Go on then, explain what else did you mean when you were talking about balance that we now have, but did in someway lack before, even though we were close to success in all fronts in the way of breaking club records last season (and all-time records this season)?
Go on, explain it all away as part of a healthy discussion that you are so interested in.
It doesn't make sense to say that we've always had a progressive passer/dribbler in midfield when we've done well. Not at all. We had Henderson, Wijnaldum and Milner (Milner is probably a bit more progressive, but is in no way a playmaker, he drifted wide and sent in crosses for his assists more than progressing through the middle) in the 2017-18 CL campaign all the way to the finals, and then we had Fabinho, Hendo and Wijnaldum predominantly in the league and CL (raking 97 points and winning the CL) and the three of them starred in the campaign. Calling this trio to be lacking in balance is not only disrespectful, but plain wrong and only circulates narratives about what has always been a successful midfield trio.
Even if we aren't really bothered, these are the narratives on which opposition fans thrive on.
Read the post again. I explicitly say that there has only been a problem 'a few times'. We have been brilliant without a player like Lallana or Keita or Ox, we will continue to be brilliant. Yes I think the balance is better with a 'progressive' player in the middle, and that ideally it would be a Lallana, Keita or Ox. Milner is one too but like you say, he tends to drift wide, out of the opposition shape, which is less helpful in some ways. I don't think the midfield does work brilliantly without that player, but neither does it need too and neither has it a been a big problem.
I also think that Klopp thinks a 'progressive' player is normally preferable. There's a reason he's signed (and played, which I'll get too) the players he has. However, I don't think that the balance being less than ideal has often been an actual problem. For the vast, vast majority of the time we've made it work. In fact it's only ever been a problem a 'few times'. You jumped on my post for its extreme negativity when in reality it was nothing of the sort. Perhaps you read 'lack of balance' and thought it was bang out of order, but if you'd read a little slower and more carefully do you really think you'd have been as annoyed as you were?
As for your latest post...
It doesn't make sense to say that we've always had a progressive passer/dribbler in midfield when we've done well.
I completely agree, if I gave the impression that I thought we've only ever done well when we've had a 'progressive' 8 in the team, I'm sorry. But I wasn't aware I had.
We had Henderson, Wijnaldum and Milner (Milner is probably a bit more progressive, but is in no way a playmaker, he drifted wide and sent in crosses for his assists more than progressing through the middle) in the 2017-18 CL campaign all the way to the finals
This is just wrong given Ox's role in the 17/18 CL campaign. In the 17/18 season you whitewash Ox's starts in the competition out of your history, when he was integral to beating City and started against Roma before sadly getting injured. I think it's worth bearing in mind that Lallana, Ox or Keita has been first choice for Klopp A LOT in his time here.
and then we had Fabinho, Hendo and Wijnaldum predominantly in the league and CL (raking 97 points and winning the CL) and the three of them starred in the campaign.
It'd be interesting to see the most common midfield 3 combinations from last season, I imagine those 3 are up there. Probably/ definitely? the most common. However, it's also worth bearing in mind that Keita started away at Barcelona and Ox and Lallana were basically injured all season. Klopp's options were down and he chose from what he had. And what he had were absolutely fantastic. Henderson when he moved to 8 and dragged us to one or two victories... brilliant stuff. All of them in the CL final, suffocating Spurs... e.t.c.
Calling this trio to be lacking in balance is not only disrespectful, but plain wrong and only circulates narratives about what has always been a successful midfield trio.
Perhaps this just comes down to a different reading of the word balance. I mean it in terms of the breadth of skillset across the midfield 3. The midfield needs certain elements for balance, and when certain elements are missing, it becomes a little uneven. That doesn't really matter most of the time, because they still offer so much, and it's compensated for elsewhere. But it is not disrespectful to Henderson to say that he is less press resistant than Fabinho or that Gini is less progressive with his passing than Keita or that Milner is worse at receiving the ball in the half space than Ox. Just like it wouldn't be disrespectful to say that a midfield of Lallana, Keita, Ox would lack balance in terms of tactical awareness compared to Gini; aggression, ability to cover ground, keep play moving, break up play compared to Henderson and defensive mopping up & aerial presence compared to Fabinho (and you could include a whole load of other things that we'd lose with a midfield 3 of Ox, Lallana and Keita too which would result in an unbalanced midfield 3).