I'm talking about players that play for Man Utd and whether they're good enough.
17
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 58
- Goals
- 11
- Assists
- 10
- Yellow cards
- 5
It's actually quite a good way to look at attacking players. They're job is to score and create goals. You'll find the best ones have the best of these stats.
Salah has great stats. Rashford half as good and wouldn't you know, he's half the player.
Amad had great goals and assists per 90 this season and everyone agrees he's been brilliant. It's not everything but it's a great start in assessing and comparing PL attackers.
Garnacho has middling to low stats and we're a middling to low team ergo buy in a top attacker, with top stats, and watch us get better.
They’re both seasoned Premier League professionals. Salah at 20 was doing what exactly?
I’m sure a bunch of Chelsea fans would’ve told you he wasn’t up to it before they binned him off.
Scholes, Giggs, Becks, Ronaldo, Best, all of them showed a ridiculous improvement in their form, consistency and abilities as they aged between 20-25, cause that’s the fecking norm man.
You can’t tell your 20 yr old talents to ”match Mo Salah else you’re nothing more than midtable”…. What absolute nonsense.
Even George fecking Best needed 3 full seasons before showing his best form.
Yeah would’ve sold Ronnie summer of 2005 if it were up to this lot.
Guaranteed
Bollocks. This gets trotted out every so often on this thread, and it’s nonsense every time.
After 120+ appearances there was no doubt that Ronaldo had enormous natural talent, and numerous aspects to his game that were elite.
So what happened to young players improving?
Would you have compared Best to Irvine or Hunt and said he needs upgrading?
In the Summer of 2005 would you have claimed the same after Ronnie had his second consecutive season with less than 10 goal contributions in the league? Would you have compared him to the likes of Robert Pires?
What is it that has made Garnacho one of the most prolific players at his age in Europe? This despite being in an utterly dog shit United team.
Yes he’s not on the same level of Cristiano fecking Ronaldo, but what do you have to see in a player of his age to make you keep him?
He’s raw as feck but he’s also so young with so much to learn. You can see progression in his game even under Amorims tenure.
I have no problem keeping him as a bench option. He’d be useful coming on against tired legs.
I just don’t think he’s good enough to be a starter if we want to start playing more cohesive and fluid attacking football, and score enough goals to win more games. He’s too poor a finisher to be relied upon, and his decision making, game IQ and team play isn’t there.
That doesn’t mean he doesn’t have any useful traits. I just don’t think he’s suits our set up that well and he has some really obvious deficiencies in his game. Maybe those will improve over time, maybe not.
But the comparisons with Ronaldo are asinine.
Many were still calling Ronaldo a show pony a year later with many more appearances under his belt in a much better side. He didn’t properly prove those doubters wrong until the 06/07 season.
Here’s thread on Ronaldo from August 2005. Not a single person in that thread is saying we should sell him.
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/cristiano-ronaldo.86763/
Sure, there are some comments about consistency, and end product, and diving, but the consensus was that he had enormous talent, would only get better, and that we were lucky to have him.
So yes, your claim that fans would have sold him that summer is bollocks. It’s there in black and white.
Here’s another one from May 2005 where everyone is saying we should do absolutely everything we can to keep him:
https://www.redcafe.net/threads/ronaldo.77664/
140 appearances and his finishing, touch and general game intelligence are still so poor. Why is it a given that he'll simply improve these things with age if he hasn't been able to do so over the course of the last two seasons?
You don’t have to read past the first page of that thread to notice the similarities in comments to Garnacho who also has his own appreciation thread this summer. The difference is that supporters were generally more sensible back then. Hence my comment that this lot would’ve had Ronnie sold if they had their way.
You’re clutching at straws. Football fans were fickle back then too. Football fans wanted poor or underperforming players sold back then too.
The fact that you can’t find a single person on any 2005 Ronaldo thread saying we should sell him shows your claim for the nonsense it is.
Ronaldo was a superior talent to Garnacho, and if he was here today the fans would not be as open to selling him as we are Garnacho.
I never said sell him. I said we should get a better player in.
No mate you’re doing the clutching. Of course Ronaldo was a superior talent. But the thread you provided literally states that there wasn’t enough appreciation for him at the time in the OP. It also smacks of the Garnacho’s appreciation thread this season. The similarities are obvious.
And while plenty might’ve had a moan back then very few called for talented 20 year olds to be sold unlike today. To be fair the game has changed obviously as players are coming through earlier. But Yamal is still one in a million just as Rooney was back then.
And yet not a single poster was saying we should sell him, because his skills, talent and potential were undeniable.
And that’s the very obvious difference between the two that you’re still somehow failing to acknowledge.
And yet if you and many others in this thread had been around back then I imagine there would’ve been plenty of calls to sell him.
Which was my original point yet you continue to argue with yourself.
I’ll leave you to it now.
Wonder what age he stops being synonymous with Ronaldo? Bet he wishes he never fecking Siuuu'd at this point. Anyway we reckon he starts the final? Not watched much Spurs this year but if they still play the suicide high line Garnacho could have a good time but Amad and Mount have a decent shout for a start after last games performances.
I never wanted Ronaldo sold. His talent was obvious.
If you honestly believe that if we had a twenty year old Ronaldo here now everyone would want to sell him then I think you are delusional.
More likely, you were being hyperbolic to make a point and didn’t expect to get called out on it with actual threads from 2005.
The difference in natural talent and skill between 20 year old Ronaldo and 20 year old Garnacho is clear, and so it’s entirely unsurprising that fans were less likely to want the former sold than the latter.
We get it. You don’t rate Garnacho and with the benefit of hindsight rate a 20 year old Ronaldo much higher than you probably did back then.
Not sure what you think you’ve proved here but well done.
Jog on.
It’s not hindsight. I didn’t want Ronaldo to be sold when he was 20, just like noone in either of those 2005 threads wanted him sold when he was 20. How are you still not understating that?
Bringing up his total goals and assists is only good for social media convos or point scoring in debates. Once you really get into those numbers you see it’s not impressive at all.
One thing people never really consider is that someone in the team has to score or assist regardless of how bad a team is.
Garnacho’s numbers are better this year but he was much better last year and the season before. He did a lot more with the ball in the time that he had it. This year he sees so much of the ball and is awful with it for large parts of the game. His ‘improvement’ in contributions comes with a serious reduction in efficiency. The numbers are much worse when you look at PL games only.
I’m not someone that wants him to be sold, I think he can be a good squad option or starter only when in top form.
One thing people never really consider is that someone in the team has to score or assist regardless of how bad a team is.
Garnacho’s numbers are better this year but he was much better last year and the season before. He did a lot more with the ball in the time that he had it. This year he sees so much of the ball and is awful with it for large parts of the game. His ‘improvement’ in contributions comes with a serious reduction in efficiency. The numbers are much worse when you look at PL games only.
I’m not someone that wants him to be sold, I think he can be a good squad option or starter only when in top form.
There are plenty of people who are 20 who it's safe to assume won't make it in the PL.
Him being young means there's some things he can improve, like decision making, but he isn't going to improve his acceleration, nor become much better technically, which are key areas holding him back.
1) It's not "unfair" to post statistics from this season when we're -9GD and 42G because in my opinion Garnacho is one of the major reasons we're -9GD and 42g. It's not like he's been sitting on the bench all year is it? He's 4th in minutes played this season for outfield players and had more gametime than any other United forward.
2) Because Garnacho played 500 premier league minutes in 22/23, hardly a meaningful sample size is it?
3) Where does Garnacho have 3x the XG+A? Daniel James has 0.28 per 90. Garnacho is 0.54. If you think that's "3x" then I don't know what to tell you.
4)Who cares about progressive passes received when you're the only winger in the entire United squad and Amad is playing at wing back? And yes Garnacho will most likely have good numbers for these passes since one of the skillsets he does have is running in behind defences, however aside from this he's largely useless which we can see from his % for through balls/progressive passes/key passes/passes into final 3rd/passes into penalty area/crosses etc etc
What do the stats say about his shooting other than he likes to do it an awful lot?
Good thing he's 20 and has back to back seasons as one of the top 3 productive players of his age group or younger though. Any reasonable, sane human would say it's safe to say that someone with his level of productivity will be ok.
Almost everyone improves after 20, just some don't hit the level that some thought they could have reached. A key difference. Decision making almost always improves, just not necessarily to a level that is good enough.
The reason the age thing will keep getting brought up, for good reason, is because it is rare for players at that age to have serious impacts at the top level like that. So naturally as he is a rare talent, people have high hopes for him and want to keep a hard working, direct player like that who excites fans. Its plain weird seeing some fans have a hate boner against a 20 year old who works his ass off every game and has game after game showed up and made himself available for it over the past 2 seasons, when so many others at this club are half assing it or can't stay fit for 2 weeks.
If it wasn't for this PSR bullshit, no actual fan would want to get rid of him. But suddenly everyone thinks they are club accountants and know all the details and are somehow confident we would use this hypothetical money wisely. If Garnacho was developing in a settled squad with actual senior players to lead those areas, most of the weird people who seem to hate him would be fine with him. So shouldn't your anger be directed at our recruitment for not having a set up that will get the best out of top talents? Shouldn't you want to keep Garnacho, but just strengthen ahead of him so he can be developed properly without being relied upon?
Last edited:
Honestly I think he's been overplayed this season. Even now he needs to rest, I know he'll be involved in the next 2 games before the final, but I think he should at least sit out for 1. I think he's actually faster than what we'd been seeing recently but he's been over played and he hasn't even realized it yet. Technically I think he'll have some improvement but he's never been a tricky winger, what makes him dangerous is that he's been always very direct and his initial acceleration is great. His top speed has always been questionable but that initial burst is something he's always used well.
That is bullshit. We’ve plenty of games where we’ve not scored goals. This isn’t basketball where games have to be played until there’s a winner.
I was around back and no, there weren't plenty of calls to sell him. Ronaldo was a truly exciting and unique player despite his issues at the time (arrogance for instance). After the world cup 06 is when no one criticized him seriously anymore
Yep. It’s one thing saying he shouldn’t be a starter, but wanting him gone at 20? Odd.
We’ve got Sancho, Rashford and Antony to focus on shifting.
What is "his age group" exactly? Because he certainly hasn't been more productive than Yamal/Doue/Cherki/Gittens/Barcola//Savinho/Wirtz in in any of the last 2 seasons.
Never said otherwise. You must’ve misread my post.
I have no strong opinion on what level Garnacho could reach, his level now, nor how he compares to others in his age group past or present.
What I do know is that the club is in no fit state to sell him given that:
- he's currently one of our better attacking players behind only Bruno, Amad and...????
- we're not the preferred destination for most top players or prospects, so we can't rely on buying (numerous) better players if we sold him (let alone thinking we could do so for less than we could sell Garnacho for)
- its normal for young players to have flaws, and its normal for young players to over time step up a level, address flaws, add new dimensions to their game, adapt to different roles etc
If we were in Arsenal, Liverpool or City's position I could understand the debate. They have good attacking options, they could more easily sign better replacements. I'm baffled it's even a debate.
What I do know is that the club is in no fit state to sell him given that:
- he's currently one of our better attacking players behind only Bruno, Amad and...????
- we're not the preferred destination for most top players or prospects, so we can't rely on buying (numerous) better players if we sold him (let alone thinking we could do so for less than we could sell Garnacho for)
- its normal for young players to have flaws, and its normal for young players to over time step up a level, address flaws, add new dimensions to their game, adapt to different roles etc
If we were in Arsenal, Liverpool or City's position I could understand the debate. They have good attacking options, they could more easily sign better replacements. I'm baffled it's even a debate.
The player he reminds me most is actually Pedro at Barcelona.
In Barcelona's front line he was the most direct and least technical player - however Pedro was still useful for Barcelona because he played in a slightly different way to the rest of the front line and would routinely come with important goals. He was the most direct of their whole attackers.
He was also naturally a right footed player playing on the RW even if he used his left footed the most. He also had the ability to cut in but also widen the pitch by hugging the touchline. Pedro was also great at making runs behind the back line.
Pedro was also the most energetic and hard working of the forwards.
I think considering how Pedro looked at Chelsea out of Barcelona's system - I don't think it's too hard to believe that Garnacho can reach or surpass Pedro's level.
He arguably already has similar or better PL seasons than Pedro in his prime at the age of 20.
Pedro was a good important player for Barcelona even if he wasn't exactly an irreplaceable player for them. He was a player of a good value who came up with some important performances, offered something different to quite a strict system when Barcelona needed it the most.
Its very similar to Amorim's strict system, Garnacho will and does provide something different.
If the right offer came for Pedro at Barcelona, I'm sure they would have considered selling him (which they did at 51m) because he isn't irreplaceable but he was still a good important player to both their squad and would frequently be seen in the first XI aswell.
Phew I'm glad I have proof that you have something against him by lying about what I said :
What I said was -
"Garnacho is becoming a one of the worlds best at cut back crosses so for you to say that he is rubbish at crossing shows how one sided you are."
Thanks mate, I can go to sleep now knowing i was right.
In Barcelona's front line he was the most direct and least technical player - however Pedro was still useful for Barcelona because he played in a slightly different way to the rest of the front line and would routinely come with important goals. He was the most direct of their whole attackers.
He was also naturally a right footed player playing on the RW even if he used his left footed the most. He also had the ability to cut in but also widen the pitch by hugging the touchline. Pedro was also great at making runs behind the back line.
Pedro was also the most energetic and hard working of the forwards.
I think considering how Pedro looked at Chelsea out of Barcelona's system - I don't think it's too hard to believe that Garnacho can reach or surpass Pedro's level.
He arguably already has similar or better PL seasons than Pedro in his prime at the age of 20.
Pedro was a good important player for Barcelona even if he wasn't exactly an irreplaceable player for them. He was a player of a good value who came up with some important performances, offered something different to quite a strict system when Barcelona needed it the most.
Its very similar to Amorim's strict system, Garnacho will and does provide something different.
If the right offer came for Pedro at Barcelona, I'm sure they would have considered selling him (which they did at 51m) because he isn't irreplaceable but he was still a good important player to both their squad and would frequently be seen in the first XI aswell.
You realise you're quoting a post that states how bad Garnacho is at creating? Just odd that you agree with it given you called him the best in the world at it!
I don't think we'll be getting near £60m for him, if someone offers that we should bite their hand off at it. I expect we'll get offers that reflect how limited he is, he's neither physically or technically up to PL football, so we'll be reliant on clubs abroad who don't have the same kind of money.
Phew I'm glad I have proof that you have something against him by lying about what I said :
What I said was -
"Garnacho is becoming a one of the worlds best at cut back crosses so for you to say that he is rubbish at crossing shows how one sided you are."
Thanks mate, I can go to sleep now knowing i was right.
Last edited:
His dribbling stats are among the worst in the league for his position? People love to just make up things as fact
It's fairly simple, yes he's young and he MAY improve, however he's not currently good enough to be starting. He's part of the worst forward line in the league. Question is will he be happy being a bench option next season? The same as Hojlund
How is that bullshit? A team isn’t going to go a whole season without scoring are they. Teams that get relegated still have players that score and assist, some even do so at a decent rate.
With all due respect this is crazy talk imo. Pedro was good enough to start for what is the best team of all time in my opinion (Barca 2010/11).
Pedro was extremely intelligent, could use both feet, good dribbler and was a deadly finisher. In Barcelona he played his role to perfection and then went to Chelsea and showed there was more to his game and could translate his skills to the PL.
Before thinking he can surpass Pedro’s level he needs to prove he can surpass someone like Walcott. That is what I think his ceiling is. A pacey non dribbler that can finish.