GK or ST

[AshRK]

With a rumour of budget constrain for this summer spending , what is more important for us going into next season? A keeper or a striker (if we have to choose one)

I personally would rather go with de gea as our keeper than Martial as number 9. But I also understand the importance of having a keeper who can play progressive football.

Mods- Polls would be appreciated.

 

[Cassidy]

If you had to choose then its a striker, good thing you don't really have to.

 

[OleGunnar20]

Striker all day long. But I'm sure we can stretch to both, as they're definitely our first 11's biggest weak spots.

 

[AshRK]

If you had to choose then its a striker, good thing you don't really have to.

I hope I am wrong but I cannot see us spending big on both the departments. Maybe spend big on one and get a cheap option for the other.

 

[Van Piorsing]

Every position is important as every gap in the team was and will be exploited by opponents. That being said, lack of ruthless sniper cost us at least 10 points this season.

 

[Raw]

Striker. If we can bury our chances we won't have to worry about De Gea letting in a last minute equaliser/winner. Plus I feel like a top striker is rarer than a keeper that's better than De Gea.

 

[Dolf]

Harry Kane would improve us so much more than a new goalkeeper

 

[Strootman's Finger]

Striker, we need to replace De Gea to modernize our style, but we can deal with him for another season because 9 out of 10 games he puts in a sold 7 out of 10.

 

[Jev]

It's obviously a striker, surely even the biggest DDG hater would agree.

 

[humdinger]

Obviously a striker but goalkeeper is a clear weakness for us too.

 

[Scandi Red]

Striker of course. Only 2 teams have conceded fewer goals, but as many as 8 have scored more. And that is despite Bruno creating a million chances!

Also, didn't 50% of the goals we've conceded happen in just 4 games?

 

[RyRy11]

If its one or the other then a striker is more important because all we have is Martial who is: A) not a top striker and B) injured for most of the season. Personally I think getting the correct keeper in place will see EtH's system come into fruition sooner, If you want us to control games more effectively a keeper with better distribution moves the needle further.

 

[Red in STL]

This isn't even a real choice, we could have the best keeper in the world, but if we don't have a striker to score the goals we'll be as far away from winning what we want to win as we are now

 

[Oranges038]

Keeper. Controlling and dictating games starts from the back, if you can do that you'll create more chances and concede less possesion and in the process concede less chances and territory. You will also be able to press higher and create turnovers higher up the pitch that will lead to chances being created quicker.

I'd just play Rashford through the middle and Garnacho on the left.

 

[JB7]

I hope I am wrong but I cannot see us spending big on both the departments. Maybe spend big on one and get a cheap option for the other.

We don't need to spend big on both. You can pick up a goalkeeper who would be better suited to our style of play for less than we'd get from selling Henderson.

 

[lex talionis]

Striker, obviously. Despite De Gea's weaknesses, he is actually a goalkeeper. We literally do not have a striker, and I am quite aware of the fact that Martial is on the squad and that Weghorst is on loan.

 

[MadDogg]

Keeper is a very high priority, but striker is THE highest.

If we can only sign one it has to be striker. More importantly, it's easier to see a bigger improvement by spending big on a striker and getting a relative cheap keeper than the other way around.

 

[jamesjimmybyrondean]

Depends on the striker. If it isn't Kane or Osimhen then I'd go for a GK

 

[ManRed]

2 Strikers before we need to replace the GK

 

[sincher]

Striker, midfielder, keeper, centre back if Maguire leaves, right back.

That would be the order of priorities for me.

I still think we need a high class partner for Casemiro and to be using Eriksen more as a backup.

 

[united_99]

Depends on some factors:
- What ETH sees as priority.
- Who is available as gk/striker with what qualities and at what cost?
- How he wants to play next season.
Can ETH compensate more for playing an average gk or lack of a striker.

Fergie would in most cases go for a striker. ETH will probably too. And I can‘t blame him as unless MG comes back I don’t see who else apart from Marcus will regularly score goals.

 

[Red in STL]

Keeper. Controlling and dictating games starts from the back, if you can do that you'll create more chances and concede less possesion and in the process concede less chances and territory. You will also be able to press higher and create turnovers higher up the pitch that will lead to chances being created quicker.

I'd just play Rashford through the middle and Garnacho on the left.

You can control and create as much as you like, but without a striker that takes chances it won't matter, however much we'd like it to be Rashford isn't that guy,

Unless Garnacho moves to the right then at some point we will need to choose between the two, Rashford needs space behind to be effective and he won't get that in a central role and we already know he's far less effective playing on the right

 

[croadyman]

Obviously a striker but goalkeeper is a clear weakness for us too.

Yeah ideally need both and GK would definitely be next on the list after ST & CM

 

[Zoid]

Gk, no strength to look at the mannequin in the goal.

 

[Oranges038]

You can control and create as much as you like, but without a striker that takes chances it won't matter, however much we'd like it to be Rashford isn't that guy,

Unless Garnacho moves to the right then at some point we will need to choose between the two, Rashford needs space behind to be effective and he won't get that in a central role and we already know he's far less effective playing on the right

I'd rather replace the keeper and take more control of games, play a higher line and create more chances by doing that, than have a guy up top having the ball lumped at him from deep and trying to feed off long through balls and second balls 90% of the time.

 

[Todd]

Imagine where we might be if we had another ~25 goals in this squad.

Striker is the top priority by a wide margin. I'd even say that a midfielder of the De Jong mold (like, preferably HIM) would be priority #2 before a GK.

If we don't start next season with Kane or Osimhen I will be very disappointed.

 

[sullydnl]

Striker, without any question whatsoever.

 

[Dec9003]

I think a modern goalkeeper would make us play better as a team, but a better striker should get us more points over a season.
Both should be big priorities, even if we only have 100 million net to spend.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

I think a goalkeeper would have the most transformative effect on the style of football we play. But a new striker would probably earn us more points. Close run thing though.

 

[Red in STL]

I think a goalkeeper would have the most transformative effect on the style of football we play. But a new striker would probably earn us more points. Close run thing though.

Not close IMO, we don't exactly have a press resistant midfield yet so even changing DDG won't make enough difference on its own, that's why a lot of posters say DDG is a lesser priority than a striker and a CM

 

[Bebestation]

We can get a cheap but quality gk but doubt we would find such a striker.

 

[Longshanks]

It would be quite easy to look at the raw data and say we haven't scored enough so obviously a striker. But I think that would be wrong.

On the large part the lack of a top class striker has caused us to underperform on our XG in games we have won anyway so it would be pretty irrelavent and count for a better goal difference only.

The games we have dropped points in, mostly away games against teams that can effectively play out from the back and high press effectively is because we lose all control in these games because we can't play out under pressure well and struggle to effectively high press because we can't confidently implement a high enough line to compress the space enough.

The reason why we struggle with both those factors is mostly because of the GK. And an upgrade to a ball playing sweeper keeper will make a huge difference to our entire set up.

 

[Mike Smalling]

Just look at what leads to us losing points. Even with an average goalkeeper we are on course to get the most clean sheets in the Premier League this season, but we have struggled scoring goals for large portions of the season. The reason we lose games like Brighton and West Ham recently is not because we concede one goal - it's because we can't score one.

I'd take a striker who can get 25 goals and link up play over a ballplaying goalkeeper any day of the week.

 

[Based Adnan]

Striker with keeper very closely behind. Both should be looked at as a top priority. I think even an average modern day keeper would improve us massively.

 

[Ish]

With a rumour of budget constrain for this summer spending , what is more important for us going into next season? A keeper or a striker (if we have to choose one)

I personally would rather go with de gea as our keeper than Martial as number 9. But I also understand the importance of having a keeper who can play progressive football.

Mods- Polls would be appreciated.

Striker, IMO. Assuming a class striker, he’d bag at least another 20 for this team. We’re over reliant on Rashford and having no CF who we can depend on is a detriment to our attack - we’ve shown we can keep clean sheets.

DDG does hamper us tbf but if it’s a binary choice, I’d go with a striker versus relying on Martial.

 

[Chairman Steve]

Striker.

DDG is lot more steady when Martinez and Varane sit in front of him, even though we could do better than DDG.

But neither Martial or Weghorst are good enough to get us goals consistently.

A lot of games this season would have been different if we had a half decent striker up front. Draws would turn to wins and narrow wins would have been a lot more comprehensive.

 

[Oranges038]

It would be quite easy to look at the raw data and say we haven't scored enough so obviously a striker. But I think that would be wrong.

On the large part the lack of a top class striker has caused us to underperform on our XG in games we have won anyway so it would be pretty irrelavent and count for a better goal difference only.

The games we have dropped points in, mostly away games against teams that can effectively play out from the back and high press effectively is because we lose all control in these games because we can't play out under pressure well and struggle to effectively high press because we can't confidently implement a high enough line to compress the space enough.

The reason why we struggle with both those factors is mostly because of the GK. And an upgrade to a ball playing sweeper keeper will make a huge difference to our entire set up.

Pretty much, my thoughts but I didn't have the time to go into such detail.

Just adding a striker doesn't solve the fundamental issues from being unable to implement a higher line and a higher press, or a more controlled playing out from the back setup against a higher press.

You'd still see the same issues against teams that press high. We'd end up with a striker that would be complained about because of lack of telling contributions in big games.

 

[MadDogg]

I'd rather replace the keeper and take more control of games, play a higher line and create more chances by doing that, than have a guy up top having the ball lumped at him from deep and trying to feed off long through balls and second balls 90% of the time.

The games we have dropped points in, mostly away games against teams that can effectively play out from the back and high press effectively is because we lose all control in these games because we can't play out under pressure well and struggle to effectively high press because we can't confidently implement a high enough line to compress the space enough.

The reason why we struggle with both those factors is mostly because of the GK. And an upgrade to a ball playing sweeper keeper will make a huge difference to our entire set up.

I'm as critical as anyone of how much De Gea limits us, but I think you guys are underestimating how much the lack of a striker also hurts us. It's not just about scoring goals (if that's all it was then Ronaldo would have been fine last season and Rashford could do the job), a proper striker will also play a huge part in helping us control games and link our entire attack together. Martial can do it sometimes (when he's both fit and in form), but otherwise we have to go back to Zlatan to find the last time we had a striker who actually had the all-round game to play upfront for us.

A striker who actually has decent movement, hold-up play, ability to pass and link with others, and pressing ability would be huge for us. Much like even the average goalkeeper in the league has much better all-round game than De Gea, even the average striker has a much better all-round game than our options (other than the rarely-seen good Martial). Both would make a significant impact on our general control, ability to maintain possession and build attacks, but the striker would have a bigger impact on our goals scored tally than a new keeper would have on the goals conceded (at least you certainly hope so).

Really we need both, as one without the other will still see us having significant issues.

 

[The Corinthian]

Replacing DdG is a bigger priority than a Striker.

 

[AlPistacho]

Striker. It doesn’t even have to be a £100m striker.

Álvarez at City would have improved us so much and would have been great competition/compliment for Rashford