Does Naismith signing mean we'll be more versatile tactically?

[The Bard]

It seems as if Naismith could play CB or LB in a 4, either CB or LCB in a 3 or as a CDM. That versatility in an individual should see us having greater ability to swap in game.  If we start with him in a 3, we can just move him into CDM, drop the wing backs to FB and play a back 4 with a diamond in midfield for example.  Or he can go to LB to allow a player like Benarous to play in front of him in a 4 4 2.

Both Pearson and Gould said we want a smaller, tighter squad and that absolutely means having players with versatility.  

playing Dasilva, Scott and Weimann on the right or Benarous on the left wasn't so stupid as some thought. 

[Lordofthebling]

If we play a 3, we need wing backs. 

Da silva could do a job on the left, maybe, and tanner on the right, but jury is out on both. We ideally need out and out wing backs.

Detest seeing Scott played there, hated seeing Weimann there, and the  Benarous/Bell experiment was the most frustrating thing about Pearson last season.

Edited May 28, 2022 by Lordofthebling

[steveybadger]

Initial thoughts suggest he’ll play at the back in a 3 but completely agree he gives us a tonne of flexibility. If the rumours of the FGR lad come true (no idea if true) then isn’t he a very attacking RWB / FB?

[Robbored]

Naismith is versatile but his own preferred position is at CB - that probably means that the classy Klose won’t be signing and possibly Cundy as well.

Good interview tho - obviously impressed by Nige. Shows how important having a well respected manager at the helm is. 

[1960maaan]

Versatility is great, allows in game tweaks and different bench options.

The thing is, we still don't know what formation we will go with. 
His preferred set up has been stated as 4-3-3. 
He's settled into 3CB system through circumstances.
We have a few players with question marks against them, even if they are put there by the fans.
This summer, possibly more than any other, we won't know much until nearer preseason.
There are so many moving parts, it is definitely interesting.

50 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Naismith is versatile but his own preferred position is at CB - that probably means that the classy Klose won’t be signing and possibly Cundy as well.

Good interview tho - obviously impressed by Nige. Shows how important having a well respected manager at the helm is. 

We can say nothing for definite. 
We assume Baker will retire, a lot assume Cundy will go.
We know we have Atkinson and Naismith.
We have Idehen coming through, possibly Towler.

As I said, we don't know what system or shape will will employ. 3 CB's will probably mean we could do with Klose. How he performed with us, there is a chance he may get a better offer.
I don't see Nige leaving us having to rely on youngsters. I could see Cundy signing, Pearson likes a good old fashioned CB, but again deals we will around for him. Atkinson, Cundy and Idehen all looked promising. But they are still new to this level, I wouldn't be surprised if we make an offer to Klose even if we play a 4, specially if we are moving towards a more possession based game.

This will be a waiting game, seeing how we slowly shape as a side. Great we are doing stuff early, but I still have no clue what the think about next year ..... yet.

[GrahamC]

I’m still unsure as to what NP’s preferred formation for 22/23 is going to be.

He’s on record as saying he prefers a back four but this signing (& the supposed interest in Kane Wilson) suggests otherwise.

Obvious, but we’ll have a clearer idea at the end of the summer when all the arrivals & departures are known.

[chinapig]

29 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Versatility is great, allows in game tweaks and different bench options.

The thing is, we still don't know what formation we will go with. 
His preferred set up has been stated as 4-3-3. 

He said in a recent interview that people are wrong to assume this as he prefers to play 2 up front with 1behind, so more like 4-3-1-2.

[1960maaan]

14 minutes ago, chinapig said:

He said in a recent interview that people are wrong to assume this as he prefers to play 2 up front with 1behind, so more like 4-3-1-2.

Similar really , just an idea. Hopefully we will be flexible.

I was more concentrating on the CB's, 3 Vs 4. 

[Bat Fastard]

We seem to have plenty of left footed defenders! 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Makes it possible IMO.

Can drop into a back 3 or play CM...a player like that can perhaps enable in-game switches with minimal disruption. Plus LB also mentioned although I have reservations around 4-4-2 and the overall control and stability in midfield...narrower versions aside perhaps.

[ProfitInMyPocket]

Think he will stick with the wingbacks and back 3 or 5.

If he is keeping the front 3 as attackers and building around that then we haven't got the midfield & back four at this moment in time to keep it balanced and try leak less chances. 

Switching in game could be a possibility but we have seen this season that the formation and style can work going forward and we were a good threat on the counter, I think keeping that and trying to solidify through the team without spending big is the best idea for progression.

[Mad Cyril]

We were third for kick-offs last season (123 of them). We should really be prioritising a playmaker for re-starts.

[The Bard]

On 28/05/2022 at 09:36, chinapig said:

He said in a recent interview that people are wrong to assume this as he prefers to play 2 up front with 1behind, so more like 4-3-1-2.

So, if we are set up 3 4 1 2 as we are normally, with Naismith in the back 3, he could easily be moved into CDM, with wing backs dropping to be full backs and we become 4 3 1 2 (or a diamond) that we tried (unsuccessfully) for a few games.  He'd be better at filling the CDM than Williams or James you'd hope. As others have said get ourselves another RB /RWB to go along with Tanner and it would all fit together.  

[Davefevs]

On 27/05/2022 at 23:01, The Bard said:

It seems as if Naismith could play CB or LB in a 4, either CB or LCB in a 3 or as a CDM. That versatility in an individual should see us having greater ability to swap in game.  If we start with him in a 3, we can just move him into CDM, drop the wing backs to FB and play a back 4 with a diamond in midfield for example.  Or he can go to LB to allow a player like Benarous to play in front of him in a 4 4 2.

Both Pearson and Gould said we want a smaller, tighter squad and that absolutely means having players with versatility.  

playing Dasilva, Scott and Weimann on the right or Benarous on the left wasn't so stupid as some thought. 

I think both Naismith and Sykes give us more options.

[The Bard]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I think both Naismith and Sykes give us more options.

Is Sykes more of a cover for Weimann?  Can play wide or as a 10?  Some seem to think he's a RB or RWB..

[Gillies Downs Leeds]

Think that possibly Naismith could play a role similar to that of Hogg at Huddersfield. Front sweeper or 3rd centre back depending on how the game is going.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, The Bard said:

Is Sykes more of a cover for Weimann?  Can play wide or as a 10?  Some seem to think he's a RB or RWB..

He played a series of games as RWB this season when Oxford went back 3, but mainly RM/RM.  In previous seasons he’s played CM.

I would be surprised if he was signed to play RWB, even more so with Wilson in talks too.

As you know, my thoughts are that it’s a squad game, so I don’t see him as cover per se, more a case of train well, get picked (wherever), play well, stay in the side.

[The Bard]

1 hour ago, Gillies Downs Leeds said:

Think that possibly Naismith could play a role similar to that of Hogg at Huddersfield. Front sweeper or 3rd centre back depending on how the game is going.

That is almost exactly what I was saying...

...but took several paragraphs whereas you took a sentence...

[Dr Balls]

Having versatile experienced professional players who will fit in where needed is essential. One of our better signings of recent seasons was Tommy Rowe, who was one of those. Hopefully Naismith will be even better.

[LondonBristolian]

I think the conversation about our formation is slightly overstated. 
 

Assuming personnel stay roughly the same we pretty much know how ten of the players will line up (4-2-1-2)

Essentially it just comes down to whether the eleventh player is

1. a third centre back making it 5-2-1-2 (or 3-4-1-2 if you prefer to express it that way)

2. a defensive screen in the midfield (4-1-2-1-2)

or

3. a third central midfielder (4-3-1-2)

But all are variants of the same basic shape.