Jump to content
.CFC

English Premiership Rating Predictions

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Hfazil said:

U think Kane shouldn't get up to 94 so soon? Cool that's your opinion but ur last few posts in this thread show that u seem to hate Kane. That is not cool. Posting up stats from WhoScored.com and claiming that Mertens is better becoz he has "better ball control" obviously shows ur hate for him. A striker's job is to score goals and Kane does it week in week out.

Oh deary me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tupac_healy said:

I don't recall the exact figure but apparently Utd have been REALLY good defensively ever since LGV.....

 

Strange how with such a good record (especially at home) over the last 3 seasons we don't have a single 90+ rated defender....

Strange......

Not really no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tupac_healy said:

Why? We have better defensive records than Chelsea, Man City, Spurs and so on over the course of the last 3 seasons...yet they all have at least 1 91 rated defender.

 

That makes no sense 

which Utd defender deserves to be 91?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tupac_healy said:

So Utd have this fantastic record over the last 3 seasons with poor defenders???

Fantastic is an overstatement, and Utd have not had the best defence over the last three years, coupled with the fact that the top defenders in the league are rated at 92 I'm not quite sure what your are bothered about. theres also that man in between the sticks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26-10-2017 at 7:20 PM, Hfazil said:

Kane has had 3 good seasons u say? Before last season Merten's best goal tally was 11 goals in a season. So basically he has had 1 1/4 good season. and u want him to be at the same rating as Kane?

I was planning on giving you the last word (you can have it back later). Yet I came across Mertens's stats since his transformation into a striker, i.e. about a year ago. He was a very good winger too but he looks simply amazing playing in more central areas, usually scoring beauties.

Since his conversion Mertens has scored 40 goals and provided 16 assists in 3363'. That's a goal/assist every 60' (last season alone it was 38 goals/assists, so every 54'). It's 75' in Kane's best season (35 goals/7 assists) and a goal/assist every 134' the season before.

Stats aside, in the eye-test Mertens looks even better than Kane. It would be a poor reflection of reality if Kane is handed a 94 rating while Mertens sits on 92. Since Kane went up to 93 in the last review he hasn't done enough to merit a 94 rating. You'd need very strong arguments to make that case. 94 is too big of a step, too soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1000dB said:

I was planning on giving you the last word (you can have it back later). Yet I came across Mertens's stats since his transformation into a striker, i.e. about a year ago. He was a very good winger too but he looks simply amazing playing in more central areas, usually scoring beauties.

Since his conversion Mertens has scored 40 goals and provided 16 assists in 3363'. That's a goal/assist every 60' (last season alone it was 38 goals/assists, so every 54'). It's 75' in Kane's best season (35 goals/7 assists) and a goal/assist every 134' the season before.

Stats aside, in the eye-test Mertens looks even better than Kane. It would be a poor reflection of reality if Kane is handed a 94 rating while Mertens sits on 92. Since Kane went up to 93 in the last review he hasn't done enough to merit a 94 rating. You'd need very strong arguments to make that case. 94 is too big of a step, too soon.

Kane shouldn't be given a +1 in Jan that I agree with but Kane is better than Mertens. Kane is not flashy and looks like an ordinary player yes, but he still is in the top 5 strikers in the world. He is a striker and he scores goals. What do u expect him to do? Dribble past 10 players on his own? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Cvilhete said:

Fantastic is an overstatement, and Utd have not had the best defence over the last three years, coupled with the fact that the top defenders in the league are rated at 92 I'm not quite sure what your are bothered about. theres also that man in between the sticks

You've just proved my point, you don't think out record (I don't have the figures off hand but they were discussing how good it actually was during the spurs game) is that good...

 

But it is, it REALLY is.... Utd have been absolutely brilliant defensively (stats wise) over the last 3 seasons, I can hardly believe it myself but apparently it's true....

SM ratings should reflect this IMO, also there is a world of difference between an 90 and 92 rated defender 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tupac_healy said:

You've just proved my point, you don't think out record (I don't have the figures off hand but they were discussing how good it actually was during the spurs game) is that good...

 

But it is, it REALLY is.... Utd have been absolutely brilliant defensively (stats wise) over the last 3 seasons, I can hardly believe it myself but apparently it's true....

SM ratings should reflect this IMO, also there is a world of difference between an 90 and 92 rated defender 

Do you watch football or are you basing this off of what you saw someone say on the TV? Because you didn't seem to have a problem before someone else told you that the team you support is apparently very good defensively. I'm basing my argument off of what I see not what someone off of the tv tells, the past two seasons Spurs have had a better defensive record than Utd and have managed to this whilst competing for the league, Utd have finished 6th and 5th,  not exactly world beaters. And in that same time there has not been one Utd defender worthy of a 91 rating, bailly is your best defender and was bought last summer he was 87 when he joined and is now 90, possibly 91 in the next review, so your argument is confusing to me and worrying that you are arguing something you haven't bothered to check the actual numbers first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Cvilhete said:

Do you watch football or are you basing this off of what you saw someone say on the TV? Because you didn't seem to have a problem before someone else told you that the team you support is apparently very good defensively. I'm basing my argument off of what I see not what someone off of the tv tells, the past two seasons Spurs have had a better defensive record than Utd and have managed to this whilst competing for the league, Utd have finished 6th and 5th,  not exactly world beaters. And in that same time there has not been one Utd defender worthy of a 91 rating, bailly is your best defender and was bought last summer he was 87 when he joined and is now 90, possibly 91 in the next review, so your argument is confusing to me and worrying that you are arguing something you haven't bothered to check the actual numbers first.

Wow, even when I explained it simply to you it's still gone over your head.... 

I (like you) didn't know that Utd's record defensively was THAT good until it was mentioned at Spurs, upon hearing that information (which by the way is 38 games unbeaten at OT) made me wonder if we are THAT good, how come we don't have a single 91 rated defender when other clubs who are not as solid defensively do?

You argue that Spurs have competed for the league, but what did they ACTUALLY win? Nothing....

I'm not entirely sure how my question is confusing you, it's extremely simple... How can a team with a fantastic record have poorer rated players than those without as good a record.. simple really 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tupac_healy said:

Wow, even when I explained it simply to you it's still gone over your head.... 

I (like you) didn't know that Utd's record defensively was THAT good until it was mentioned at Spurs, upon hearing that information (which by the way is 38 games unbeaten at OT) made me wonder if we are THAT good, how come we don't have a single 91 rated defender when other clubs who are not as solid defensively do?

You argue that Spurs have competed for the league, but what did they ACTUALLY win? Nothing....

I'm not entirely sure how my question is confusing you, it's extremely simple... How can a team with a fantastic record have poorer rated players than those without as good a record.. simple really 

i'll put it in simple terms for you, Man Utd have finished 6th,5th and 4th, with defenders like jones,smalling,shaw,rojo,blind darmian and valencia none of which were 91 rated quality players if you say any different you are deluded. i asked you earlier which defender deserves to be 91 and you said Valencia, how good can these players be if Valencia is who you put forward to hold the highest rating? and who are these teams that you speak of that have poorer records but higher rated players? can't be spurs, can't be Chelsea, and city have otamendi and kompany who are 91, one was 91 before he joined city and kompany is on his way down from 93, i really am baffled by these claims. Man Utd as a whole team have been pretty defensive for the past two years, does not necessarily mean individual defenders are of the highest quality. Courtois got more clean sheets than De Gea last season whilst winning the league why is he rated lower? that is basically your argument  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 31/10/2017 at 1:56 AM, tupac_healy said:

Valencia 

All this talk about how good your defence has been and u name one player who  u think should be 91 rated? lol. Other than that who do u want to be 91 rated- Smalling, Rojo, Darmian,Blind, Shaw? These all defenders do not deserve a high rating. Look at Chelsea, Spurs and City's defence and then look at United's. Big difference in quality. BTW Spurs have had the best defence in the last 2 seasons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hfazil said:

All this talk about how good your defence has been and u name one player who  u think should be 91 rated? lol. Other than that who do u want to be 91 rated- Smalling, Rojo, Darmian,Blind, Shaw? These all defenders do not deserve a high rating. Look at Chelsea, Spurs and City's defence and then look at United's. Big difference in quality. BTW Spurs have had the best defence in the last 2 seasons

You obviously didn't pay enough attention to 'all this talk' 

 

I was asked to name 1, I did....

 

You say look at the Chelsea, Spurs & Ciry defence, yeah they have individual better defenders, but we are 38 games unbeaten at OT with lesser defenders... strange how that works. 

Btw, what have Spurs won in the last 2 seasons with said best defensive record?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Cvilhete said:

i'll put it in simple terms for you, Man Utd have finished 6th,5th and 4th, with defenders like jones,smalling,shaw,rojo,blind darmian and valencia none of which were 91 rated quality players if you say any different you are deluded. i asked you earlier which defender deserves to be 91 and you said Valencia, how good can these players be if Valencia is who you put forward to hold the highest rating? and who are these teams that you speak of that have poorer records but higher rated players? can't be spurs, can't be Chelsea, and city have otamendi and kompany who are 91, one was 91 before he joined city and kompany is on his way down from 93, i really am baffled by these claims. Man Utd as a whole team have been pretty defensive for the past two years, does not necessarily mean individual defenders are of the highest quality. Courtois got more clean sheets than De Gea last season whilst winning the league why is he rated lower? that is basically your argument  

You don't even think Valencia is worthy of 91 so what's the point? Being 100% honest I read down to the part where you said he wasn't worth 91 and decided the rest wasn't even worth reading. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, tupac_healy said:

You obviously didn't pay enough attention to 'all this talk' 

 

I was asked to name 1, I did....

 

You say look at the Chelsea, Spurs & Ciry defence, yeah they have individual better defenders, but we are 38 games unbeaten at OT with lesser defenders... strange how that works. 

Btw, what have Spurs won in the last 2 seasons with said best defensive record?

Where did OT come from in this conversation? Secondly this is not about trophies but a team's defence and Spurs have been better defensively than United in last 2 seasons. U say that United have a "fantastic record"? It is becoz of De Gea. He has saved ur asses time and again in the last few seasons and do I need to remind of LVG's last season? All the players did was pass the ball sideways and backways! United scored only 49 goals that season-less than Southampton and West Ham!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, tupac_healy said:

Sorry lads but this back and forth has gone on long enough, it's ridiculous that Utd (with their trophies and home record in the last few seasons) dont have a 91 defender...

 

Argue all you want but it's true 

Yup u are right and everyone else is wrong. Totally not bias dude. BTW I would like to know what other changes do u want in the ratings? Martial to 95, Rashford to 94 and Smalling to 93?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...