Forget Moreno & Blind, Jason Davidson is who we should sign

You're probably asking yourself, "Who the %&*$ is Jason Davidson?" Well, he's a left back who plays for Australia and Heracles Almelo in the Eredivisie, and he might be the wisest solution for our left back dillema. He just turned 22 and would provide great competition for Flanagan and Enrique.  Here is his output from last season along with Daley Blind, who plays in the same league, Flanagan, and Moreno.

	Davidson	Blind	Flanagan	Moreno
age	22	24	21	22*
app(subs)	30	29	23	27(2)
mins	2669	2503	1890	2414
goals	2	1	1	3
assist	3	1	1	0
chances	32	37	13	19
npgp90	0.06	0.04	0.05	0.11
gcp90	0.17	0.07	0.1	0.11
ccp90	1.08	1.33	0.62	0.71
pass%	76.5	88.1	83.7	78.9
bp%	31.4	38.7	42.6	36.5
sacc%	38.5	28.6	42.9	17
shot%	15.4	3.6	14.3	13
tp90	1.7	2.8	3.8	1.9
tack %	51.2	50.4	45.7	39.6
intp90	2.2	2.7	1.9	2.7
clrp90	5.2	2.1	3.6	1.6
dribpp90	0.9	1.4	1.9	0.8
bsp90	0.5	0.3	0.2	0.3
adwp90	1.7	1.6	1.4	1
adwon%	58.6	65.7	46.8	50
TTI90	7.6	10.9	9.2	8.5

(*Moreno turns 22 in 11 days.)

Davidson has the highest overall ranking among the four, topping 8 categories and coming in second in 5 more.  His only achilles heel is his lack of successful tackles, but he is still comparable to Moreno and does have the highest tackle success rate.  His passing rate is not impressive, which is odd considering his low TTI90, but his low back pass rate is phenomenal.

The biggest buying point is his cost.  He is only valued at £352,000 according to transfermarkt, but there's no way they'll let him go for that cheap.  If we could get him for £2.5-3m, it may still be a steal.  I'd much rather spend that much and have him not work out then spend a ridiculous amount on Moreno or Blind.  It's true Davidson is not a 'dynamic' nor 'sexy' player, but neither is his price tag.

What Barça has to offer for Suarez

(Note: Most of this article was written before today's incident.)

Though I doubt the reports that Luis Suarez wants out are true, after the abrupt and classless exit of Fernando Torres, nothing surprises me these days.  The thing is we really can't afford to take straight cash for him, especially when whomever we replace him with, and we are going to have to replace 31 non-penalty goals and 13 assists with someone, is going to be well over-priced.  Why not try to get best value from whomever we sell him, which right now appears to be Barça.

So who can we get from the Catalan club that would be acceptable?  Well, Messi of course.  Unfortunately, that's not going to happen.  The other player who would be a straight fair trade would be Neymar, but it's highly doubtful that they would pry their cold, dead hands from the baby Brazilian wizard even if we were to throw in cash and/or Daniel Agger.  Other than replacing Suarez, we could use a left back, centre back, and another defensive midfielder, so let's see what they have to offer in those regards.

Let's look at what they have to offer on attack (with a comparison with Suarez):

	Suarez	Pedro	Sanchez	Deulofeu	Tello
age	27	26	25	20	23
pp	F	F(L)	F(R)	M(R)	F(L,R)
app (sub)	33	28(9)	27(7)	9(16)	2(20)
mins	2962	2354	2374	900	428
goals	31	15	19	3	1
assists	12	8	10	3	2
chances	87	37	47	9	9
npg90	0.94	0.57	0.72	0.3	0.21
gcp90	1.3	0.89	1.1	0.6	0.63
ccp90	2.6	1.4	1.8	0.9	1.9
pass %	74.8	84.5	79.7	78.5	82.1
bp %	44.1	66.5	63.7	47	77.6
sacc %	44.8	41.4	52.8	67.7	25
shot %	17.1	21.4	20	9.7	5
TTI90	17	10.8	13	10.3	12.1

The only player on the list above who we should even consider taking is Alexis Sanchez, plus at least £20m.  He has shown he can create the goals that we need to replace Suarez, but his backpass % is quite worrisome.  Pedro can score, but needs service, we would probably need him plus another player plus cash to justify the transaction.  Taking either Deulofeu, who impressed with his energy for Everton last season, or Tello, who appears to be great at creating goal chances, is just too risky.  We need players who have solid records of production.

Here's what they have to offer on defense:

	Busquets	Song	Montoya	Alba	Bartra
age	26	27	23	25	23
pp	DM	DM	RB	LB	CB
app (sub)	30(2)	12(7)	12(1)	14(1)	17(3)
mins	2650	1130	1123	1195	1590
goals	1	0	0	0	1
assists	1	0	2	2	1
chances	18	5	4	18	6
npg90	0.03	0	0	0	0.06
gcp90	0.07	0	0.16	0.15	0.11
ccp90	0.6	0.4	0.3	1.4	0.3
pass %	92.5	91.7	87.6	89.4	89.9
bp %	30.1	31.6	52.7	42.2	28.6
sacc %	25	50	12.5	60	37.5
shot %	12.5	0	0	0	12.5
TTI90	7.5	7.9	8.6	9	6.8
tp90	2.8	2.9	3.4	1.7	3.1
tack %	44.9	49.2	57.1	38.6	51.9
intp90	2	2.2	1.7	1.9	3.2
clrp90	1.4	1.1	2.1	3	4
dribpp90	1.3	1	1.2	0.7	0.8
bsp90	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.7
adwp90	1.9	1.9	2.6	1.3	2.5
adwon%	54.9	55.8	55.2	50	67.7

Busquets is a great passer, especially considering his very low back pass rate, and for a defensive midfielder, he's not a bad chance creator either.  What worries me about him is his subpar tackle rate, though it is better than Lucas at 42.9%.  Song is the better true DM than Busquets, but offers next to nothing on the attack.

Montoya, who can play both left and right back (which is why he is included here), is the best defender overall. He is the best tackler at the highest success rate and leads in both clearances per 90 and aerial duels won per 90.  Alba is a great attacking left back, but not all that impressive on defense.  He produces the most chances per 90, but has both a poor tackle rate and success percentage.  

Finally we have Bartra, who overall is the cream of the defender crop  His 89.9% passing is nothing short of amazing when you consider only 28.6% are back passes. There is actually little to nothing that Bartra does poorly.  If we were to get him or Busquets and Pedro, plus £20m, I could live with that.

Suarez has got to go

Let's just hope we can get something for him now.

I'm all for someone being innocent until proven guilty, but the evidence isn't completely exonerating and his past is pretty damning.  The bottom line is that he can't avoid controversy and is distracting to the squad.  It's a shame since 31 non-penalty goals and 13 assists are going to be very hard to replace.

On the pitch it seems Suarez will do anything for club or country, I guess we now know the good and bad of that.  He'll play any position and give it his all, he'll even take a handball to give his side a chance, but this time, for the third time, he apparently took it too far.  I can't even fathom what he was thinking? That he would win a penalty? That's the only logical thing I can come up and it's fringe logic at best.

Most of all this is embarassing.  When people who know nothing of football, who don't support a club, and can't tell you what offside means, feel they have the right to ridicule you because they know you're a Liverpool and Suarez fan, it's very distressing.  When you can longer defend a player you love, it's truly time to let him go.

Even if he plays for Liverpool again, it will not be the same.  To me, he can now only ever be a tarnished hero at best, a player who had the potential to be one of the greats, but couldn't keep his mouth shut.  In opposition eyes, no matter what he achieves on the field, it will now always come second to his vulgar acts.

I was willing to forgive him the first time and he seemed to be on course to becoming a modest human being. No matter the outcome of the investigation, even if he is completely absolved, the fact that he put himself in this situation is infuriating.  It's a complete lack of respect for his country, club, family, and himself.

There is no other option, he has to go.

Luke Shaw for £27m? No thanks, we got Flanagan

Rumor has it Luke Shaw is headed to Man U for £27m.  That's a preposterous amount for a player who will definitely not become the next Gareth Bale.  In fact, he'll be lucky if he can become the next Leighton Baines or Aleksandar Kolarov.  Here's a look at stats from last season for Shaw, Flanagan, and a few other top left backs:

	Shaw	Flanagan	Baines	Azpilicueta	Kolarov
age	19*	21	29	24	28
app(subs)	35	23	32	26(3)	21(9)
mins	2990	1890	2838	2325	1977
goals	0	1	5	0	1
assist	1	1	4	0	7
chances	33	13	48	12	34
npgp90	0	0.05	0.06	0	0.05
gcp90	0.03	0.1	0.29	0	0.36
ccp90	0.99	0.62	1.5	0.47	1.6
pass%	79	83.7	85.8	80.6	81.2
bp%	41.6	42.6	41.4	37.1	43.5
sacc%	41.7	42.9	23.8	40	24.5
shot%	0	14.3	23.8	0	1.9
tp90	2.2	3.8	3	3.8	2.3
tack %	58.7	45.7	60.3	52.9	56.2
intp90	1.1	1.9	1.1	1.9	1.4
clrp90	3.7	3.6	2.5	5.3	2.8
dribpp90	0.7	1.9	0.6	1.1	0.8
bsp90	0.1	0.2	0.2	0.3	0.1
adwp90	1.8	1.4	0.4	1.3	1.7
adwon%	56.5	46.8	41.2	58.6	71.7
TTI90	11.6	9.2	9.1	10.1	10.9

* Shaw will turn 19 next month.

Compared to Flanagan, Shaw is the better chance creator, more efficient tackler, and significantly superior in the air, but our number 38 has a higher pass rate, nearly doubles his counterpart's tackles and clearances, and holds onto the ball better.  If Southampton were to offer Shaw for Flanagan, Rodgers would be an idiot not to take them up on it, but that would never happen.  It's not that Shaw is that much better than our 'Red Cafu' and the distance between their productivity may never be much, but Shaw has more potential.

Comparing Shaw to the others above, he is probably most similar to Kolarov.  The Serbian is a great attacking left back, but is not an exceptional defender like Azpilicueta.  Would I have paid £27m for Kolarov at (soon-to-be) 19, if I had known then what I do now? Probably, but with Shaw there's no such luxury.  It's still a crap shoot with all that can happen in his young career.

The one thing that will improve at a bigger club is the quality of his teammates.  No offense to Southampton, but Adam Lallana is no Steven Gerrard and Rickie Lambert is not even a poor man's Rooney.  Having players around him who are quicker and more talented overall should improve his numbers.  It certainly helps Kolarov.

If I've said it once, I've said 'til your eyes bleed, if we are going to splash that kind of cash for a left back or really any player, it should be Ricardo Rodriguez. He is the real deal and can provide coverage on the wing as well.  Shaw is just not worth the risk when we have fully capable coverage in Flanagan.

Blame the FA, Hodgson, or the entire squad, not just Gerrard

It is sad and pathetic that the English press and the wind-up blogs are attempting, though ever so poorly, to blame Steven Gerrard for the early World Cup exit of the Three Lions. He did not pick the manager.  He did not pick the players.  He did not pick the formations, his own position, nor tactics.  All he did was go out and play to the best of his ability, trying to execute the plan of his manager.

Roy Hodgson is not truly to blame either, he is just doing what he has always done, but it is quite evident that his style of management doesn't work for the English side.  He is a blue collar manager if there ever was one.  He found most of his success at clubs in lesser leagues like the Allsvenskan or at smaller clubs like Fulham and West Brom which rely more on tactics than talent.  Let's face it, England is made up of big club players and it is hard for a big club player to revert to simple tactics, it is like asking a chef to wash dishes, he can do it, but he won't be happy nor necessarily do it well.

Capello utilized advanced tactics, but he also knew how to control the superstar egos of the English side.  You were either part of the team or watching from the outside, Hodgson is too much of a gentleman to command the Three Lions.  I'm not saying they lack discipline, because if anything they are seemingly one of England's more mature squads despite their age, I just think Hodgson's tactics and demeanor lack the authority to shape the squad to his liking.

Gerrard had a very poor performance against Uruguay and a medicore one, at least for him, versus Italy.  Neither losses can be fully pegged on him though.  In the Italy match, England's lack of a true defensive midfielder, which they don't even have in the squad, hurt them because no one could stifle the Italian attack.  Neither Gerrard nor Henderson are true DMs and it's idiotic to ask them to play such a role on the world's biggest stage.  Hodgson supposedly imploys zonal marking, so it was either executed quite poorly on both of Italy's goals or nobody listened.  The lack of coverage on the second goal and the careless positioning by Hart are clear signs of a insufficiently managed side.

The Uruguay match was just plain awful from everyone, even for Suarez.  He scored two goals, but was statistically one of, if not the, worst player on the pitch.  Uruguay overall had a passing rate of 64.7%, 53.9% in the England half, and did not connect on a single one of their 18 cross attempts.  Unfortunately the England defense went asleep for a total of about ten seconds and it cost them the match.  Hodgson's tactical approach is a support method of twos and the two centre backs, Jagielka and Cahill, failed to communicate on the first goal, allowing Suarez to sneak in and put away a brilliant header.

Everyone wants to blame Gerrard for the second goal since he miscalculated his header and passed it on to his Liverpool teammate, but it was the brilliance of Suarez to net at a tight angle with scorching pace.  Still it was Gerrard's error that gave him the ball and actually Cahill did a great job in cutting down Suarez' perspective, but Hart's indecisiveness to go for it or stay back was quite apparent and he ended up doing neither.  If he would have stayed back, he would at least had a chance of a save, but getting stuck in the middle left him little chance.

No one seems to be talking about Rooney missing three point blank chances, one in the Italy match and two versus Uruguay.  He connects on one of those, this post doesn't happen.  England still has hope against Costa Rica.  He better realize that if it weren't for Sterling, Sturridge, and Johnson, he would have had zero assists and zero goals, they better be on his Christmas card list.

Listen I can spew stats all day to disprove Gerrard's culpability and direct the blame on others, but it's just as stupid as being a sensationalist and blaming the captain for a total piss poor team effort.  The bottom line is, and it pains me to say this, they should have brought Michael Carrick and begged Gareth Barry to come, so they would have a true DM.  I don't want to get into why I would have picked a different squad, but I don't see the point in taking Lampard and an injured Oxlade-Chamberlain.

Also, if reports are true, and Hodgson still has a job after the World Cup, than the only people to truly blame are the donkey shepherds at the FA.  Hodgson is not the manager to take England anywhere, not even a watermelon festival.  They should go after a gaffer with balls, who that is, well I don't know, but I would even take André Villas-Boas at this point.

Sterling or Morata: Who would you take?

StatsBomb, one of my favorite blogs, recently wrote an article claiming that Alvaro Morata is the 'best young prospect in Europe.'  I have to respectfully disagree though, Raheem Sterling is much better and younger.  Here are stats from last season for Sterling and the last two combined for Morata:

	Morata	Sterling
age	21	19
app (sub)	8(27)	24(9)
mins	994	2220
goals	10	9
assists	1	5
chances	18	51
npg90	1	0.36
gcp90	1	0.57
ccp90	1.64	2.06
pass %	66.5	81.7
bp %	48.1	46.8
sacc %	58.8	48.9
shot %	15.7	20
take on %	42.5	64.3
TTI90	18.4	12.1

They play different positions, Morata up front and Sterling on the wing, so you would expect Morata to have a higher non-penalty goal and goal created per 90.  Other than goal scoring and shot accuracy, Sterling is better in every other category.  

He creates more chances per 90, has a significantly better passing rate with a lower back pass percentage, is much more efficient at taking on defenders, and turns over the ball considerably less.  Shot selection is a bit mixed though as Morata has more on target, but Sterling puts a higher percentage in the back of the net.

One stat that I didn't include was aerial duels, for a few reasons.  First, Alvaro Morata is 6'3" and Sterling 5'6".  Second, positioning, Morata plays up front in the middle and obviously gets more crosses fed to him.  Third, these numbers are reflected in shot and passing stats.  Also, it would be one thing if Morata had scored a ton of header goals, but he has one in the last two seasons, and no one I know keeps track of key headers, chances created via header, header pass percentage, nor header shot percentage.  I have a feeling if someone did track the latter, neither Morata nor Sterling would have an impressive rate.

The bottom line is Sterling is the better chance creator.  He can create his own shot for himself and others, where Morata seems to rely on players like Sterling for service.  Morata is a one-toucher, a good one, but still if he doesn't shoot or pass with his first touch, there's a high probability that he's going to lose possession. Of course, if you already have a Sterling, adding a Morata wouldn't be a bad idea.