DAFC.net
Home 22 September 2020 
 Post Message  |  Top of Board  |  Go to Topic  |  Search  |  Twitter Updates  |  Log In   Forum Rules  |  Newer Topic  |  Older Topic  |  end 
[ please login to use the Like feature ]
 Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: OzPar  
Date:   Mon 3 Aug 09:31

Do you make a football team better by upgrading its best player or its worst player?
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: Biggles  
Date:   Mon 3 Aug 09:45

A team is only as good/strong as its weakest link.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: par-91  
Date:   Mon 3 Aug 09:55

Both are ways that can make a team better. But bringing in a better player, who is not a 'good fit' won’t necessarily make the team better, even if it is a better quality of player coming in.

If you lose your best player, a lot of people would automatically think that one player needs replaced with someone of the same quality. However, I would argue that I would rather that money was used to strengthen a few weaker areas.

Using our position. We sold Nisbet. But we 'replaced' him with McManus and O'Hara. Neither of them will 'replace' Nisbet. However, there is an argument that we may be a stronger team overall. Watson and Whittaker are very good signings and obviously Dom Thomas improves the team. We have seen what he can bring to this team - Nisbet didn’t play in a lot of the games Thomas did, so he can certainly still help the team without Nisbet. Gambling on one player being the answer to losing your best player is not a solution that works out well very often. In general, using the money received to boost the overall squad and/or potentially invest in the future (training equipment, youth setup etc) would be more beneficial. In our current situation, there's no reserve football next season, so I think we are doing things right - assuming that we are setting some of the money aside for when unexpected costs occur/January (if injuries happen, or we need a Hardie type signing).

Regarding improving the weakest player, Goalkeeper was a weakness last season, without question. However, I think any keeper would be exposed playing behind a defence as unpredictable and lacking leadership, as ours was. Decision making must be tough when the defence couldn’t hold a solid back line and one defender was always a couple of yards behind the rest of the defence. There was also the guessing game of when defenders would let the ball in behind for no obvious reason. Communication in general seemed to be very very poor amongst the defence last season. For that reason, I think signing a new defender was just as crucial as a new goalkeeper. Hopefully Watson and Whittaker's leadership skills prove useful and help to resolve some of the issues we saw last year. We just need to get that keeper sorted now.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: wee eck  
Date:   Mon 3 Aug 12:16

It's an interesting question but pretty academic under the current transfer system when clubs often have to replace half their team every season, not just their best player. It was more relevant to the Pars in the 60s when we had to replace a succession of star players like Sinclair, Smith, Ferguson, T Callaghan. I think we did try to replace them with similar players but with little success. Hugh Robertson for Jackie Sinclair was probably the best.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: parfection  
Date:   Mon 3 Aug 12:40

It is a very interesting question - one where the answer may depend on the financial security. Some clubs have to replace their best player because he has moved on to bigger and, from his angle at least, better things. Other clubs will retain their best player and pair him with a new player of equal status and ability.

Then we have to accept that all activity in the transfer market is fraught with some degree of risk : deals that just don’t work out, unforeseen injuries, coaches who leave soon after overseeing a deal for a new playe etc.

I'm going to sit on the fence on this one Oz. It is a fascinating question but there are too many imponderables for an answer with any degree of confidence.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: Luxembourg Par  
Date:   Mon 3 Aug 15:28

Depends where the team is, and how badly the results are affected by the 'worst' player.

And the size of 'upgrade'

Upgrade the weak link would be best plan, imho, unless you were, for example, replacing Nisbet with Ronaldo...


[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: dafc  
Date:   Mon 3 Aug 17:28

I would upgrade worst player.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: Buspasspar  
Date:   Mon 3 Aug 17:54

An interesting question Oz

I see upgrading as an in house thing... Develop the squad ...many as individuals...because we are all different ... with good coaching ...good management skills and most important people skills ....Our next better player may already be here
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: Indiapar  
Date:   Mon 3 Aug 19:40

Sometimes its not about players ability in my view. If you took the best parts from every car and put them together, you wouldn't get the best car, in fact it probably wouldn't run. Its abouta group of individuals with different personalities, aspirations, needs, skills and abilities etc. and moulding these complex human traits ito a team with a purpose of winning the league. You have to become more than the sum of your individual parts. Thats the art of management
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: istvan kozma  
Date:   Mon 3 Aug 20:30

If Mo Salah signed for the pars we'd still struggle to make the playoffs. Discuss

KOZMA



Post Edited (Mon 03 Aug 20:50)
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: USMac  
Date:   Tue 4 Aug 04:01

Oz, you always have more players on a team than play in the field. So you play 11 in the field, but you might have 18-20 in the team.

Improving your worst player may not help you much because that player still may rarely get onto the field. If you can improve your worst starter (figure #11) or one of your regular subs (figure #12-14), though, then you can improve your team significantly.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: GG Riva  
Date:   Tue 4 Aug 12:13

Was it Jim Leishman who said he was selling an ace to buy 3 kings? Definitely sounds like a smart piece of business if you can do it.

When our ''ace'' was injured last season, we struggled to score without him. A club with ''3 kings'' would have to be very unlucky to lose them all to injury at the same time.



Not your average Sunday League player.


[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Re: Philosophical Question
Topic Originator: Benny74  
Date:   Thu 6 Aug 11:39

In my opinion neither, you make the team better by giving each player a simple role in the cog and getting all of them to give the maximum they can every game. That’s why so much of it is man management.
[IP address logged]
Report Abuse   Reply To This Message
 Top of Board  |  Forum List  |  Threaded View   Forum Rules  |  Newer Topic  |  Older Topic  |  end 


 Forum List  |  Need a Login? Register Here 
 User Login
 User Name:
 Password:
 Remember my login:
   
 Forgot Your Password?
Enter your email address or user name below and a new password will be sent to the email address associated with your profile.
Security : type 'pars' in the box:
email:
© 2020 -- DAFC.net