Werner has always missed big chances, I think he missed something like 21 last season. However, the trick with him is that he gets himself into so many great positions that he still scores and assist a ton. At the moment he is on course for a 20+ goal season with 10+ assits, that is a very good season.
Buy haaland ? L0L
Agreed he'll be a good signing and he definitely helps open up the pitch for Chelsea and creates good chances for himself through movement alone. I was just surprised how often be messed up easy chances. Might be what separates him from being among the best. I don't know if he was signed in the hope that he was a #9, and his versatility was clearly a valuable factor, but ultimately that's where the highest gap is. Pulisic and Ziyech are among the best in their positions while Giroud and Abraham are nowhere near that. He looks better than Havertz at this stage but I imagine he's expected to become an elite #10 too. Leaves space tight for Werner when everyone's fit and on form.
The issue with Werner are that there will be periods where he will be underperforming his xG for a string of games, and then suddenly find his form again and go on a scoring run, outperforming is xG.
Perhaps it's the quality of chances he's missed, rather than the number of them. He's missed 4 genuine sitters in the last 2 games, but as others have said, his performances and chance creations have mostly remained at a really high level.
As does any striker, by definition. I would need to see some strong evidence that this issue is more pronounced with Werner. And even then I'm not sure it would make sense to read anything into it as it might just be random variation.
Which four sitters are those? I just looked at the shots he has taken in his last two games games (two against Newcastle and two against Rennes) and only two of them were 'big' chances for a combined xG of roughly 1.25. 0.75 for the one against Rennes and 0.5 for the one against Newcastle are fair estimations I think (StatsBomb have all four shots at 1.6 xG total for what it's worth). So him not scoring any of them is perhaps unlikely but hardly anything significant. I would be careful with the word 'sitter' in general and it is definitely overused by pundits on TV. It creates the illusion that those were 100% chances (no such thing exists) and now people think Werner should have scored four goals from those four attempts.
Sitter is just used interchangeably with big chance, and the one against Newcastle and two against Rennes were big chances in my eyes, (do statsbomb record it as a chance missed by Werner if he tried to pass it instead of shooting?). If you just have the keeper in front you and it's a favourable angle, which at least 3 of the 4 were, then it's it will be difficult to convince me those weren't big chances.
This relies on the premise that expected goals are a good measure of the quality of chances. Of course that is a greatly disputed claim.
Or fans can use their eyes? If a Chelsea fan is saying he missed four sitters then numbers on a sheet arent going to be a convincing argument otherwise
Unfortunately individual shot data from StatsBomb is not freely available (only cumultative for each player) and Werner's output was 0.6 xG against Newcastle and 1.0 against Rennes so we can deduct the probability for each shot from that. Only shots are recorded. Another source I use (by a guy who watches and records every single shot manually and whose xG numbers match goals scored to a tee) has Werner's shots against Newcastle at 0.15 and 0.35. I'm pretty sure you thought those numbers would be higher. And so did I in fairness, particular the second one.
Yes, let's ignore hard evidence and go by what someone claims to have seen (see above). Someone also tried to tell me recently that Arteta has improved Arsenal because he 'trusts his eyes' when all data points to the contrary.
This is selling Vardy short. He is better than you make him out to be and every striker bar a couple of them would be happy with his level.
Do you know what the problem with those stats are? They don’t take account of the fact that he had a simple one on one with the keeper but didn’t shoot. Instead he played an awful square pass straight to a Newcastle defender. Great opportunity missed but won’t be shown by those stats.
In fairness, when I mentioned two big chances against Newcastle, that one definitely wasn't one of them.Unfortunately individual shot data from StatsBomb is not freely available (only cumultative for each player) and Werner's output was 0.6 xG against Newcastle and 1.0 against Rennes so we can deduct the probability for each shot from that. Only shots are recorded. Another source I use (by a guy who watches and records every single shot manually and whose xG numbers match goals scored to a tee) has Werner's shots against Newcastle at 0.15 and 0.35. I'm pretty sure you thought those numbers would be higher. And so did I in fairness, particular the second one.
This is why it's dangerous to trust what we think we have seen. We are all biased to some degree, by club allegiance, by what we hear from pundits or by our own memory because we have seen similar shots being scored in the past, maybe even by the same player. In general fans and pundits vastly overrate the likelihood of chances being scored. Think of how often they say on TV "oh he should have scored that" after a header from 10 yards out which is ridiculous (which header even has an xG above 0.30). If we went by that we would be seeing three or four times as many goals in reality. Shooting from an angle, being under defensive pressure and even being a further yard out dramatically decrease the chance of a goal happening. That's why I don't like the term sitter even if we use it meaning 'big chance'.
I agree with your last sentence. I don't think Werner is world class (whatever that means) but I said in the summer that for 50m he is an absolute no-brainer purchase for Chelsea and will be a very good player for them
Yes, let's ignore hard evidence and go by what someone claims to have seen (see above). Someone also tried to tell me recently that Arteta has improved Arsenal because he 'trusts his eyes' when all data points to the contrary.
I have also 'seen' those four chances by Werner, infact I looked at each one of them again before posting. And he did not miss four sitters, that is just factually incorrect. Saying he missed two big chances? Fair enough although, again, I would not be reading anything into that.
Here is the still image of Werner's first shot against Newcastle:
Roughly 16 yards from goal, at an angle (hard to get past the goalkeeper from there) and under pressure from two defenders. This just isn't a big chance. He actually did pretty well to place it in the far corner but the keeper got a hand to it resulting in a corner.
Not at all. Vardy is a good striker but he’s a level below the likes of Kane, Aguero etc who are the top top strikers in the league. Werner is a level below Vardy again in my book, so he has along way to be top striker.
Hasn't Vardy been putting up similar numbers to Kane and Aguero recently?
Do you think he’s as good?
I may not but then again Vardy's numbers speak for themselves.
This is basically what i wrote so i don’t think we disagree.
I agree, all the signs point to him being very prolific for us for the next couple of years.
This is essentially what I was saying, but you have said it in a much better way. Werner is a striker/wf who creates masses of chances for himself and consequently can get serious numbers despite the poor misses/passes. Further, the kid is 24 a new to the league, yet is still on course for 20+ goals and 10+ assists and that doesn't include the pens he has won (4 so far.)
Yeah I thought the same regarding his passing, his pass appreciation is a little off at times and can sometimes kill the flow, especially when dealing with a defensive team and trying to play quickly. I’m basing this just on his time at Chelsea as I never saw him in the bundesliga.
Who?
Decent return. Doesn't pass the eyeball test for me though, which I know isn't scientific but just my feel. He's incredibly uncomfortable on his left, which makes him pretty predictable. Was certainly expecting him to look much better.
Just an expensive Darren Huckerby at this point.
