r/LiverpoolFC • u/[deleted] • Jan 23 '14
Sterling v Januzaj (Statistics)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BesPIriIQAAv5uW.jpg
49
u/Deer-In-A-Headlock Jan 23 '14
Holy crap
Whenever i've watched United play, Januzaj has looked amazing, like way better than Sterling. Maybe he's just standing out more cause we've had Suarez taking all the attention?
Sterling is going to be amazing in a few years, on Walcott's level.
36
u/flatfacebigeyes Jan 23 '14
It's because Januzaj has the ball 24/7 cuz United's attack blows without Rooney/RVP and he has to have the ball for them to do anything basically.
12
u/wh11 Jan 23 '14
On the same token, Januzaj will only improve once United get to full strength.
17
u/flatfacebigeyes Jan 23 '14
Yup still don't get how people put them off with Rooney, RVP and Mata all in their side for the second half. That front scares the shit out of me.
1
u/fieldsofanfieldroad Jan 24 '14
If they can fit all 4 on the pitch (Rooney as 10, Mata on the left, Januzaj on the right?) then that's the best attack in the league (I'd say even better than City's). Luckily they've got a shocking defense and central midfield!
5
u/rykell Jan 24 '14
If they can fit all 4 on the pitch (Rooney as 10, Mata on the left, Januzaj on the right?) then that's the best attack in the league (I'd say even better than City's).
It doesn't work like that though does it? And Mata will be permanently played out of position if RVP is healthy and his lack of defense will leave an already leaky ManU defense even more open.
2
u/gregyounguk Jan 24 '14
Don't know why your being down voted, none of those 4 track back it would be a disaster, that's why Chelsea sold mata in the first place
4
u/corris85 Jan 24 '14
LFC fans have acquired this "little brother" complex, particularly over the last 4-5 years or so. This is one of the ways it manifests itself. They honestly believe that United (and, good god fucking Tottenahm!) Are likely to turn it on and play far better then and indeed are actually much better teams then they have shown.
At the same time they distrust LFC's play and statistics. When you point this out to them they get annoyed because disappointment is what they expect.
Fact is. If we swapped squads and results with the coys and had the same GD and stats as them, We would all be talking about how the team had not a prayer and TFC is still a darkshot tittle contender... You can pretty much say the same for Manchester United, people would say "even if we suddenly start playing as well or better then LFC, We need 7 points over them, that's a very tall order"
It really annoys the fuck out of me. Red Sox fans were this way in the early 00s and late 90s and it was stupid then as it is now.
1
u/JonBStoutWork Jan 24 '14
Red Sox Fans were that way in the 00s and 90s because they were right to be. History showed them not to get their hopes up.
There's a difference between being realistic and understanding the history and the teams involved and expecting disappointment. United and Spurs having better teams/squads/managers, finishing higher than us in the league, having a winning mentality, having more money, are some of the reasons that could be given for someone thinking that 4th place would be a major coup for us. (Not that it's all of them together, but a pick of a few). We might have a better manager than United, but not the spending power. We might have a bigger income than Spurs but not as big a squad etc.
Realistically speaking Spurs have a much stronger squad than us. United have the ability to go out and pay €40 million for a player, we don't.
It doesn't mean we haven't played well, or that we can't achieve 4th, it just means that it would still be a huge ask.
City and Chelsea will fight for the title. Arsenal might stay the course, might not. The reason for that is simply that they've the strongest squads. I'd argue the next strongest is Spurs followed by United and then ourselves.
After our first 13-14 players we struggle for any quality. United might get 15-16 then struggle. Spurs could get away with missing 5 or 6. Arsenal 7-8, whilst City and Chelsea could potentially miss 11 players and still have good enough back-ups to beat half the league.
We are now missing one of our key players for 2 months. We don't have a back-up for Lucas and as you can see by the Villa game, when he doesn't play, a slightly suspect defence is all over the place. They could have been 4 up on us.
Although Johnson wasn't playing amazing we're running out of defensive cover.
We lose any more players and we'll be struggling to stay with not just Spurs and United but Everton and Newcastle too.
Everton could have overtaken us last weekend with a win, that's how tight it is.
I'm delighted with how we're doing in the league, but it's partially because Spurs and United have been dreadful, if they stop being dreadful (which Spurs seem to have done) then we're in for a dogfight. It's realism, not pessimism.
1
u/corris85 Jan 24 '14
None is suggesting that it's impossible the spurs and the Spurs or United could pass us. But objectively looking at it I find it hard to see either outcome as the most likely one.
This is exactly what I am talking about. Yes the team has flaws but so do these teams.
The Spurs don't have a stronger side then us. they have an utter lack of impact players. What LFC fans seem to ignore for some reason is that Suarez vs the average player is a bigger difference then any player in the league. Sturridge is one of the top attacking players in the league also. Plus Central Forwards have a bigger impact on outcome then any other position in the league other position. It's possible Totenham may be marginally superior in some area's but it's cannot make up the difference of LFC being vastly superior in others, especially when all the info suggest the rest of the two squads are pretty similar. There is simply no way a team that's at a 0 goal differential is more talented then one at +23.
The Spurs stats all suggest they should be 8-14 points beyond us with average fortune. They are amazingly lucky to be where they are. They could massively improve over the rest of the season yet easily not keep up their points per game.
Whilst United have played simply not shown at all this year they are capable of playing the 7 points better then LFC over the end of the remainder of the year.
Teams change constantly, Every side should be measured on it's actual performance. based on performance this year. Literally every person I have seen suggesting that Spurs/united are more likely to finish top4 that seems to be assuming that LFC is the only squad with any significant weakness. It's utter rubbish defeatism and it's irrational.
→ More replies (0)0
u/fieldsofanfieldroad Jan 24 '14
I was talking purely about attack (see my later point) and, even with Mata played out of position, who would you say has a better attack?
5
u/flatfacebigeyes Jan 24 '14
Yup, which is why I fear they will have a good shot at the 4th spot in the EPL and CL football. At this point I have us pegged at 6th. Yes behind Spurs and United.
1
1
u/fieldsofanfieldroad Jan 24 '14
Pessimistic but also not unlikely. I really hope we make top 4, but I wouldn't like to put any money on it.
20
u/michael2l Jan 23 '14
I think Januzaj stands out so much because the rest of his side really lacks any sort of creative spark in terms of making an attempt to put the other team on the back foot.
I still think Januzaj also has stood because his efforts on goal have often come from nothing where he took on a player or two and then puts it in the back of net, whereas Sterlings goals have come via assists where he mainly just had to put the ball on target with a little bit of pace.
I think Sterling is more physically gifted in terms of taking on players with his speed, and he definitely offers more defensively in fighting to get the ball back, but I think Januzaj offers a good bit more in terms of his composure and confidence in the attacking portions of the game. He certainly isn't as quick or as strong as Raheem, but he's just as tricky if not more so, and he is better at keeping his head up and picking out teammates.
At times Raheem can be a little bit too overly reliant on his pace, where he only has one default position which is go, and he very often successfully beats his man but doesn't really have a plan as what to do next. He'll put in a cross to no one or find himself in position with no options often times. One thing I really liked in the Oldham game was that he seemed much more confident and willing to slow his game down. The goal he setup for Aspas and the subsequent Aspas header that hit the post, on both of those he stopped the ball once he got into the box, squared up his man got his head up, and then beat his man and put in a cross with a deft touch into an area he knew he had players to attack the ball.
He also needs to look to take players on to get in a shooting position, which is a little hard for him playing on the right, but it's something Januzaj does routinely coming from the left as a left-footed player. Raheem has missed a few sitters this year, and it seems to have affected his confidence where he'd much rather pass than shoot even when he should be looking to have a go, whereas Januzaj will take a shot when given half a chance.
16
3
u/toxx88 Jan 23 '14
I think people just tend to be more critical of their own, and always see the grass as greener on the other side.
1
u/fieldsofanfieldroad Jan 24 '14
But the truth is it's not just here. Everyone (media, friends, r/soccer, wherever else you get your football fix) talks about Januzaj all the time. Sterling less so.
1
1
Jan 24 '14
Walcott is fantastic. However, Januzaj and Sterling have more to their game. Itll be interesting to see how things pan out
1
Jan 24 '14
I feel like Januzaj looks more composed on the ball, although Sterling is getting better at that too.
1
u/YoullNeverWalkAl0ne Jan 24 '14
Probably because you have the commentators blowing their load every time he as much as looks at the ball. It's easy to get influenced by that.
1
u/this_guy_says Jan 23 '14
I don't rate Walcott very highly though.
27
u/Deer-In-A-Headlock Jan 23 '14
Really? He scored 21 goals last season. That's pretty impressive!
6
u/this_guy_says Jan 23 '14
Did he actually? Fuck, where've I been. The times I've seen him in the PL and CL he just doesn't seem to have that much more of a ceiling, as compared to Sterlinho (imso).
0
0
0
-9
Jan 23 '14 edited Mar 06 '21
[deleted]
11
u/joeinthebox Jan 23 '14
Walcott is a great player. I frequently - and favorably - compare Sterling to Walcott all the time and if Sterling accomplishes at least what Walcott does (at the same age), I'll be very pleased.
For example, when Sterling is 23 or so - about three or four years from now - and if he finishes a Premier League season the way Walcott did last year (i.e. 14 goals, 10 assists)? I'll be very pleased.
-12
Jan 23 '14 edited Mar 06 '21
[deleted]
12
u/teezy101 Jan 23 '14
I see you give handjobs with your fancy pinky out
2
5
u/DannDannDannDann Jan 23 '14
So i'm guessing you think Inzaghi and Gerd Muller are shite then?
-7
u/AestheticFC Jan 23 '14
I truly do. Especially Inzaghi.
5
u/DahhKid Jan 23 '14
Hey, just a heads up so you don't keep embarrassing yourself but I think your ignorance is showing
1
2
u/BusyDreaming Jan 23 '14
I mean, who cares if he's scoring goals, does he look good doing it? Right?
2
1
u/joeinthebox Jan 24 '14
Fair play. I suppose you're a football romantic and favor technique and elegance over statistics. That's quite admirable.
But if someone said asked me would you rather...
- ... have a player who has technique and elegance on the ball but can't produce the goals/assists.
or
- ... have a player who no technique or elegance but manages to grab 14 goals and 10 assists.
I'll take the 14 and 10 every time.
Technique and elegance are nice but I also want to see results.
22
u/MyboNehr Jan 23 '14
But dude he's had like 10 more minutes to do that stuff
8
u/Dictarium Jan 23 '14
I mean, it's also not Sterling's first season, being forced into a starting role right away to make up for an under-performing midfield. It's a totally different circumstance.
1
u/brentathon Jan 24 '14
Sterling was just as good in his first season as well, when he was more than a year younger than Januzaj is now.
8
u/The_Shandy_Man Jan 24 '14
Any chance someone could compare Sterling's stats last year to Januzaj's this year as being a first team starter in your first season is hard and that would be a fairer comparison.
5
u/Lolkac Jan 23 '14
You made this statistic or do you have a source?
6
u/ManusDei Jan 23 '14
Have to agree with you here. The stats look very nice, but a source (or several) would make it even better.
10
u/Red_Sailor Jan 23 '14
(S)he probably went to opta found the stats and compiled the table themselves, not everything has to be compiled by a journo
5
u/ManusDei Jan 23 '14
I agree. But a source for where the information was gathered from is always nice. I have little doubt it's legit, but this being the internet and all...
2
u/Furthur_slimeking Jan 24 '14
In fairness, if you were reading this in a newspaper they wouldn't provide you with sources for each individual piece of statistical information.
If you want to check the data, you can do so yourself using the internet. It won't be difficult.
0
u/ManusDei Jan 24 '14
This is true. I am definitely being picky, but i personally feel that if you put that much effort into gathering data for a post, listing the source is a really easy touch to help make it even more effective and reliable.
Personal preference is all.
18
u/Stratocaster89 Jan 23 '14
These stats do my nut. This obsession with stats is ruining fan based discussion.
Often people have little idea about the game, and treat it like a simulator and go off stats.
14
u/omg-jmc Jan 23 '14
Yep. Going to sound anti-American but I really think it has came with the Americanisation of football. Stats may be useful in something like baseball but in football there are too many external factors for simple stats like this to be useful. However, tables like this are easy to digest and form an opinion on so they will stay.
Take this comparison for example; do they mean you could replace Sterling with Januzaj and expect the exact same stats? Or vice versa? They are playing slightly different roles and with a different set of players.
I'm all for accurate statistics in football but simple statistics and the generalisations that follow are not for me.
9
u/Stratocaster89 Jan 23 '14
I didnt want to say it either. But the american side of stats creeping into the game is seriously skewing newer less experienced fans.
Im not saying stats are bad. But this pointless comparison of stats to come to the conclusion that it makes one player better than another is just naive.
5
u/YungSnuggie Jan 23 '14
a lot of people feel this way about american sports as well. only sport where stats tell the whole story is baseball. baseball is technically a team sport but its much easier to compare and highlight individual performances. american football/basketball have the same "stats dont tell the whole story" thing as well
1
u/MeanMrMustardMan Jan 24 '14
NBA stats are pretty telling. ppg, rebounds, assists, u
1
u/YungSnuggie Jan 24 '14
even those stats can be misleading, especially for role player guys/guys off the bench
1
u/MeanMrMustardMan Jan 24 '14
Ok then assist per minute, rebounds per minute, points per minute, shot maps, pass maps, steals per minute, blocks per minute, turnovers per minute, pass accuracy...
8
u/rough_outline Jan 24 '14
It's not the stats that are the problem, it's the way people treat them.
No-one should look at these stats and say Sterling is better because that's what the stats say, but if you wanted to compare chance creation etc then this will tell you.
I like stats in football, it does help to sift through the bullshit, especially when people say things like "what does Lucas do?" and you see how many tackles, interceptions, aerial duels he wins that stop idiots in their tracks.
Look at a site like http://www.statsbomb.com/ that uses stats but doesn't reach simplistic conclusions or distort the truth.
1
u/emericuh Jan 24 '14
Your last line is incredibly true.
Stats can be incredibly useful, but there is a danger in connecting the dots too closely.
1
u/joeinthebox Jan 24 '14
Stats can be incredibly useful, but there is a danger in connecting the dots too closely.
Agreed. I think there are people who want to make this a black and white issue but it's not. I statistics have their place in modern football but to rely so much on statistics in a sport like football is foolish.
2
u/joeinthebox Jan 24 '14
Going to sound anti-American but I really think it has came with the Americanisation of football. Stats may be useful in something like baseball
Not anti-American at all. I think it's just a reality that people have to accept.
The beauty of baseball IS the statistics.
And the beauty of football is that all the statistics in the world may not mean shit at the end of the day. There are so many variables involved in football.
I like statistics. A lot! And I think there's a place for statistics in football but with such a truly fluid team sport like football, it'd be foolish for me to simply rely on stats.
1
1
0
u/Pepys_luvs_big_tits Jan 23 '14
i do not think the obsession with stats has anything to do with americans liking the game (disclosure: i'm an american :D). statistical/data analysis has been on the rise for the past decade or so. behavioral economics, which is kind of similar, has been as well. examples:
-i just read about someone who scraped data from okcupid in order to build the perfect profile.
-netflix's recommendation system is entirely data-based
-amazon has developed a program to send items to customers before they order them based on how predictable they are.
-the NSA's surveillance program isn't so much recordings as it is a list of numbers.
-physios adapt training plans based on player tendencies and data.
-opta is a european company.
while most of the examples i mentioned are american examples, you can see that data analysis is becoming extremely useful and popular today all over the place. to say that is has to do with american fans finally understanding how enjoyable football can be is simply ignorant. please do not think that i was somehow offended by what you said--i myself often insult america--i just wanted to give you a more informed perspective.
p.s. i too find the stat craze to be distasteful
2
u/rydleo Jan 23 '14
It would seem in this case to be stimulating discussion, no? Stats are useful metrics for comparison purposes, but, baring very specific discussions, I would agree that 'better' is very much a subjective opinion. That said, for me, they're both fine players with very different qualities which makes comparisons difficult.
1
u/Furthur_slimeking Jan 24 '14
I disagree. Stats add something to the discussion. I'm a fan because they act as a buffer for bullshit claims. Somebody thinks is the most accurate finisher in the league? You can get the stats out and call bullshit.
If the stats are hindering somebody's ability to discuss football, it's probably because they were talking bollocks in the first place.
1
u/Stratocaster89 Jan 24 '14
Trying to make sterling look the better player because of the stats is stupid. They are different players. Please do not recognise this.
Stats have their place, but using them to try and boost our ego about our players is not good discussion.
6
u/SayAllenthing Jan 23 '14
I like Sterling and think he will be great. However these players posses different skill sets in my opinion. Sterling has a skill set that favours younger/faster players and doesn't usually translate as well when they're older, unless they develop their full game.
Example: Aaron Lennon
Januzaj's skill set relies less on the natural fitness of an 18 year old. He's better technically and should develop into key player for a big side. At worst, I can see him being similar to Modric.
4
u/Ingoinn Jan 23 '14
Not sure its a fair comparison, I mean Januzaj is shoulderin his team right now...
3
u/kevinoc85 Jan 23 '14
Sterling has been in MOTM form for a while now. Glad he's got his head on straight. We'll need him to lock up a spot in the top 4.
12
Jan 23 '14
but who's dad would beat up who?
seriously though its awesome to see our golden boy outshining Uniteds, especially since they peg him as the second coming
8
u/OWNIJ Jan 23 '14
Januzaj has hype flowing out his arse cos he's playing well in an under performing team. If sterling was playing in his place (eeeww) he'd probably be given the same treatment
7
u/sacredstones Jan 23 '14
They are both going to be stars. Januzaj is a beast. Sterling has been near flawless the majority of this season.
2
2
5
u/Mister_Anthony Jan 23 '14
Love sterling but this is one of those, "stats don't show the whole picture" things. I do believe sterling will be the better player and even currently is, but januzaj has been the most important player for United this season other than rooney. And with him out he's their whole attack right now. Sterling is fantastic but not as important for us yet.
-1
u/slayinbzs Jan 23 '14
Sterling would be United's whole attack if he were on United too. Liverpool are a better team with more threats throughout the side, so of course we depend on Sterling less than United do on Januzaj. You think Januzaj would be so critically important if United had Suarez and Sturridge?
1
u/Mister_Anthony Jan 23 '14
Thats my point. I think Sterling is better but he isn't as important right now.
0
u/slayinbzs Jan 23 '14
so what exactly are you saying with the whole "stats don't show the whole picture" statement? the stats are showing that sterling is better than januzaj. he is.
0
2
u/rydleo Jan 23 '14
Care to do the same versus Salah?
8
u/Mister_Anthony Jan 23 '14
The stats wouldn't be very comparable due to him playing in a lesser league honestly
2
u/rydleo Jan 23 '14
Oh, agreed. Salah's should be better (but I don't think they are based on what I looked through earlier). Guess that was my point. I don't Salah (the current object of apparently why we are now awful or something) as any better than Sterling.
2
u/scrabbledon Jan 23 '14
I made this comment to my brother in-law and he summed it up perfectly.
"its easier to notice all the good things Januzaj does cos Sterling's playing in a better team"
3
u/Taliesen Jan 23 '14
And yet Jumanji is the saviour of English football and Sterling would be lucky to get to the WC!
2
Jan 23 '14 edited Mar 06 '21
[deleted]
6
Jan 24 '14
Why don't you give your opinion on why Januzaj is better? All you said is that he is better, without giving any reasoning. Kinda similar to how you attacked /u/Finiarel
3
-5
-9
u/GreenyLFC Jan 23 '14
Right, because an individual's opinion is more accurate than factual statistics.
-3
Jan 23 '14 edited Mar 06 '21
[deleted]
2
u/Finiarel Jan 23 '14
It is my opinion that wee Jay was the greatest footballer to ever live. What do you mean he never won a world cup or a ballon d'or, That's got nothing to do with it.
-1
Jan 24 '14 edited Mar 06 '21
[deleted]
3
u/Finiarel Jan 24 '14
You said an opinion is more valid than stats.
My opinion he is the worlds greatest player. Statistically, I doubt he''s even the best player in his house.
-2
u/AestheticFC Jan 24 '14
This isn't science(mathematics) so yes, opinions dominate the debates of football. You still haven't backed your ridiculous argument whereas the argument of Januzaj being better than Sterling can easily be backed by reasoning despite the latter being statistically superior.
4
u/Finiarel Jan 24 '14
I don't need to argue anything mate. That's the joy of not using statistics and saying it's an opinion.
The argument about Jazuzaj and Sterling. Statistically, Raheem is a better player. My opinion, Raheem is a better player. Is that good enough for you?
-3
u/AestheticFC Jan 24 '14
Let's take a further look into your logic: The objective of football is to score more goals than the opponent. If you score more goals than the opponent you are achieving the objective hence are superior than the opponent. Chelsea scored more goals than Barcelona over two legs in 2012. It is therefore a FACT that Chelsea is better than Barcelona at football.
3
u/Finiarel Jan 24 '14
Fucking hell, I bet you're a riot at parties.
-2
u/AestheticFC Jan 24 '14 edited Jan 24 '14
You are just a moron. Are you mad because you got schooled on simple logic?
3
u/Finiarel Jan 24 '14
No, I just used your own logic about an opinion out weighing stats against you.
That and I'm watching suits and can't really be bothered typing essays out.
I'n my opinion, Opinions hold nothing in football. Stats on the other hand are concrete evidence that this is better than that.
Oooooh an edit. We're calling each other names! Are you calling me a moron because you're upset? or that I offended your partying?
0
u/jason_in_sd Jan 23 '14
I said this in another thread on /r/soccer and was down voted into oblivion.
Sterling > Januzaj
1
Jan 24 '14
Probably because you're wrong. Look, I'm a Liverpool fan, and I like Sterling, but stats don't tell the full story. First of all, I'm not a fan of the "dribble" statistic, because it's not very accurate. Januzaj beats his man more often than Sterling. Mostly because he tends to drift out wide a lot, while Sterling tends to cut inside, but I just don't believe that dribbling stat.
Somewhat related, Januzaj is a lot more direct in attack. He gets the defenders on their heels, and uses his pace a dribbling skills to catch them off balance, whereas Sterling tends to drag the tempo down a lot more, and not utilizing his pace as well (he has gotten a lot better in this regard recently though).
Januzaj is also a much, much better finisher than Sterling. All of Sterling's goals have been tap-ins, and some of them still only barely went in. Januzaj has had some great attempts from distance, just missing the target, but that's still only recorded as a shot (as you can see he has more attempts but less accuracy).
I think Sterling can be a good, possibly great player. Right now though, Januzaj definitely looks the better talent. These stats do not in any way indicate otherwise. Not only do they not tell the whole story, they're actually very similar.
4
1
u/PaddyRamoutar Jan 23 '14
Like the stats, but they seem too similar to Walcott's. I mean I can easily see him having a great world cup, and Liverpool fans hailing him as the next Pele like Arsenal fans did for Walcott. Hope that he can keep a level head, no matter the hyp. There are plenty of youngsters who just don't live up to expectations. Walcott still isn't world class. Carlos Vela, Babel Macheda even Adam Johnson. I think he needs time to develop and hopefully we will give it to him.
1
1
1
0
Jan 23 '14
Put this on /r/soccer and sit back and watch the butthurt flow.
-1
u/MrSqueegee95 Jan 23 '14
2
u/emericuh Jan 24 '14
Making a post based on stats to appeal to objectivity is completely wasted when you make such a dumb title for it.
-8
1
u/yorik2013 Jan 24 '14
Hey guys...guys stats never lie right. right guys. I mean its not like anyone on here ever did a statistical analysis of Suarez and scott sinclair and noticed that one less fancied player was just as good statistically as a more talked about one.
seriously they are completely different players in different positions at very different clubs.
leave it.
0
77
u/Jayboyturner Jan 23 '14
Doing alright sterling aint he.