Topic: Darwin Núñez (Darwin Gabriel Núñez Ribeiro)

[jepovic]

No dog in this fight but how much consideration do you give to the fact Isak is playing for Newcastle with their shite squad and under Eddie howe rather than Darwin who's playing for Klopp alongside Premier league greats in Salah, Trent and Robbo and a much higher quality of teammate in general?

Assists and npg are probably harder to come by for Isak no?

Impossible to answer of course, but Isak is Newcastle's main target and focal point in a way that Nunez isnt for us (and he takes their penalties).
We try to find Salah and Diaz just as much as Nunez. 

[JackWard33]

If it isn't post and in it's off target.

That’s right .. what’s that got to do with whether hitting it is luck or not?

[Coolie High]

So has Nunez?

You made a silly comment about our wingers not creating for our number 9, like Villa…

[ScottScott]

If Nunez is here for 5 more years and delivers 32 goals and assists a season (same as this season), would people be happy with that contribution?

[Cpt_Reina]

With all this being said, how would you explain or assess Núñez scoring all those goals against Bayern, Barcelona, Ajax and ourselves? Against arguably 3 of the 5 best goalkeepers in the world at that time + Onana who has been an excellent shot-stopper this season.

I'd say he's capable of scoring against good teams.

But unreliable at doing do, seeing as they're a long time ago now (in football terms) and we've not seen that same kind of output in a red shirt vs similar level opposition. Even his 'I'm him' moment this year comes against a mid table Newcastle (great as those goals were).

I'd also perhaps argue that scoring goals with the 'pressure' of playing for benfica who see these games as essentially a free hit is different to playing them at Liverpool where the expectation and standards are higher and more intense. I don't think he thrives under pressure, in fact I'd say it's detrimental to his game and has been ever since his first pre season where he was clapping back at the haters for scoring in friendlies.

Its interpretive ofc but that's how I see it.

Its not like Darwin isn't talented or doesn't have many traits of a top level even world class striker. I'm not blind. I just think there's something missing that doesn't show up in the numbers.

Composure, ability to deliver under pressure, ability to be the man for the big moment, a dead eye, calmness in the eye of a storm, ice in the veins when the lights are at their brightest quality. Delivering when he's expected to or NEEDED to.

In much a similar way that you see when a player has it, you can see when someone doesn't. Darwin doesn't have it (imo).

[Coolie High]

Isak is a completely different forward to Nunez, his more similar to Haaland.

Isak is like neither to be honest. He’s much better technically than them both but a lesser goal scorer than Haaland and not as creative as Nunez.

[jepovic]

If we had Isak, I probably wouldnt wanna sell him to get Nunez even if we had the money - and vice versa

[LallanaInPyjamas]

Impossible to answer of course, but Isak is Newcastle's main target and focal point in a way that Nunez isnt for us (and he takes their penalties).
We try to find Salah and Diaz just as much as Nunez.

Anthony Gordon might be an ex-Blue but he also says Hi. This is a really strange viewpoint and has nothing to do with the fact that, if you wanna put anyone clean through in the league, it's Isak.

[Coolie High]

This is where the crux of any disagreement misalignment comes in between me and the analytics first assessment of players.

xG and xA to me are broad, they paint half a picture. I'm sure the clubs departments are more in depth and are going deeper as you've described above, but the amateur analysts who peddle xG and xA sure as hell aren't.

A player racking up an incredible xA but negating to look at the context of it is as useful as not looking at it at all in my opinion. Does it come against poor teams? Domestically? In Europe? Is CL level European opponents or Europa league? Are the games this player is over performing their xG against poor standard of goalkeepers? Or in games or scenarios where the pressure is lower or higher?

There's a difference in playing at Old Trafford and vs playing at Estoril that these headline numbers don't bear out.

There's a difference between missing a shot because a goalkeeper makes an incredible save and one in the same situation where you allow him to make a simple one because of an incorrect or rash decision that again doesn't tend to be conveyed in analytics at this level.

The context is what I need from them.

Player y might have a fantastic xA, but if he's padding those numbers against teams from the championship in the FA Cup or the Czech Republic in the Europa League vs a player z who's minutes are coming at the Emirates or Etihad they're not created equal.

Even context as basic as substitute minutes don't appear to be presented. Is it harder or easier to come on in a game and deliver? Vs tired legs but not up to speed with the game.

Minutes with the first team vs minutes with a rotated squad or the kids.

There's so many directions that anyone can come at to pick at the validity of these numbers in isolation that I just feel isn't applied enough.

Mr Dilkington and Jack have some good posts in this thread but this is also a great post.

[Draex]

If Nunez is here for 5 more years and delivers 32 goals and assists a season (same as this season), would people be happy with that contribution?

And we won nothing? No.

[Mr Dilkington]

I'd say he's capable of scoring against good teams.

But unreliable at doing do, seeing as they're a long time ago now (in football terms) and we've not seen that same kind of output in a red shirt vs similar level opposition. Even his 'I'm him' moment this year comes against a mid table Newcastle (great as those goals were).

I'd also perhaps argue that scoring goals with the 'pressure' of playing for benfica who see these games as essentially a free hit is different to playing them at Liverpool where the expectation and standards are higher and more intense. I don't think he thrives under pressure, in fact I'd say it's detrimental to his game and has been ever since his first pre season where he was clapping back at the haters for scoring in friendlies.

Its interpretive ofc but that's how I see it.

Its not like Darwin isn't talented or doesn't have many traits of a top level even world class striker. I'm not blind. I just think there's something missing that doesn't show up in the numbers.

Composure, ability to deliver under pressure, ability to be the man for the big moment, a dead eye, calmness in the eye of a storm, ice in the veins when the lights are at their brightest quality. Delivering when he's expected to or NEEDED to.

In much a similar way that you see when a player has it, you can see when someone doesn't. Darwin doesn't have it (imo).

We're not going to agree on this. I think all of the things you've mentioned are noise.

Darwin has scored against Brazil and Argentina away this season. In games that matter a lot.

He has and will continue to score a lot of goals for Liverpool too.

Don't think this conversation can go anywhere from here unfortunately as we are too far apart.

[JackWard33]

Mr Dilkington and Jack have some good posts in this thread but this is also a great post.

But what does it have to do with Darwin?
Obviously xg is harder to come by vs better teams.. every player will perform better vs worse teams

What's the relevance to this thread other than not wanting to believe numbers that don't match your narrative .. which is confirmation bias in action

It reads that his thought process is : from watching him I don't believe Darwin is a top player .... the numbers say he is a top player... therefore there must be a problem with his numbers

I do think its an interesting question whether Darwin is a below average finisher or not but the problem remains people are using the possibility that he is below average as a finisher to conclude he isn't a good player and/or we could buy better - when from the data we have a) you can't go and buy a better finisher and reliably predict they'll stay a better finisher and b) if he is a below average finisher it will have such a minimal effect over time compared to his productivity

[killer-heels]

Since Edwards is on the scene, the nerds are full cocksure now. Dilks and Jack, patrolling the fan base like a bunch of data muscle for hire.

Beer is off the menu. It’s all about the sparkling water.

[Coolie High]

But what does it have to do with Darwin?
Obviously xg is harder to come by vs better teams.. every player will perform better vs worse teams

What's the relevance to this thread other than not wanting to believe numbers that don't match your narrative .. which confirmation bias in actino

It reads that his thought process is : from watching him I don't believe Darwin is a top player .... the numbers say he is a top player... therefore there must be a problem with his numbers

I agree with the general premise of the points as someone who has been a scout. The way people sometimes simply spout numbers in general can be lazy without context and nuance, there are some things that the stats we have available don’t quite capture and that’s why despite the amount of computers data analysts and maths bigwigs behind the scenes big clubs are still not doing away with actual scouts who watch the game and performances of these players week to week.

[Cpt_Reina]

But what does it have to do with Darwin?
Obviously xg is harder to come by vs better teams.. every player will perform better vs worse teams

What's the relevance to this thread other than not wanting to believe numbers that don't match your narrative .. which is confirmation bias in action

It reads that his thought process is : from watching him I don't believe Darwin is a top player .... the numbers say he is a top player... therefore there must be a problem with his numbers

I do think its an interesting question whether Darwin is a below average finisher or not but the problem remains people are using the possibility that he is below average as a finisher to conclude he isn't a good player and/or we could buy better - when from the data we have a) you can't go and buy a better finisher and reliably predict they'll stay a better finisher and b) if he is a below average finisher it will have such a minimal effect over time compared to his productivity

More that the numbers are incomplete.

Its like you're trying to present a masterpiece but only painted with prime colours.

[cptrios]

Well, looking forward, Darwin is the only one of our players I’m individually excited to see perform under the new manager and coaching team. Something really feels like it’s gone wrong for the whole squad’s finishing in the second half of the season - we’re the only top 6 team currently underperforming our xG. Whatever complex mixture of factors is responsible for that, you’ve got to think that the upcoming structural change has at least a chance of improving things just by dint of being a change. I choose to believe that someone in the new setup will be able to help Darwin figure things out. Why not be optimistic, eh?

[LallanaInPyjamas]

I do think its an interesting question whether Darwin is a below average finisher or not but the problem remains people are using the possibility that he is below average as a finisher to conclude he isn't a good player and/or we could buy better - when from the data we have a) you can't go and buy a better finisher and reliably predict they'll stay a better finisher and b) if he is a below average finisher it will have such a minimal effect over time compared to his productivity

Yep, think that's all fair. For me there's so much to work with in a player like Nunez that makes him worth persisting with. I certainly don't think that way when it comes to Diaz or Gakpo, for example.

We don't know what goes on behind the scenes, and I'm sure this process is well underway, but getting him to speak better English, a psychological coach to help him become cooler in front of goal and block out the internal/external noise, and repetition work from different angles/situations to help him know how to place the ball more effectively...these are all things that can help him become an elite striker, even if he may never be an elite finisher (in the same way that applies to Haaland, imo).

[skipper757]

Since Edwards is on the scene, the nerds are full cocksure now. Dilks and Jack, patrolling the fan base like a bunch of data muscle for hire.

Beer is off the menu. It’s all about the sparkling water.

Didn't the nerds at the club want Nkunku over Nunez but the coaching staff opted for Nunez instead?  I think that was Draex's point earlier about Ian Graham.

Maybe the nerds had been really interested in the xInjuries per 90 stat.  He'd fit right in.

[JackWard33]

More that the numbers are incomplete.

Its like you're trying to present a masterpiece but only painted with prime colours.

The numbers aren't complete .. but they are dependable and the extent to which they're not dependable is quantified (ie we know the margins/variation over time)
The alternative is putting the prime colours on your face and face planting it onto the canvas and hoping its a picture

Of course the irony is in Darwin's case you don't even need xg and xa.. you can just look at goals and assists from open play per 90 conclude he's really fucking good and move on to the actual problems with the team.......

[PaleBlueDot]

If Nunez is here for 5 more years and delivers 32 goals and assists a season (same as this season), would people be happy with that contribution?

Depends doesn't it? Not just all about numbers. Don't think Firmino hit that for 5 seasons but we were certainly happy with him.

Context is everything. I'd be satisfied with Darwin's season but given the context I wouldn't be happy.

[lionel_messias]

Since Edwards is on the scene, the nerds are full cocksure now. Dilks and Jack, patrolling the fan base like a bunch of data muscle for hire.

Beer is off the menu. It’s all about the sparkling water.

If Darwin is our beer,

Viktor Gyökeres can be our sparkling water.

[PaleBlueDot]

Isak is like neither to be honest. He’s much better technically than them both but a lesser goal scorer than Haaland and not as creative as Nunez.

He also plays in a team that creates significantly less chances than the other two.

[markmywords]

The numbers aren't complete .. but they are dependable and the extent to which they're not dependable is quantified (ie we know the margins/variation over time)
The alternative is putting the prime colours on your face and face planting it onto the canvas and hoping its a picture

Of course the irony is in Darwin's case you don't even need xg and xa.. you can just look at goals and assists from open play per 90 conclude he's really fucking good and move on to the actual problems with the team.......

The problem is, if Darwin's poor finishing the last 2 yrs, is due to a  lack of composure, this is an issue that is likely to get worse in big games at the back end of a season. So next yr his overall production could be good, but in the games that decide titles, he could be lacking,  that costs, big misses in those games are likely to have a bad psychological affect on his teammates as well

[decosabute]

I never said Darwin won't get better. I don't know why everyone gets triggered by saying Isak is a better striker. It's not just his finishing, he overall play is better.

Saying "he is that good" if he just would have scored some of the big chances missed doesn't make sense because he isn't scoring these chances. He doesn't even have an average finishing rate for his big chances. It's well below. 2 years now at the club. Until he brings that up this coulda shoulda woulda can go on forever.

Darwin might well outstrip him in the future if he changes and I back him to. But right now he isn't on the same level. Nothing wrong with accepting that.

I agree with this. Darwin is a weirdly divisive, emotional topic for some people. Some of the discourse on this thread reminds me of the chats that were being had about Gerrard in the 2014-15 season. Some were desperate to beat us over the head with stats that said he was still playing at an elite level, but anyone with eyes could see he was poor and that the head and legs were going.

Not at all that I'm comparing the two players of course, or saying Darwin is finished here - I think he can contribute for us for years. But I just think it's the same weird divisive discussion and people swearing by stats vs people using the eye test. I'm not saying stats can't tell us a lot of things either - I just think there is something missing from Darwin from my what I see. He has the physical gifts and the willingness, but I just worry he'll always lack the brains, the precision, and consistency to be truly elite or someone we can completely build around. Hope I'm wrong.

And personally, I don't think he'll go like Suarez, where all the near misses suddenly turned into goals the next season - I don't think the two players' footballing IQs are comparable.

[Wool]

The discourse has been a lot better the last two pages with a lot of interesting points being raised at least compared to what was happening after the Palace game.

[Knight]

Isak is the most clinical striker in the league. I don't really care what the numbers say. His shot power, placement and selection is elite.

Would you care if the sample size were bigger? Or if Isak gets to the end of his career basically hitting his xG will you still be saying the above? Because there are some significant philosophical differences being exposed here if it's the latter. Really interesting ones.

[PaleBlueDot]

And personally, I don't think he'll go like Suarez, where all the near misses suddenly turned into goals the next season - I don't think the two players' footballing IQs are comparable.

Part of the division is what people value in a player.

Some go with the eye test and can see the "bad finishes" aren't unlucky they're really poor types of finish that is a result of bad decision making, along with other issues in poor overall play.

Some look at his heart and exciting pace and power and then look to the stats to verify why he is effective and will come good. Which could be right to some extent.

[Cpt_Reina]

The numbers aren't complete .. but they are dependable and the extent to which they're not dependable is quantified (ie we know the margins/variation over time)
The alternative is putting the prime colours on your face and face planting it onto the canvas and hoping its a picture

Dependable until you start to pull at a thread a little.

How's his record vs the top half of the PL?

How's his record per 90 if you remove the goals in cup completions and look at PL only, the one competition  think it's fair to say is what we care about most.

The goals against Prague and Norwich and Tolouse are lovely and all that, but I'd swap them out for even 1 in those big important games vs City, United or Arsenal.

How dependable is a goals per 90 stay when it doesn't take in to consideration who the minutes and goals are against?

Goals per 90 doesn't apply context to the degree of difficulty some 90s possess vs others.

Darwin's league goals have come vs

Newcastle x2
West Ham
Forest x2
Bournemouth x2
Burnley X2
Brentford
Sheff Utd

Now you need to beat the shite to win the league. These goals have merit, I'm not arguing they don't.

But I don't subscribe to the opinion that goals from a player vs that calibre of them are worth the same as a player who is able to score against the top 6 clubs, let alone the top 10 (which only includes WHU and Newcastle from that list).

The gp90 and perhaps your own opinion seems to be that one goal is worth the same amount as any other, and empirically that's true.

The position I'm coming from is, are they really?

Its harder to score vs the top teams, that's why they tend to concede fewer goals. Therefore extrapolating that his gp90 are strong and therefore that can be projected forward to *every* 90 he plays is disingenuous isn't it?

A 90 vs Burnley, a team he loves playing seemingly, is not the same as a 90 vs Arsenal, or Madrid or City.

Therefore, as a statistic, what's it's true value?

If I was presented with his gp90 vs various tiers of teams then id be more interested to hear about it.

It's easier to project down, if you're good at scoring against good teams then it stands to reason you'll be good against bad teams.

I don't agree it projects in the opposite direction however. Which using gp90 as a means of assessment seems to, as all 90s are created equal?

[jepovic]

Part of the division is what people value in a player.

Some go with the eye test and can see the "bad finishes" aren't unlucky they're really poor types of finish that is a result of bad decision making, along with other issues in poor overall play.

Some look at his heart and exciting pace and power and then look to the stats to verify why he is effective and will come good. Which could be right to some extent.

Welll... https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/players/hit_woodwork
9 times Nunez has hit the post in PL.

If two of those go in he would be equal to Isak in non-penalty goals.
While still being superior at everything else, and massively so in assists

[Sheer Magnetism]

Do you have an explanation for why Isak and Nunez are both almost identical in terms of xG to goals across their career?

Also this isn't a dig at you because it's used a lot on here and in general but the phrase 'the truth lies in the middle' is one of the most overused and dull ideas going IMO.

I've seen this repeated a lot but can someone actually provide firm figures for every season of his career? Because it would be interesting to see if his last season at Benfica was an outlier that's skewed the stats, as opposed to something that's been reflective of his career up to that point.

[koptommy93]

And we won nothing? No.

We won a cup 6 weeks ago

[Draex]

We won a cup 6 weeks ago

He's talking about the future

[PaleBlueDot]

Welll... https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/players/hit_woodwork
9 times Nunez has hit the post in PL.

If two of those go in he would be equal to Isak in non-penalty goals.
While still being superior at everything else, and massively so in assists

Superior at everything else? He doesn't have good link-up or passing so I'm trying to figure out if chaos is something to be superior at.

"If" those went in. But they haven't, they're misses. And bear in mind he has taken 43 more shots in the league.

[1892tillforever]

How is that ironic? It's a case in point that Nunez can improve his finishing, just as Watkins has done. Watkins was always a top player, anyone who watches the Championship would know that. But he was wasteful in front of goal, and his hold-up play wasn't the best (it still isn't, but again, it's massively improved), hence why he spent a lot of time playing out on the left like Nunez has.

I think Nunez's ceiling is far higher than Watkins. My point is that people need to show patience with him, but he also needs to work on faults in his own game, and quickly. Because you won't get the same patience at Liverpool as at Villa.

This is Watkins' first season out of the four in the Premier League that he has slightly (and only slightly) overperformed his goals against xG ratio. He slightly underperformed in the previous 3 seasons; again, only slightly. There is no evidence that he has 'improved' his finishing at all.

[Mighty_Red]

We have all said that the team have almost been formed in Darwin's image this season, the chaos, the utter madness of it all. He has been central to creating chances for himself and others but not always taking it. It stands to reason that our finishing as a team declines even further with him being below par.

The problem we have as a team is that we need the likes of Diogo and Mo to score goals to balance out the misses from Lucho and Darwin and the first two have been missing for a while.

Long term, Darwin may need become a calmer character in order to become a calmer finisher, hopefully this will come as he matures as a person.

[-Willo-]

He isn't good enough technically and won't ever be. That little segment in the Palace game when he was on the edge of the box, everyone said it was a poor decision to shoot, I'd argue he knows it was too, but weighing up the risk to reward in that situation, I don't think he backed himself to get the ball down in a tight area and either get inside the box to close the angle, or pass it to Salah.

I'd be open to selling him in the summer if we could claw back 75% of what we bought him for.

[Zlen]

If Nunez is here for 5 more years and delivers 32 goals and assists a season (same as this season), would people be happy with that contribution?

Yes if it was 32 goals and 0 assists per season.

[PaleBlueDot]

Yes if it was 32 goals and 0 assists per season.

All in the league only 

[Mr Dilkington]

He isn't good enough technically and won't ever be. That little segment in the Palace game when he was on the edge of the box, everyone said it was a poor decision to shoot, I'd argue he knows it was too, but weighing up the risk to reward in that situation, I don't think he backed himself to get the ball down in a tight area and either get inside the box to close the angle, or pass it to Salah.

I'd be open to selling him in the summer if we could claw back 75% of what we bought him for.

If we sold him we'd be stupid. If we sold him for 75% of what we bought him for we'd be the biggest mugs in European football.

[PaleBlueDot]

If we sold him we'd be stupid. If we sold him for 75% of what we bought him for we'd be the biggest mugs in European football.

Disagree with stupid. But it would entirely depend on who we bought to replace him.