Noni Madueke: Page 60 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One more in the Tolly

Noni Madueke

--

I did not state 50-60m.

Actually he cost 48.5m if we are being specific.

RowJimmy

Gunner89
Maybe for United. Neither of them would improve our team at all, either in comparison to Madueke or in themselves.

daredevil

Gunner89

A broken clock is also right twice a day.

For all the people that hated the Madueke signing and saw it a mile off - you can bet your arse they also didn’t like us signing Ramsdale, spending 50m on White, signing Raya when we had Ramsdale, signing Havertz, signing another LB in Calafiori, the list goes on.

It does say a lot how much mental capacity goes into the one player in the squad that doesn’t quite live up to the standard, despite 90% of the squad doing a great job.

We will never have a situation where there aren’t any weak links.

awooga83

daredevil Madueke was easily avoidable it's not a suprise outcome the way he's turned out with everything that was known about him at the point he was signed so that line of arguement it's quite disingenuous. I didn't have an issue with Raya so that isn't consistent with your claim. I didn't love the Calafiori signing mainly because lots of the reporting at the time said there were injury concerns about him which didn't sound like the thing to focus on.

It's a bad decision because all the information was he's not good enough and that's proved the case. Even if you wanted to gamble the prince should factor in it's a gamble and not pay Chelsea asking price..If the position becomes well then you lose out then walk away because he's not a difference maker.

RowJimmy

awooga83
So what's the theory as to why the club signed him? Given that it was evident to everyone that he was objectively terrible? And why he still plays?
I'm not saying the club/Arteta can't make mistakes, I think they can and do. But there has to be an explanation of the way they were wrong that's not sheer stupidity, blindness, or desire to sabotage our success.

daredevil

awooga83

You missed my point. Claiming the critics were right when they are wrong most of the time isn’t a flex.

awooga83

RowJimmy genuinely no idea I cannot think of a logical explanation looking from the outside. I assume Arteta had a view on what he thought Madueke could bring or in a worse case scenario already thought he did.

I don't think Arteta has a great eye when it comes to attacking talent or he doesn't look at things like what's their technical level and their attacking output but rather will they be a hard worker. It feels consistent with signings like Willian and Sterling which I found equally baffling. Maybe he overestimates his abilities in changing them as well.

RowJimmy

awooga83
So I think we can rule out Arteta being stupid or blind. Again, not to say he can't make mistakes. But he's certainly looking at particular traits and thinking they are useful and important to how he wants us to play. He pretty clearly still thinks Madueke's contribution is important because he continues to play him. (And Tuchel clearly thinks something similar.) The fact that you or I don't see it is most likely our limitation.

awooga83

daredevil oh fair that's not really what interests me on this signing. It didn't make sense from the outset so I don't get how it got progressed and reflects badly on the way we recruit given an the red flags.

--

RowJimmy it's clear what value he brings to the team.

https://fbplot.com/players/noni-madueke-5143901588188325023

He's elite when it comes to dribbling/ progressing the ball and getting it / us into the final third where we can do damage, even if he isn't the one doing the damage directly. 97th percentile. That's not something you sniff at in today's game, especially for a back up player. That's why he gets picked ahead of many "better" footballers.

awooga83

RowJimmy well like I said he may be pretty poor at identifying attacking quality his record it's not very good in that regard since he's been at the club. Wet also agent a great attacking side so it may be a weakness of his. The fact that managers okay them doesn't mean that they see something we don't. For forwards attacking contribution is what matters not how hard they may work. If he's lining at the former then he's getting it wrong with Madueke and if it's the latter it reinforces that his attacking instincts as a manager are not great right now.

awooga83

-- I mean he was very good at that for Chelsea that's not the question it's end product d and that's the most important thing for forwards and he's way down in that regard.

Getting into the box but doing nothing with it isn't a great attribute to me.

RowJimmy

awooga83 The fact that managers okay them doesn't mean that they see something we don't.

Again, everyone makes mistakes from time to time. But one thing we can be sure of is that managers see things we don't.

RowJimmy

awooga83 it's end product d and that's the most important thing for forwards

I suspect this assumption is the core problem.

awooga83

RowJimmy they do, but that fact on its own doesn't make them right either.

Tuchel chose not to play Saka I'm the semi and played him the full playoff, there's no clever thinking at okay or was just a stupid decision.

Ultimately I don't think Arteta is a great attacking manager, either he undervalues the things that top level attackers need to have or he's just very bad at judging talent based on his record which has been poor in the attacking recruitment side.

There seems to have been a theme with these types of players Willian, Sterling, and now Madueke. Players that didn't look great before arriving but for some reason he valued them and then they performed in line with what they looked like before joining. Arteta may have extra info available but it's not manifesting in the players greater attacking performance.

Qwiss

Funny seeing people who dissect where, against who and every other little aspect to downplay Gyokeres goals talking about how great Noni is cos he runs the ball into the corner before doing fuck all.

invisibleman18

Qwiss he runs the ball into the corner before doing fuck all.

to be fair, sometimes he hoofs a cross into the stands.

Burnwinter

Meh there's a lot of double standards and revisionism in this thread.

There are plenty of people who can remember extremely clearly how opposed they were to signing Madueke, but have also mysteriously memory-holed their convictions we didn't have any chance of winning the league because of all our bad transfer business.

It's all in the game. If you don't have at least two standards are you even a poster?

RowJimmy

Burnwinter
I'm pretty sure that:
1) I was agnostic about Madueke
2) I thought Gyokeres was a good signing because I always thought of him as a backup to Havertz (I could find the receipts, but please just believe me...). I will admit to being surprised and therefore negative about some of his basic skills.
3) I always expected us to win the league (my confidence hit a low after Bournemouth).

It seems to me now that Arteta-out attitudes have migrated into Madueke-bashing. It's not just that people think Madueke is not good, it's that they think Arteta is criminal in having wanted him and having continued to play him. The Gyokeres debate seems less tied up with attitudes about Arteta.

awooga83

RowJimmy I think it's Madueke calls into question how we go about transfers and certainly from an attacking perspective. He wasn't a player without data to make a call on so why did we end up doing it and for that outlay.. The only counter is that's what your have to pay in the market but that's inconsistent with what we've been saying the club rigorously dies for recent deals, we don't accept what the market says and wet dummy du the deal, so why did that not apply here?

RowJimmy

awooga83
I think what it actually tells us is that the club has different criteria that they're looking at than "end product" (otherwise know as counting stats) and that players like Madueke are part of the mix of what they want.
I say this because if it had just been a bad signing he'd be stuck on the bench, and he's not. He's doing what Mikel wants him to do.

Burnwinter

awooga83 He wasn't a player without data to make a call on so why did we end up doing it and for that outlay

It was because of the data we signed Madueke. A lot of his data is actually still top echelon. Here's the Cannon Stats report from last summer that swayed my view on him.

https://www.cannonstats.com/p/stats-scouting-noni-madueke

Now, if you go through the past season, his shot volume, xG per shot, 1-on-1s and carries etc are still top tier. He's still pumping out just shy of 3.0 shots per 90. You just don't want to look at his post-shot xG added, creativity, or overall effectiveness. But you can see why the Madueke experiment was undertaken.

« Previous Page Next Page »