|
Sam Vokes
Dec 15, 2020 11:35:29 GMT
via mobile
Post by wagsastokie on Dec 15, 2020 11:35:29 GMT
One of the problems with vokes is there’s never a Stoke player close enough to any knockdowns or head on’s
|
|
|
Post by sneydgreenstokie1 on Dec 15, 2020 11:37:41 GMT
One of the problems with vokes is there’s never a Stoke player close enough to any knockdowns or head on’s He would need to cleanly win the ball first for that to make any difference
|
|
|
Post by moon on Dec 15, 2020 11:42:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Dec 15, 2020 11:42:58 GMT
One of the problems with vokes is there’s never a Stoke player close enough to any knockdowns or head on’s I’m no Vokes fan, but we don’t use him correctly for him to be effective. He needs crosses and quick players around him to thrive like he did at Burnley.
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on Dec 15, 2020 12:59:51 GMT
Vokes being good in the air is a myth. It's not. He won 53% of his aerial duels at Burnley. For Stoke, he's won 48% in 2018/19, 52% in 2019/20 and 48% in 2020/21. He's contested around 20 aerial duels per 90. The expected winning aerial duel percentage for a player of his height and his position, in this league is 42%. He's above average aerially. I hoped you wouldn’t see this. I can honestly say, it certainly doesn’t feel like that. Be interesting if you have any stats on the West Brom game that Delap took charge of? Because it stands out as a game I don’t remember him winning a header. I suppose what is the definition/ criteria of winning? The ball hitting his head and not the defenders?
|
|
|
Sam Vokes
Dec 15, 2020 13:01:56 GMT
via mobile
Post by Gary Hackett on Dec 15, 2020 13:01:56 GMT
One of the problems with vokes is there’s never a Stoke player close enough to any knockdowns or head on’s I’m no Vokes fan, but we don’t use him correctly for him to be effective. He needs crosses and quick players around him to thrive like he did at Burnley. Who did he play alongside at Burnley?
|
|
|
Post by Pirate on Dec 15, 2020 13:03:55 GMT
I’m no Vokes fan, but we don’t use him correctly for him to be effective. He needs crosses and quick players around him to thrive like he did at Burnley. Who did he play alongside at Burnley? Had a standout season in this division with Andre Gray didnt he?
|
|
|
Post by Pirate on Dec 15, 2020 13:05:49 GMT
I’m no Vokes fan, but we don’t use him correctly for him to be effective. He needs crosses and quick players around him to thrive like he did at Burnley. Who did he play alongside at Burnley? Just had a swiz, good year with Gray & with Ings
|
|
|
Sam Vokes
Dec 15, 2020 13:10:18 GMT
via mobile
Post by scfc75 on Dec 15, 2020 13:10:18 GMT
He scores the winner tonight. Well done Vokesy lad.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Dec 16, 2020 13:03:21 GMT
I hoped you wouldn’t see this. I can honestly say, it certainly doesn’t feel like that. Be interesting if you have any stats on the West Brom game that Delap took charge of? Because it stands out as a game I don’t remember him winning a header. I suppose what is the definition/ criteria of winning? The ball hitting his head and not the defenders? Lol, I'm afraid to say he won 11 aerial duels in that game :-) Yep, duels require you to get your head to the ball first in a contest with an opponent. No contest and it's either a (headed) pass, clearance or interception, depends how you want to classify things.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Dec 16, 2020 13:58:13 GMT
Vokes has accounted for around 25% of our headed attempts on goal, despite being far from a regular starter. So if you're going to prioritise an aerial attack, he's a decent option. However, Stoke are going the opposite way. We ranked 33nd since 2014/15 for the amonut of our chances that came from headers in 2018/19, but we we're down to 67th in 2019/20. Also it's not just down to the striker if headed goals aren't arriving regularly. Crossing the ball from better areas hugely increases the quality of a headed opportunity. Here's our last two headed goals, vs Mbro & Wycombe. We crossed from the prime areas and found players in prime receiving area. Good to see Ince crossing from these more dangerous, in-field areas last night, as well, rather than hugging the touchline and whipping in a low quality effort. We may be crossing less, but we should be crossing smarter.
|
|
|
Post by logdog on Dec 16, 2020 14:08:31 GMT
Vokes hasn’t exactly covered himself with glory, but with the type of striker he is, I would guess most of his goals will have been from getting on the end of crosses & poached efforts. A lot of our service in from wide areas is atrocious, it was the same again last night. You lose count of the times a ball in doesn’t even beat the opposition’s first man. MON mentions the quality in the final third after every game. So whilst Big Sam hasn’t done himself any favours, he’s not getting much help I reckon.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Dec 16, 2020 14:10:31 GMT
Vokes being good in the air is a myth. It's not. He won 53% of his aerial duels at Burnley. For Stoke, he's won 48% in 2018/19, 52% in 2019/20 and 48% in 2020/21. He's contested around 20 aerial duels per 90. The expected winning aerial duel percentage for a player of his height and his position, in this league is 42%. He's above average aerially. But, where the hell does the ball go when he wins it??? Isn't that a useful piece of info?
|
|
|
Sam Vokes
Dec 16, 2020 14:20:48 GMT
via mobile
Post by mickstupp on Dec 16, 2020 14:20:48 GMT
Vokes hasn’t exactly covered himself with glory, but with the type of striker he is, I would guess most of his goals will have been from getting on the end of crosses & poached efforts. A lot of our service in from wide areas is atrocious, it was the same again last night. You lose count of the times a ball in doesn’t even beat the opposition’s first man. MON mentions the quality in the final third after every game. So whilst Big Sam hasn’t done himself any favours, he’s not getting much help I reckon. Exactly. Admittedly, it’s not much of a montage, but if you look at every goal he’s scored for Stoke I’d hazard a guess and say every one has been from a cross from out wide or a set piece. He’s terrible, but it’s remarkable how the club deemed it acceptable to pay such a lot of money on a striker so ill suited to how we actually play.
|
|
|
Sam Vokes
Dec 16, 2020 14:23:17 GMT
via mobile
Post by Bojan Mackey on Dec 16, 2020 14:23:17 GMT
Vokes hasn’t exactly covered himself with glory, but with the type of striker he is, I would guess most of his goals will have been from getting on the end of crosses & poached efforts. A lot of our service in from wide areas is atrocious, it was the same again last night. You lose count of the times a ball in doesn’t even beat the opposition’s first man. MON mentions the quality in the final third after every game. So whilst Big Sam hasn’t done himself any favours, he’s not getting much help I reckon. Poor service does not affect his ability to take a penalty or to make a nuisance of himself on the pitch though, he couldn’t look more half-arsed if he tried. He’s beyond shit at both of those things.
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Dec 16, 2020 14:28:42 GMT
It's not. He won 53% of his aerial duels at Burnley. For Stoke, he's won 48% in 2018/19, 52% in 2019/20 and 48% in 2020/21. He's contested around 20 aerial duels per 90. The expected winning aerial duel percentage for a player of his height and his position, in this league is 42%. He's above average aerially. But, where the hell does the ball go when he wins it??? Isn't that a useful piece of info? Where on the pitch is also important. If all his won headers are in our own box from set pieces, then as great as that is it means he’s not contributing at the other end (what he’s paid for).
|
|
|
Post by moon on Dec 16, 2020 15:36:38 GMT
Vokes has accounted for around 25% of our headed attempts on goal, despite being far from a regular starter. So if you're going to prioritise an aerial attack, he's a decent option. However, Stoke are going the opposite way. We ranked 33nd since 2014/15 for the amonut of our chances that came from headers in 2018/19, but we we're down to 67th in 2019/20. Also it's not just down to the striker if headed goals aren't arriving regularly. Crossing the ball from better areas hugely increases the quality of a headed opportunity. Here's our last two headed goals, vs Mbro & Wycombe. We crossed from the prime areas and found players in prime receiving area. View AttachmentGood to see Ince crossing from these more dangerous, in-field areas last night, as well, rather than hugging the touchline and whipping in a low quality effort. We may be crossing less, but we should be crossing smarter. Nice summary, so Vokes is going to play then we also need to change our style of play for him to be effective and play down the wings more focusing on the aerial threat. Given the lack of goals at the moment it's an option, as bad as Vokes has been this season perhaps changing our style and playing him up top (when Fletcher is not available) is a better option than playing Brown as the central striker - or even playing them both together, I really hope we can bring in another striker in January though as we don't look anywhere near as effective up front without Campbell. I don't think Vokes/Gregory/Brown are the answer to our goalscoring problems but we'll just have to make the best use of them we can this season.
|
|
|
Sam Vokes
Dec 16, 2020 17:23:13 GMT
via mobile
Post by logdog on Dec 16, 2020 17:23:13 GMT
Vokes hasn’t exactly covered himself with glory, but with the type of striker he is, I would guess most of his goals will have been from getting on the end of crosses & poached efforts. A lot of our service in from wide areas is atrocious, it was the same again last night. You lose count of the times a ball in doesn’t even beat the opposition’s first man. MON mentions the quality in the final third after every game. So whilst Big Sam hasn’t done himself any favours, he’s not getting much help I reckon. Poor service does not affect his ability to take a penalty or to make a nuisance of himself on the pitch though, he couldn’t look more half-arsed if he tried. He’s beyond shit at both of those things. It’s hard to defend him to be fair mate.😂 I just think we signed a player for way too much money who has never suited the way we play. He’s too long in the tooth now to change his game I reckon. What can you do?🤷🏻♂️
|
|
|
Post by clarkeda on Dec 16, 2020 19:43:36 GMT
I hoped you wouldn’t see this. I can honestly say, it certainly doesn’t feel like that. Be interesting if you have any stats on the West Brom game that Delap took charge of? Because it stands out as a game I don’t remember him winning a header. I suppose what is the definition/ criteria of winning? The ball hitting his head and not the defenders? Lol, I'm afraid to say he won 11 aerial duels in that game :-) Yep, duels require you to get your head to the ball first in a contest with an opponent. No contest and it's either a (headed) pass, clearance or interception, depends how you want to classify things. Is there any metric about a contested header reaching a team mate?
|
|
|
Post by future100 on Dec 17, 2020 0:42:44 GMT
Lol, I'm afraid to say he won 11 aerial duels in that game :-) Yep, duels require you to get your head to the ball first in a contest with an opponent. No contest and it's either a (headed) pass, clearance or interception, depends how you want to classify things. Is there any metric about a contested header reaching a team mate? Lets face it he is now at an age where he is no longer effective
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Dec 17, 2020 9:35:32 GMT
Where on the pitch is also important. If all his won headers are in our own box from set pieces, then as great as that is it means he’s not contributing at the other end (what he’s paid for). They're not. The great majority are won in the opposition half.
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Dec 17, 2020 9:42:20 GMT
Lol, I'm afraid to say he won 11 aerial duels in that game :-) Yep, duels require you to get your head to the ball first in a contest with an opponent. No contest and it's either a (headed) pass, clearance or interception, depends how you want to classify things. Is there any metric about a contested header reaching a team mate? You can quantify every on-field action by where on the field in takes place. You can have a value for where a player receives (or loses) the ball, where the player he passes to receives the ball. It's more difficult to complete a pass higher up the pitch, but it's also more valuable if it is completed. Vokes has been steady, but nothing outstanding. He's done an OK job of holding the ball up and the same when he moves it along to a team mate. No great, but not terrible, either.
|
|
|
Sam Vokes
Dec 19, 2020 1:18:07 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2020 1:18:07 GMT
Been poor in the final third away so hard to criticise Vokes too much, missed McClean and any wide men at times. Vokes is a target man and we don't play to that too often.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Dec 19, 2020 1:26:30 GMT
Been poor in the final third away so hard to criticise Vokes too much, missed McClean and any wide men at times. Vokes is a target man and we don't play to that too often. We lump plenty of balls up to him, we've been doing it all season he just can't get off the ground most of the time and when he does he's shocking at reading the flight of it, someone needs to get on the blower to fat Sam sharpish.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Dec 19, 2020 1:28:30 GMT
Vokes being good in the air is a myth. It's not. He won 53% of his aerial duels at Burnley. For Stoke, he's won 48% in 2018/19, 52% in 2019/20 and 48% in 2020/21. He's contested around 20 aerial duels per 90. The expected winning aerial duel percentage for a player of his height and his position, in this league is 42%. He's above average aerially. That has to be wrong, it goes against everything we see when he plays
|
|
|
Post by tachyon on Dec 19, 2020 9:05:28 GMT
That has to be wrong, it goes against everything we see when he plays You mean the binary (he's s***) conformation biased stuff that passes for "analysis" on here ;-)
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Dec 19, 2020 9:13:33 GMT
One of the problems with vokes is there’s never a Stoke player close enough to any knockdowns or head on’s With Vokes we need to play two on top and also get a lot of crosses into the box, then I think he could be very effective. Unfortunately that won't happen here so he really needs to look at other options right now I think.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Dec 19, 2020 9:25:59 GMT
That has to be wrong, it goes against everything we see when he plays You mean the binary (he's s***) conformation biased stuff that passes for "analysis" on here ;-) Exactly , I'll be honest I'm flabergasted by those stats, he's looked awful when trying to win the ball in the air but oh well if he isn't he isnt, still think he needs to be gone mind.
|
|
|
Sam Vokes
Dec 19, 2020 9:38:22 GMT
via mobile
Post by nonameface on Dec 19, 2020 9:38:22 GMT
Vokes being good in the air is a myth. It's not. He won 53% of his aerial duels at Burnley. For Stoke, he's won 48% in 2018/19, 52% in 2019/20 and 48% in 2020/21. He's contested around 20 aerial duels per 90. The expected winning aerial duel percentage for a player of his height and his position, in this league is 42%. He's above average aerially. What's the average without taking height into the query? It's there a way to see statistically what type of striker (and if we already have him) stoke need to fill Tyrese's boots with the way MON plays?
|
|
|
Sam Vokes
Dec 19, 2020 9:49:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by bayernoatcake on Dec 19, 2020 9:49:39 GMT
It's not. He won 53% of his aerial duels at Burnley. For Stoke, he's won 48% in 2018/19, 52% in 2019/20 and 48% in 2020/21. He's contested around 20 aerial duels per 90. The expected winning aerial duel percentage for a player of his height and his position, in this league is 42%. He's above average aerially. That has to be wrong, it goes against everything we see when he plays Shows why a massive pinch of salt is needed.
|
|