasn’t challenging your view / opinion, just wondering how you reached it.  So your evaluation is that he’s nothing special (cool) and you can point to team results as a form of evidence (cool too).

FWIW, I don’t think you’ve proved anything / anyone is wrong, you’ve proved to yourself that you’ve got something to hang your evaluation on and provide a discussion point.

What do you think of his last 2 performances as standalone performances?

Re my +/- charts, it’s a concept, a model.  It’s “interesting” imho, it’s certainly not defining.

Genuinely, to make sure there's understanding. Do you understand that the point about the results when he plays is related to a specific comment and not about my views on his ability?

Because when you say "you've got something to hang your evaluation on",  and "you can point to team results as a form of evidence" that's telling me you don't get the two are unrelated. I've posted I think 3-4 times that they're separate. Multiple ways.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Prinny said:

Genuinely, to make sure there's understanding. Do you understand that the point about the results when he plays is related to a specific comment and not about my views on his ability?

Because when you say "you've got something to hang your evaluation on",  and "you can point to team results as a form of evidence" that's telling me you don't get the two are unrelated. I've posted I think 3-4 times that they're separate. Multiple ways.

 

Easy tiger!

I get that you were using it to “debunk” another poster’s claims of significant contribution.  I don’t think he has either in probably the calendar year of Jan 2020-Dec 2020 (rough dates).

But I have seen performances from him in his early months here (not consistently) and again of late too that have both been good individually and of benefit to the team.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Easy tiger! Wasn't trying to be rude, but have to be clear on that.

I get that you were using it to “debunk” another poster’s claims of significant contribution.  I don’t think he has either in probably the calendar year of Jan 2020-Dec 2020 (rough dates).

But I have seen performances from him in his early months here (not consistently) and again of late too that have both been good individually and of benefit to the team.

Ok, so to answer the q.

Birmingham I rarely watch because they're not fun. And they're not good. and I don't support them , so I have a choice, I found it very hard to judge individual performances against them in the game. Everyone looked good, Watkins looked pacey, Palmer was able to go away/stay away enough from a player for his goal, same for Wells, I don't think that's normal. So while Massengo was good, Lansbury was fine too. Do you think if we had any other midfielder playing that would have changed anything? What did Massengo uniquely bring to the game that anyone else couldn't have?

Blackburn showed me a couple of things through observation. Rothwell, who I've not really paid attention to before, gives a direct comparison on the field about what top level athleticism is in that position in this league. I think there's a clear difference. Holtby was really good with movement and showing for the ball. These are older experienced players, but that's the competition level. Were they good enough to completely break us down, no, but they were much closer than we were with our 26% possession. I thought Massengo was fine in his role, but those two players showed high levels in different aspects which I think really can affect a game. No, they're not perfect. Massengo showed good tactical discipline, didn't look out of place compared to anyone else. Didn't feel like a good team performance to me. Was he a real difference maker in that game either? Well maybe, maybe he is the most tactically disciplined midfielder we have. But you know who does that job for Wales and wouldn't have cost us £2.5m+ obviously as his biggest fan 😛

You currently have us trying to offload Nagy for next season, I'm fine with that, but i think Nagy now, is a better player. He to me has shown more performances which make a difference. Do you think Massengo is better now? Or is it just his age and hope? Do you think we need to upgrade our central midfield area? I think Williams is a good level championship player, I have questions over his fitness, but I have questions over everyone elses suitability as it stands.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Prinny said:

Ok, so to answer the q.

Birmingham I rarely watch because they're not fun. And they're not good. and I don't support them , so I have a choice, I found it very hard to judge individual performances against them in the game. Everyone looked good,

not everyone 😉

Watkins looked pacey, Palmer was able to go away/stay away enough from a player for his goal, same for Wells, I don't think that's normal. So while Massengo was good, Lansbury was fine too. Do you think if we had any other midfielder playing that would have changed anything? What did Massengo uniquely bring to the game that anyone else couldn't have?

passing tempo / ability to find Palmer quickly.  Looking forward to seeing how Walsh does with our passing tempo

Blackburn showed me a couple of things through observation. Rothwell, who I've not really paid attention to before, gives a direct comparison on the field about what top level athleticism is in that position in this league. I think there's a clear difference. Holtby was really good with movement and showing for the ball. These are older experienced players, but that's the competition level. Were they good enough to completely break us down, no, but they were much closer than we were with our 26% possession. I thought Massengo was fine in his role, but those two players showed high levels in different aspects which I think really can affect a game. No, they're not perfect. Massengo showed good tactical discipline, didn't look out of place compared to anyone else. Didn't feel like a good team performance to me.

disjointed team performance without doubt.

Was he a real difference maker in that game either? Well maybe, maybe he is the most tactically disciplined midfielder we have. But you know who does that job for Wales and wouldn't have cost us £2.5m+ obviously as his biggest fan 😛

different roles, team systems too, but yep, you got it 😂

You currently have us trying to offload Nagy for next season, I'm fine with that, but i think Nagy now, is a better player. He to me has shown more performances which make a difference.

yeah, I can see why you'd say that, tend to agree, but....there's been enough in the recent (very small sample) for me to think with other players around that I'd keep Massengo over Nagy in the summer if I had to choose between the two.  I'm sure its not a binary Nagy or Massengo decision anyway.  My "retained list" is not a case of picking players in rank of ability individually, its about how I'd blend them together and caveatted at the point of doing it too.  In a fortnight we've moved Mariappa (on my out list) to RCB2 alongside Kalas in a 4231 and he looks a different player.  I'd be very tempted to offer him another year.  As a LCB3 or LB, don't bother!

Do you think Massengo is better now?

In a two game sample in 4231, I see little to think next season Nagy will give us more than Massengo.  HNM might have a stinker today and I can reflect on 3 games instead of 2!  But if I take the last two games, and compare to some Nagy performances, I'd find it hard to differentiate, so not better, but not worse either!

Or is it just his age and hope?

Nope, its technical ability, ability (on the face of it) to take on tactical instruction, ability to pass the ball firmly and quickly.  Nagy leaves a lot of passes short for example.  I think we've seen him starting to dribble again too (like last season early-on).  If you notice my reviews of game performance from Edwards (x2), Towler etc, I make little reference to age, apart from hoped that they will get better, so Massengo is rated on a game by game basis on his performance in that match as a player selected to play, i.e. on equal footing.

If he was playing like that spell I referred to in my earlier post, then its very much based on age and hope.

Do you think we need to upgrade our central midfield area? I think Williams is a good level championship player, I have questions over his fitness, but I have questions over everyone elses suitability as it stands.

I don't know yet.  I honestly think Williams lifts us.  He's had injuries in previous seasons, but nothing that you'd really worry about from a fan's view.  This season is very different....but he's ours now, you've got to hope its gonna get sorted.  If that was a concern, then yes I do....but I'm working on assumption he will strengthen us....especially if we see the trend towards a 4231-type system.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/03/2021 at 17:51, Prinny said:

You're being very desperate to play gotcha here, I get it, but the conversation is  And It's smith said, you wouldn't think this way if he's from the academy. And the proof against this is, an academy player who I think the same way about for the same reasons. So that's why I used that example.

There is a comparison. What a player offers and how much they cost. Unless your plan is to wait 5 years to try and get promotion...

 

 

 

I think you are fully aware "And its Smith" was likely suggesting you wouldn't judge a 19 year old from the academy in the same way. Not someone 5 years older with 2 full seasons as a regular and international experience.

Anyway, it's a poor excuse because from what I've seen Massengo has more about him now than Morrell does now, let alone what Morrell had 5 years ago.

Not sure what that has to do with waiting 5 years to get promotion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

I think you are fully aware "And its Smith" was likely suggesting you wouldn't judge a 19 year old from the academy in the same way. Not someone 5 years older with 2 full seasons as a regular and international experience.

Anyway, it's a poor excuse because from what I've seen Massengo has more about him now than Morrell does now, let alone what Morrell had 5 years ago. Oh he's well ahead, Morrell was coming off of failed loans to Sutton and Margate IIRC at this comparative age.

Not sure what that has to do with waiting 5 years to get promotion. How long are we prepared to wait for him to be a great player? If you think he already is, cool. I don't see it.

Trying to think of academy players, who played a reasonable amount at a young age 19 ish, who I didn't think had any special qualities. Joe Burnell. There we go, that's the proof then. Your need to make things up is funny. You can just disagree.

Why would I care where they're from? What incentive are you making up for me to do so?

How much do they cost, how much do they offer, do they have traits that I think are worth investing in. That's it. No agenda,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JonDolman said:

Thought Massengo was class first half today. And when more advanced his work rate was unreal. 

3 games on the trot where imho he’s been one of the better performers in our team, relevant to the average of our team in that game.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

3 games on the trot where imho he’s been one of the better performers in our team, relevant to the average of our team in that game.

Exactly. I was gonna say the only player to score at least 7/10 in each of the 3 games but your version is a less contentious way of saying the same thing.

 

 

Edited by mozo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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