Probably. Slow day and I'm manically refreshing these threads hoping for some form of dopamine-like breakthrough in our transfer business.
Rasmus Højlund | Signed for United
- Thread starter Zoo
- Start date
- Status
Exactly, made same point few days back, our rivals haven't signed some goal scoring machines as CF as they are not available and also there aren't many. It's better to take risk on unproven kid who might have lot of potential and also attributes to lead the line rather than proven average striker.
That's not what that person said, they offered an hypothetical and a caveat. They didn't tell you that it would happen based on his past.
What?
If my opinion that a 20 year old with 20 appearances and 9 goals is not the best way to goal scoring problems is simple minded then I’ll happily remain simple minded
I didn’t say this either
That's exactly what you did, otherwise you wouldn't have wrote the post about goal ratios and then used that post as an example.
Its harder to score in the Premier League than it is in Serie A. That's not a myth.
What is the base of that statement? Keeping in mind that statistically last season the PL registered more goals per game.
Then, as I said before, it's a good thing ETH and our recruitment team are not.
My question would be whether Hojlund actually strengthens us and what he’s actually strengthening.
If we stick him up top rather than Rashford is he likely to score more goals then Rashford? Personally I’d say no from what I’ve seen of him and his stats.
If that’s the case, he’s essentially going to be backup. €70m is a lot for a player that just provides strength in depth. City can afford to do that and we could probably do if we had new owners. But we don’t as per this moment and the way it’s currently looking it doesn’t look guaranteed that we will anytime soon, so you play the cards you currently have.
There’s a price point at which Hojlund makes sense, but overpaying to give the manager what he wants is exactly the logic that led to us paying €100m for Antony. A few extra week’s training with the team pre-season isn’t going to make him a significantly better player, or good value for the prices currently being quoted.
The style of football in the Premier League is going to be built for more goals, but the quality is the difference here. Serie A mid table and lower end quality isnt the same.
It is when you have weghorst upfront for sure
I think new players arrive all the time. It’s kind of the nature of football. They didn’t stop making good strikers at some fixed point in time.
Let’s keep our powder dry and use it when somebody good who actually fits the brief arrives/announces themselves. In the mean time we can sign any striker not called Wout Weghorst or Anthony Martial as a short term fix and we’ll be strengthened from where we were. WW was probably the worst number 9 in the premier league last season. Literally anybody else would have been an improvement.
Or it's easier for players to score goals in the PL due to higher overall quality or style? Because the point that you are trying to make is closer to a myth than the factual statement that teams have found scoring goals easier in the PL if we use the most recent season as an example.
I am quite certain he will. The one issue Rashford has is that he is almost never in the right spot in the box, which is also why he is so much more prolific on the wing. Højlunds strength is his runs into the box and being at the right spot.
The one thing we really lack is someone to receive the service into the box, and this is where Højlund is really good. He gets more service for Denmark then Atalanta which is also why he scores more per 90 for Denmark than Atalanta.
We'd rather have Rashford on the left, hence why we're looking to sign a striker. Or do you think we'll play Rashford up top this season with Højlund as back-up for that position? I don't. Some games sure, when that suits the opposition, but part of why people are exited about Højlund is the lack of a player of his profile in our squad. Would it be better if he was a couple of years older and further along in his development? Yes, but then we probably wouldn't be able to afford him this summer.
I've said it before, as has several other people, but a player like him should help the team as a whole. Our other attackers, like Sancho and Antony, should see their numbers rise when they have a player of Højlund's profile to play off of. His numbers if we get him might not be the most impressive in his first season, but him along with the other signings we have done should se our general play improve a fair bit. And our numbers as a team.
He might not score more than Rashford would in a central position but I'm not sure that's the point because unless we clone Rashford he can only play in one position. The majority of his goals were scored from the left. When you move Rashford you're really just rearranging deck chairs in terms of our goalscoring composition, it's not going to necessarily add more goals to the team because then we have to turn to Sancho or Garnacho out wide who are not close to the same level of threat. Hojlund is by far a more noted goalscorer than those lads and he's also an out and out striker that offers something to our options.
I don't see him as a backup. He'd have to outcompete Martial, but that's only when he's actually available and only when he's actually playing well - two things that don't coincide particularly often. I'm not sure why you would be concerned about him being a backup when Wout Weghorst received notable game time. The manager sees a clear gap for a central striker.
It's pointless for me to argue 70 million wouldn't be expensive, it is. I still think sense will prevail and he'll end up here for less. But would I rather pay that then get someone mediocre on loan or get nobody? Absolutely I would. I don't know why you consider them to be palatable options. The loan market is inevitably very weak because we're not Burnley where there are players of the requisite standard, and nobody wants to loan us the ones that are. Getting nobody is just a bizarre suggestion, we have no strikers. What are we saving the money up for? One way or the other we need somebody, even if it does end up being a crappy loan. Or go for a different target on the shortlist. Saving for some unknown reason is not an option.
@Niall any chance we can start IQ testing for posting privileges?
I think Martial will start the season as main striker as long as he is fit. Hoijund will need to pounce when he gets the chance. If he can do that, I am sure Martial will be sitting on the bench most of the time. Hoijund is expensive but I think it is worth it for one being so young. As a Denmark International, he can't be that bad.
He's 20. He will be depth/competition to start with. Rashford will rotate up top, martial will rotate as well. The idea is that he develops and turns into a world class CF, as he has all the necessary traits to turn into an all round top striker.
We have Rashford, Antony, Garnacho, Sancho, martial, Amad if he stays and then would add Hojlund to that group. He'll need time to develop - look at when guys like Dzeko, Lewandowski, Cavani etc (any bigger, technical striker not named Haaland) started doing anything relevant. The striker market is such that you have to spend 60m or so to get a big talent who isn't fully proven, before they are 120m+. And we are desperate for a CF, and can't afford any of the guys who are more proven, or they are just not at the right level but would cost too much anyway, or not the right type of CF. Hojlund fits the type of player and has big potential.
Serie A's minnows are terrible and would struggle to stay in England's League One. So, yes, even Jesus would look amazing in that league.
We will get him even if we have to overpay by 30 million or so. When ETH starts obsessing about a player the club pays whatever is needed.
Okay, calling him one of the league's "best defenders" was too much. What I meant was, he's reached his level in the league, which is mediocre at best.What?
Wow. How doesn't attackers score 30+ goals on the regular in that league then?
Assuming we’re playing three up front, Hojlund is coming in at the expense of somebody.
Garnacho - Rashford - Underwhelming RW
is preferable to
Rashford - Hojlund - Underwhelming RW
at least to me. He’s not improving that front line enough to justify >€50m in my opinion.
What‘s the point agreeing terms with him long ago and not make an offer then? We better hurry before PSG offers oil money, whipping out his United love
Its not a myth. Strikers in Serie A face poorer quality defenders. Hojlund said himself that Smalling was the toughest defender hes played in the league. Scammaca's recent struggles is a good case example too.
Its not a myth that Premier League is a higher quality than Serie A. It's harder to score goals in that league than it is in Serie A.
We've made a few informal offers to Atalanta according to Alfredo Pedullà. An opening formal offer here means that we've come to an offer that Atalanta may entertain, which is a sign progress in the negotiations.
He was never an embarrassing defender in the premier league. Had his limitations, especially on the ball but he was definitely one of better players in his position.
And yet teams literally score more in the PL. And Scammaca isn't a good example, he has no history of high scoring whether we are talking about Serie B, Serie A or any other league, he has one decent goalscoring season which may or may not be an outlier, he is no different to Bamford.
Garnacho isn't ready to be a 50-game player yet. Neither is it good for his development or for the club's ambition. The underwhelming RW part is worrying though. Hope Antony and or Sancho come good.
At ST I guess we would be hoping that it would be Martial, Hojland and Rashford(20%) rotating. But martial is very unreliable obviously. So the new guy may have to play a lot which isn't very good for him either.
50 million isn't that much these days, at least not for a striker with good potential. And again, we got to think about the team as a whole, not just the front line. For one Rashford is worse as a striker than a wide attacker cutting in. Should we limit him and his contributions? We've got no one making the types of runs Højlund makes - runs that Bruno should benefit from, as well as Sancho and Antony. Runs that stretch the defense, giving room to players that will benefit hugely from that as well as a bigger presence in the box than we have had in ages should give our team more than playing Rashford there, especially given what we loose from not playing him in his favoured position.
So the defenders are worse yes...but so is the rest of the team. He will get far more service at United. He is great when given the right service, hence why his goals per 90 are better for the national team then Atalanta.
I honestly dont think Jesus would score more goals at Atalanta.
Also the league one comment is just absurd.
He’s been busy today 
Hyperbole at best, disrespectful at worst. Just total nonsense. Any Serie A side would batter League One outfits.
It depends on lot of factors, yes PL is better quality than Serie A but players adapt differently to different play styles.
I didn't do proper check, just looking at high level stats, Morata had better mins per G+A in PL than in Serie A or other leagues. Salah too. Lukaku scored bunch of penalties, his goals + assists was more or less same if you exclude penalties.
He'd look okay in a Sean Dyche or Tuny Pulis team. So, yes, in that context he wouldn't be embarrassing. I stand corrected.
- Status