[quote author=Wizardry link=topic=47340.msg1420345#msg1420345 date=1320154284]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47340.msg1420207#msg1420207 date=1320131459]
[quote author=Wizardry link=topic=47340.msg1420198#msg1420198 date=1320120004]
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=47340.msg1420125#msg1420125 date=1320088543]
[quote author=LeTallecWiz link=topic=47340.msg1419946#msg1419946 date=1320066734]
[quote author=RedStar link=topic=47340.msg1419890#msg1419890 date=1320063937]
We effectively swapped Ming for Adam, now the common consensus on Ming was that his worst attribute was a reluctance to put in a tackle and generally being a bit soft despite his obvious passing and goal scoring quality. Adam on the other hand is so slow that he is in no danger of shirking a tackle because his opposing player could easily beat him for pace by jogging. Anybody who thinks Mereiles wouldnt be a useful asset to have right now is nuts, and as for the "you cant keep a player who wants to leave" theory it has been disproved many times, Modric is currently doing it, ronaldo was the best player in the league for two years despite begging to go to Madrid every summer and Fabregas was Arsenals best player even though he demanded a move to Barca every 6 months like clockwork
Clearly Kenny sees something in Adam and didnt with Ming, so be it, but Adam cannot replace Gerrard, Ming did was head and shoulders our best midfielder when asked to perform the same job
[/quote]
I have no problem with most of this post - Would I rather have Ming? Yes.
My issues are:
1) goal scoring quality? He had a fantastic stretch (5 in 6 I think) and that was all his goals for the yaer. Sorry, that's not goal scoring quality - and his track record, as far as I remember, for Porto and Portugal echos similar stats.
2) Your comparisons of disgruntled players who are the best player on their respective teams, who are paid very well and were guaranteed 1st team minutes. Meirless, with all due respect, was not paid well (I don't know what the story is with his raise - our fault, his - whatever) and wasn't in Kenny's 1st 11 plans this year. That means he could very well have become a problem ...
Still wish he was an option to have ... But again, I think we'll be fine without him and won't regret this move long term (short term - we haven't yet, and hopefully won't either)
[/quote]
I have a problem with Redstar in that he's talking nonsense. Adam has proved to be a very decent tackler, like 1000% better at it than Ming. His runs from deep also have opened up defences on numerous occasions, proving he is much more mobile than some people think. In our last game against West Brom, Adam covered 11.5Km, more than any other player on the pitch.
He already has 4 assists in 10 games. Ming had a decent but very unspectacular 7 for the whole of last season. Ming also weighed in with 5 goals. 5. Half the number Maxi scored, who Redstar isn't wanking on about. If Adam doesn't manage double that this season I'll be surprised. Adam's set-piece delivery is also wickedly good. Again, another tick beside his name that Ming lacks.
I'd rather have Adam. Easily.
[/quote]
Tell me your on a wind up Doc. Otherwise you need to either start or stop self medicating - whichever the case may be.
Ming is getting nowhere near the game time at Chelsea as Adam gets with us yet his stats are quite comparable. He proved his worth for us as soon as Kenny took over last season and was the one responsible for igniting our charge. Kenny, for some reason, doesn't see what pretty much everyone else sees or it could be that Ming was a trouble maker behind the scenes somehow. Whatever, he's gone, the team clearly misses him in performance terms, our table position regrets he's no longer with us but as a club the focus needs to be on making sure it's not a long term regret.
I'm pretty sure that Adam is not a long term solution for us - certainly not as a long term midfield 2. You can talk about him developing his fitness all you like - he's in better shape now than in quite some time and he's struggling against the likes of Norwich. We want to have someone who can handle the likes of manu, city, chelsea, Real, Barca.... imagine Adam trying to keep up with Barca at the moment.
He can be good for us in a midfield 3 - very good in fact. But the reality is, IMO, that he's been bought largely for his set piece delivery. He just doesn't have the engine for a high level game in a midfield 2.
[/quote]
'He hasn't got the engine'. What does this nonsense mean when he covered more ground than any other player against WB (where he was part of a midfield 2)?
Doesn't that stat suggest 'he's got the engine'?
I don't think he faded against Norwich either. He was still pressing at the end of the game and could have won us it. I think people are finding it hard to overcome decisions they've made about Adam.
[/quote]
Not sure where you did your intern 😉 but covering a lot of ground has got nothing to do with "the engine". A players engine is determined by their capacity to provide lung bursting efforts time and time again. There are plenty of cases of 70 year olds covering half marathons in pretty reasonable times because they can keep the one, steady, controlled pace. It's when you have to vary your pace dramatically, recover and do it again that you test a players "engine".
Ironmen are probably the easiest example to demonstrate. When competing in the swim or the surf ski they will often see their heart rates climb to close on 200 bpm which is extreme in any condition. But then, as they catch a wave for approximately 12 to 15 seconds their heart rate will drop back to 70 or 80 and they're ready to go again.
The game against WBA didn't see Adam having to put in that kind of repeated effort so while he covered plenty of territory it wasn't a demonstration of how good his engine was. As Sunny has pointed out he died against Norwich who frequently demanded high intensity efforts from him and he simply couldn't keep doing it. Think back to Gerrard and the lung busting runs he'd make..... repeatedly throughout the game. That was why everyone marvelled at his engine. A 25 year old Gerrard would have put Adam in hospital if they'd been opposed. To be fair Gerrard would have done that to a number of opponents but the point about Adam still stands.
[/quote]
You're right about Gerrard- but as you say yourself- the comparison is unfair- practically no-one in the game bears comparison - and anyway, Adam's detail is not to play box to box anyway, but usually to play deeper. I still think it shows that his fitness levels are rising to the standard needed. We don't need him to have a Gerrard like engine- a Xabi style capacity to cover the midfield area will do us rightly.
I'd also say, for someone who was apparently totally enfeebled by the end of the Norwich game, he did a good job of making a gut-busting run down the left and into the Norwich penalty area that could have (should have?) resulted in a peno for us. That was on 86 minutes.
