-
This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:
1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.
2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.
3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.
Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.
Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.
Thank you!
SG's Ultimate Draft Challenge
- Thread starter ShiftyPowers
- Start date
Mus;2921353 said:Also interested, sounds fun
Hi I am interested. Sounds fun. Since the fantasy premier league games itneraction has become very very dull...this is something that will atleast make the memebrs active again
Now guys please, you know who i am. I still follow and read the forums..
And im so too busy in my business now that Ive no time for pranks and timepass..
so in the more serious mature note...PLEASE do not ban me..
SG was heaven some years back and the light got off over a few years. So I guess its time to get the light back on SG.
___________________
watch movies online
ShiftyPowers
Make America Great Again
You're about a month too late. I'm sure you would have been great in the draft though, we needed someone who got skipped for 10 rounds in a row.
Arnau;2934084 said:
Bastard.
I have no ******* idea who to choose now. I was hoping everyone here thought Mexican players were overrated so I could have them as serviceable back ups, but that has not worked at all.
ShiftyPowers
Make America Great Again
Isla's a good pick. He was going to be my reserve fullback.
I'd say Gabby is what Theo wants to be, a pacey striker, instead of playing on the wing. Anyway, I've seen him play as a targetman because he's surprisingly strong for someone that fast, and he can play on the wings. Good back-up, offers something different. Will terrorize defenders after they've had 70 minutes up against a good targetman like Zamora. He can also dribble past them, not just race past them, and has a good first touch and fairly good technique. When I first saw him I expected him to lose a lot more balls than he does.
Xifio;2934577 said:good decision, great pick
Thanks!
ShiftyPowers
Make America Great Again
Mandieta6;2934588 said:
"what Theo wants to be", give me a break. The best players are on the wing now. The only reason Theo would want to play as a target man is because that's just the tradition in England. He's FAR more dangerous on the wing than Agbonlahor is in the middle. In my opinion it's a joke to think they're in the same conversation much less to consider Agbonlahor the superior player.
So what if the best players are on the wing? Walcott has SAID, on record, that he wants to be a striker. That's what he wants to do. He wants to do what Gabby gets to do at Villa, play centrally, and occasionally drift wide. He doesn't want to be a target-man, not all strikers are target-men. I said Gabby COULD play as a targetman, and that he has done it, but that's not his main role, especially with Heskey and Carew in the team.
Your opinion about comparing players is something I've stopped paying attention to, especially players in the Premiership. Walcott is far more dangerous than Gabby on the wing, and he's more dangerous (not FAR more) on the wing than Gabby in the middle, not because he's a better player, but because pace is more dangerous on the wings than in the middle. It comes down to the team and the role, and less about their actual ability.
Agbolanhor is a more complete player than Walcott. As I said in the past, Walcott is a motorcycle with decent finishing. Nothing else. The thing about being one of the fastest players in the world, though, is that in the right circumstances, you get to score hat-tricks. So Walcott's reputation has grown because of those rare performances, in a similar manner to Nani (whose a better player by miles). Gabby is nearly as fast, a better finisher, and is decent overall, better than Walcott in pretty much everything. The difference? He plays at Villa with Young, who is the staple winger, and Carew, the staple striker, and his versatility means that he needs to play several roles in a match. He moves around a lot because of that, to use both his pace and strength, oin the wing and in the middle.
Walcott on the other hand got signed by Arsene, which boosted his rep, got picked for the WC in 2006, which boosted his rep, he plays at a mass-exposure team, and when he gets picked, it's normally with the intent to use his speed to its maximum potential. All of this has facilitated people's conception that Walcott is a great player, alongside with the occasional great match, like the one against Croatia, but Walcott is hugely overrated in that sense.
Despite being extremely knowledgeable about most areas of football, you seem to have a bliindspot for these bang-and-fade players like Walcott and Nani. I'm not sure you've actually seen that much of him, much less Gabby, and those highly-publicized, RARE matches when Walcott has shined seem to have stuck a bit too much.
I think it's a joke that you consistently judge players when you don't seem to know much about them.
Your opinion about comparing players is something I've stopped paying attention to, especially players in the Premiership. Walcott is far more dangerous than Gabby on the wing, and he's more dangerous (not FAR more) on the wing than Gabby in the middle, not because he's a better player, but because pace is more dangerous on the wings than in the middle. It comes down to the team and the role, and less about their actual ability.
Agbolanhor is a more complete player than Walcott. As I said in the past, Walcott is a motorcycle with decent finishing. Nothing else. The thing about being one of the fastest players in the world, though, is that in the right circumstances, you get to score hat-tricks. So Walcott's reputation has grown because of those rare performances, in a similar manner to Nani (whose a better player by miles). Gabby is nearly as fast, a better finisher, and is decent overall, better than Walcott in pretty much everything. The difference? He plays at Villa with Young, who is the staple winger, and Carew, the staple striker, and his versatility means that he needs to play several roles in a match. He moves around a lot because of that, to use both his pace and strength, oin the wing and in the middle.
Walcott on the other hand got signed by Arsene, which boosted his rep, got picked for the WC in 2006, which boosted his rep, he plays at a mass-exposure team, and when he gets picked, it's normally with the intent to use his speed to its maximum potential. All of this has facilitated people's conception that Walcott is a great player, alongside with the occasional great match, like the one against Croatia, but Walcott is hugely overrated in that sense.
Despite being extremely knowledgeable about most areas of football, you seem to have a bliindspot for these bang-and-fade players like Walcott and Nani. I'm not sure you've actually seen that much of him, much less Gabby, and those highly-publicized, RARE matches when Walcott has shined seem to have stuck a bit too much.
I think it's a joke that you consistently judge players when you don't seem to know much about them.
ShiftyPowers
Make America Great Again
I get that Walcott wants to play in the middle, and I said that his feelings have more to do with being raised English and being a stubborn little brat than anything else.
We've had this debate a million times. Yes, Walcott's game is 95% pace. So what? His pace is effective. You seem to have this Spanish or Dutch mentality that technique is the end all be all, well sometimes something as stupid as speed or strength and very little technique can be more effective than a traditionally "good" player. Blinded by good games? That's one way to look at it. I'd say that I value overall effectiveness, and someone like Walcott or Nani can win or dominate a game all by themselves. It won't happen all the time, particularly for Walcott who needs teammates to be aware of his runs, but it's a ****load more than what Agbonlahor can do. Gabby is an average player; Walcott is occasionally average too, but he's also occasionally exceptional. I'll take the brilliance over "meh" anyday.
We've had this debate a million times. Yes, Walcott's game is 95% pace. So what? His pace is effective. You seem to have this Spanish or Dutch mentality that technique is the end all be all, well sometimes something as stupid as speed or strength and very little technique can be more effective than a traditionally "good" player. Blinded by good games? That's one way to look at it. I'd say that I value overall effectiveness, and someone like Walcott or Nani can win or dominate a game all by themselves. It won't happen all the time, particularly for Walcott who needs teammates to be aware of his runs, but it's a ****load more than what Agbonlahor can do. Gabby is an average player; Walcott is occasionally average too, but he's also occasionally exceptional. I'll take the brilliance over "meh" anyday.
ShiftyPowers;2934658 said:
OK, it sounded like you were disputing my claim before, that was where I was coming from, nevermind. I value physical prowess and things other than technique, of course I do. Look at my team. None of them are purely technicaly players, they're all players with physical presence and advantages. My point about lack of technique is strictly regarding Walcott, I value the speedsters: Young, Gabby, Lennon, even SWP to a now minimal extent, but Theo is a special case.
Saying that Walcott can dominate games is entirely fictitious. He never has. He's had EXCEPTIONAL games, he's been MoM, he's been Man of the Matchday, probably, but he doesn't dominate games. Making good runs, even if you make a lot of them, doesn't mean you dictate the game. Walcott's speed is effective, but he still gets marked out of the game more often than not. He's not an effective player. Lennon and Young are effective, not Theo. Not yet anyway. Sure, every handful of games he gives the defenders hell, but not nearly enough to credit him as a great player. That's why Gabby is a better player, because he too, can give defenders hell with his speed, but when that gets frustrated, he does something else. Walcott has nothing else to offer.
In terms of overall effectiveness, he's still not a good player. Match-by-match, sure, occasionally. And Gabby certainly has shined in the past, and like I've said, those matches don't get nearly as much publicity as Walcott's. And he doesn't have the benefit of playing solely to his strengths like Walcott. Walcott's got 'run to the net' burned into his skull in a team that has been notorious for passing the ball and failing to finish. Villa's more famous for longballs to speed (which he has Young to share that role with) or to targetman (which he shares with Carew and Heskey).
Gabby's the better player, he just isn't set up to shine like Walcott is, and he's still a better player throughout the season. Seriously, the only English speedster worse than Theo is SWP, and that's right now, SWP, on form, is better.