Henrikh Mkhitaryan: Page 9 - The Arsenal discussion community: One More in the Tolly

Henrikh Mkhitaryan

marv3llous

Anzac wrote:
marv3llous wrote:
No, Miki doesnt play this deep. He is a second striker / attacking midfielder / winger.

https://www.whoscored.com/Players/28421/

I know what you're saying but Cazorla was also a CAM when we signed him.

I know and i believe we will continue with Santi at CM.

Rex

He is very good at skinning players on the inside. Or the outside. This is so confusing.

JazzG

Tactics wrote:
The way I see it, we don't have enough technicians in our side and that should be an absolute priority this summer IMO. We are generally very good against bottom half teams, it is mostly against top half of the table sides that are organised, disciplined (with very little space for us to play) that we struggle against. We need more technicians or should become a very dangerous set piece team (not gonna happen under Wenger)

Always thought technically Mkhitaryan was a good player in tight spaces but then again I've not seen that much of him.

Tactics

JazzG wrote:
Tactics wrote:
The way I see it, we don't have enough technicians in our side and that should be an absolute priority this summer IMO. We are generally very good against bottom half teams, it is mostly against top half of the table sides that are organised, disciplined (with very little space for us to play) that we struggle against. We need more technicians or should become a very dangerous set piece team (not gonna happen under Wenger)

Always thought technically Mkhitaryan was a good player in tight spaces but then again I've not seen that much of him.

I saw more than a dozen games of Mkhitaryan at Shaktar, he was part of a super trio of Willian (on the left), Mikhi at 10 and a Brazilian guy (forgot his name) on the right. I often wondered at the time why Willian, who was the creative brain of the side, played on the left and not at 10. I concluded it probably had to do with the greater goal threat offered by Mikhi, he added depth to their attack and was one of their main ball carriers in transition. That side was incredibly disciplined and broke forward with pace.

Mkhitaryan is a good allrounder with good technique but his technique is still closer to guys like Ramsey, Ox etc than guys like SantI and Ozil. We need more players in the latter category IMO. Arsenal being a technical side is one of the biggest myths around. Adding more players who are not elite technicians is only going to make us a one dimensional side that is very easy to defend against or a side that will continue to struggle to keep the ball during important moments in games.

I know I'm in the minority, but it I'd consider this summer very underwhelming if Vardy and Mikhitaryan are the 2 main attacking players we bring in.

Rohit

I think Mkhitaryan is quite good technically.

I wish we sign Gotze though.

Big Willie

What did you make of last summer Tactics?

Burnwinter

Tactics—your description sounds like a fit and in form Wilshere to me. Wonder if Wenger thinks the same way. I think this line of thought might keep us from signing Götze in fact.

I reckon we have a deficit of quality off the ball movement and finishing as much as we do quality on the ball. Space in the final third is a function of the kinds of movement and threats defenders have to speculate about.

jones

Tactics wrote:
JazzG wrote:
Always thought technically Mkhitaryan was a good player in tight spaces but then again I've not seen that much of him.

I saw more than a dozen games of Mkhitaryan at Shaktar, he was part of a super trio of Willian (on the left), Mikhi at 10 and a Brazilian guy (forgot his name) on the right. I often wondered at the time why Willian, who was the creative brain of the side, played on the left and not at 10. I concluded it probably had to do with the greater goal threat offered by Mikhi, he added depth to their attack and was one of their main ball carriers in transition. That side was incredibly disciplined and broke forward with pace.

Mkhitaryan is a good allrounder with good technique but his technique is still closer to guys like Ramsey, Ox etc than guys like SantI and Ozil.

I have to disagree here, no way can Mkhitaryan's technique be described as "close to Ox" even if the alternative was Messi. He's similar to Pires in that he has the vision, ball control and technique of a midfielder but other qualities like goal threat and dribbling of a winger. I don't think there's anyone available for our left wing who'd be a better buy than him

Ray

I would say he is quite similar to Rosicky.

Meatwad

jones wrote:
Tactics wrote:
I saw more than a dozen games of Mkhitaryan at Shaktar, he was part of a super trio of Willian (on the left), Mikhi at 10 and a Brazilian guy (forgot his name) on the right. I often wondered at the time why Willian, who was the creative brain of the side, played on the left and not at 10. I concluded it probably had to do with the greater goal threat offered by Mikhi, he added depth to their attack and was one of their main ball carriers in transition. That side was incredibly disciplined and broke forward with pace.

Mkhitaryan is a good allrounder with good technique but his technique is still closer to guys like Ramsey, Ox etc than guys like SantI and Ozil.

I have to disagree here, no way can Mkhitaryan's technique be described as "close to Ox" even if the alternative was Messi. He's similar to Pires in that he has the vision, ball control and technique of a midfielder but other qualities like goal threat and dribbling of a winger. I don't think there's anyone available for our left wing who'd be a better buy than him

dude is trying to kill me, close to ox and ramsey. what a joke.

Tactics

Burnwinter wrote:
Tactics—your description sounds like a fit and in form Wilshere to me. Wonder if Wenger thinks the same way. I think this line of thought might keep us from signing Götze in fact.

I reckon we have a deficit of quality off the ball movement and finishing as much as we do quality on the ball. Space in the final third is a function of the kinds of movement and threats defenders have to speculate about.

Yep a Wilshere like technician would be great in that role. I have to say though, I do have reservations about Jack so far up the pitch, he tends to see less the closer he's to goal and he isn't a goal threat. I prefer him in a deep lying role, his ability to play under pressure and play intricate probing passes or long diagonals are all huge assets in that role. I dunno why, but he tends to see the picture better and pick out runners more when playing in that deeper role. Ideally, I'd like a technician who is also a goal threat in that wide forward role.

Your 2nd paragraph is spot on.

Tactics

Big Willie wrote:
What did you make of last summer Tactics?

Disastrous
34

Tactics

jones wrote:
Tactics wrote:
I saw more than a dozen games of Mkhitaryan at Shaktar, he was part of a super trio of Willian (on the left), Mikhi at 10 and a Brazilian guy (forgot his name) on the right. I often wondered at the time why Willian, who was the creative brain of the side, played on the left and not at 10. I concluded it probably had to do with the greater goal threat offered by Mikhi, he added depth to their attack and was one of their main ball carriers in transition. That side was incredibly disciplined and broke forward with pace.

Mkhitaryan is a good allrounder with good technique but his technique is still closer to guys like Ramsey, Ox etc than guys like SantI and Ozil.

I have to disagree here, no way can Mkhitaryan's technique be described as "close to Ox" even if the alternative was Messi. He's similar to Pires in that he has the vision, ball control and technique of a midfielder but other qualities like goal threat and dribbling of a winger. I don't think there's anyone available for our left wing who'd be a better buy than him

Ok no problem, let's agree to disagree.

I agree with you on his similarity with Pires in that he he has qualties of a midfielder but also some qualities of a forward but that's where the similarities end: Pires was much better technically IMO. Mhikitaryan's touch isn't always brilliant and he thrives on space (probably no coincidence he joined 2 teams in Shaktar and Dortmund who base their game on exploiting space), he isn't great in confined spaces from my experience of watching him play.
39
42

est

This rumour makes me wonder whether Wenger is thinking of going back to 4-4-2?

Elneny and Xhaka are the kind of midfielders that can hold their own and Mkhitaryan would make for an ideal wide-midfielder in that formation. Add the likes of Ramsey, Wilshere, Coquelin, Santi and you'll get a decent mix of midfielders for different roles in that formation.

That would make a lot of sense, if it weren't for Özil. Play him as a second striker? Doesn't score enough goals. Play him on the wing? Takes a lot away from his game and he wouldn't provide enough cover defensively.

Tactics

Meatwad wrote:
jones wrote:
I have to disagree here, no way can Mkhitaryan's technique be described as "close to Ox" even if the alternative was Messi. He's similar to Pires in that he has the vision, ball control and technique of a midfielder but other qualities like goal threat and dribbling of a winger. I don't think there's anyone available for our left wing who'd be a better buy than him

dude is trying to kill me, close to ox and ramsey. what a joke.

You are acting like I just compared him to 2 cloggers. I dunno what you define as technique, but for me it things like touch, shooting, passing, ball control etc. Ramsey and Ox are very good at some of those. For example, they've both got very good shooting technique and I have seen them play plasses that are very difficult tro pull off technically, such as Ramsey's "banana" pass (the one against Olympiakos comes to mind), or ox playing 30-40 yards outside of the boot passes accros the surface. As I said, all passes that are technically very difficult to pull off.

They do have weaknesses in certain areas though, their touch for example is inconsistent (not awful or poor! can be very good at times) and Ramsey clearly struggles to control the ball in tight areas especially when pressed. Ox is better in that area (we've seen him control the ball well at pace and go pass multiple players within a very short distance, Bayern away springs to mind). Overall they are both not great technicians but it's not like their technique is awful either.

Mikhitaryan's touch is good (much more consistent than Ramsey and Ox) but it's not brilliant IMO.As I mentioned above, he doesn't excel in tight areas, he thrives on space. Overall he's more polished technically compared to Ox and Ramsey but his technique is nowhere near elite level IMO.

Clrnc

Tactics wrote:
Meatwad wrote:
dude is trying to kill me, close to ox and ramsey. what a joke.

Mikhitaryan's touch is good (much more consistent than Ramsey and Ox) but it's not brilliant IMO.As I mentioned above, he doesn't excel in tight areas, he thrives on space. Overall he's more polished technically compared to Ox and Ramsey but his technique is nowhere near elite level IMO.

49

That's much more acceptable.

No other top clubs should have players compared to Ox and Ramsey's touch. If they do, it's not worth for us to sign them at all.

Gunner89

Tactics wrote:
Meatwad wrote:
dude is trying to kill me, close to ox and ramsey. what a joke.

You are acting like I just compared him to 2 cloggers. I dunno what you define as technique, but for me it things like touch, shooting, passing, ball control etc. Ramsey and Ox are very good at some of those. For example, they've both got very good shooting technique and I have seen them play plasses that are very difficult tro pull off technically, such as Ramsey's "banana" pass (the one against Olympiakos comes to mind), or ox playing 30-40 yards outside of the boot passes accros the surface. As I said, all passes that are technically very difficult to pull off.

They do have weaknesses in certain areas though, their touch for example is inconsistent (not awful or poor! can be very good at times) and Ramsey clearly struggles to control the ball in tight areas especially when pressed. Ox is better in that area (we've seen him control the ball well at pace and go pass multiple players within a very short distance, Bayern away springs to mind). Overall they are both not great technicians but it's not like their technique is awful either.

Mikhitaryan's touch is good (much more consistent than Ramsey and Ox) but it's not brilliant IMO.As I mentioned above, he doesn't excel in tight areas, he thrives on space. Overall he's more polished technically compared to Ox and Ramsey but his technique is nowhere near elite level IMO.

49

Define elite level technique?

Cannon

Have watched him maybe thrice, but on evidence of youtube i am inclined to agree with Klaus that is a very average dribbler. Still seems like a good, productive player though

Clrnc

A lot of rumours flying in on twitter now about him. Jan hinting about it as well.

marv3llous

I hope he's our man.

« Previous Page Next Page »