Player Watch Player Watch: Brennan Johnson

[Mr Pink]

When people say he doesnt do a lot when he's not involved in goal contributions, that is pretty hilarious.

The absolute measure is goal contributions, and he's had many.

At the end of the day he"s a young player in his first season at a bigger Club and he's had a very productive first season.

Expecting more progress next season with him

 

[Ron Burgundy]

When people say he doesnt do a lot when he's not involved in goal contributions, that is pretty hilarious.

The absolute measure is goal contributions, and he's had many.

At the end of the day he"s a young player in his first season at a bigger Club and he's had a very productive first season.

Expecting more progress next season with him

I think it's a valid criticism, personally.

He doesn't add much to general play, and defensively, he offers almost nothing. Compare that to Saka who adds massively in that regard.

So, to be specific:
- he never gets the ball and creates something out of nothing i.e. beat a man, put in a great cross, score a long range goal etc. The City goal for Deki was great, I'd love to see him do that more
- he rarely tracks his runner defensively
- he doesn't impose himself on a game, physically, or with general threat

These are all ideals that a top tier winger would provide, and areas to improve.

Now clearly, he adds plenty, as evidenced by his stats. But they tell the story of someone who has found himself on the end of some good balls, both with respect to scoring, and placing a final pass/cross.

That is very useful, clearly. No one is taking that away from him. But to be considered a top tier winger, he needs to do more of the above.

Moreover, I find this insistence on a very binary assessment of him annoying:
1) he's a no hoper; or
2) no way, his stats are great, he's a great player

Neither is true, and many of us that occupy a middle (nuanced) ground are being shouted down - just politics really, it's a curse of social media.

The guy obviously has plenty to improve on. We are rooting for him to do so. But there are valid doubts. Not so hard to understand really.

 

[parj]

To be honest I don't really see it but I could be wrong. When I compare to some other players in the league around his age, in similar positions (Saka, Palmer, Anthony Gordon, Olise, Doku, Madueke), I see a level of talent that I don't see in Johnson. Really hope I'm wrong and he becomes a world-beater, but I also think it's important to try to be as objective as possible and see things with as little bias as possible. I don't think Johnson will be anything more than a decent midtable winger. I think we need someone a lot better if we hope to compete at the top table.

Stats wise, how far was Johnson from Saka and these other players? I think only Palmer's numbers blitzed him.

He definitely has some work to do but being "crap" at finishing and still hitting decent numbers is a good return. Also remember, our midfield was misfiring for at least a third of the season so service wasn't great to the forwards.

 

[spurs9]

Stats wise, how far was Johnson from Saka and these other players? I think only Palmer's numbers blitzed him.

He definitely has some work to do but being "crap" at finishing and still hitting decent numbers is a good return. Also remember, our midfield was misfiring for at least a third of the season so service wasn't great to the forwards.

Saka got 10 more goals and assists than Johnson.

 

[fecka]

When people say he doesnt do a lot when he's not involved in goal contributions, that is pretty hilarious.

The absolute measure is goal contributions, and he's had many.

At the end of the day he"s a young player in his first season at a bigger Club and he's had a very productive first season.

Expecting more progress next season with him

IMO the absolute measure is if you win more games with a player than without as football is more than just goals and assists.
Brennan isn't a poor player, but he's influenced by the game, not actively influencing it.

He's one of the players who underperformed his xG the most this season, which the eye test backs up.
He both can, and likely will improve, but in any other top-half PL team he wouldn't be starting atm

 

[Rout-Ledge]

Agree with those saying on the eye test he seems very far from the finished product. But you absolutely can’t argue he hasn’t delivered more direct goal contributions than we expected when he signed, which is a really good sign. I’d much rather a Johnson who delivers something almost every week than a Gil who always looks like they might start delivering but never actually do.

 

[Mr Pink]

IMO the absolute measure is if you win more games with a player than without as football is more than just goals and assists.
Brennan isn't a poor player, but he's influenced by the game, not actively influencing it.

He's one of the players who underperformed his xG the most this season, which the eye test backs up.
He both can, and likely will improve, but in any other top-half PL team he wouldn't be starting atm

Mate you apply that first sentence to every player starting.

 

[fecka]

Mate you apply that first sentence to every player starting.

Yet you win more games with some players than others, no?

G/A is only part of an attacker's worth. Does the player score when the team is playing well, or despite the team playing poorly?
Can the player tilt the game in your favor with runs, dribbles, or passes that open up the defense for other players?

I'd rate Luis Diaz or Diogo Jota higher than Brennan for example, even if Brennan provided more G/A this season than both.

We scored the most and conceded the least in 16/17(or was it 17/18? I'm unsure), yet we didn't win the league because we couldn't get over the line in enough games over the season.

 

[thelak]

I like Brennan but think for the money we paid we could have signed someone with more “threat” to his overall game

At the moment he plays like a wing version of a young Dele with a knack of arriving in the box at the right time but lacking in overall play and menace on and off the ball in general

 

[Mr Pink]

Yet you win more games with some players than others, no?

G/A is only part of an attacker's worth. Does the player score when the team is playing well, or despite the team playing poorly?
Can the player tilt the game in your favor with runs, dribbles, or passes that open up the defense for other players?

I'd rate Luis Diaz or Diogo Jota higher than Brennan for example, even if Brennan provided more G/A this season than both.

We scored the most and conceded the least in 16/17(or was it 17/18? I'm unsure), yet we didn't win the league because we couldn't get over the line in enough games over the season.

I know a lot of fans who find Diaz very frustrating.

Those guys are more experienced and further along in their development.


They're 27 ffs, in their supposed peak.

 

[HildoSpur]

Yet you win more games with some players than others, no?

G/A is only part of an attacker's worth. Does the player score when the team is playing well, or despite the team playing poorly?
Can the player tilt the game in your favor with runs, dribbles, or passes that open up the defense for other players?

I'd rate Luis Diaz or Diogo Jota higher than Brennan for example, even if Brennan provided more G/A this season than both.

We scored the most and conceded the least in 16/17(or was it 17/18? I'm unsure), yet we didn't win the league because we couldn't get over the line in enough games over the season.

I think I know what you are getting at however I think it's a flawed way of thinking. Not all positions are of equal value within a team. Needing to use a back-up wing back is probably easier to deal with than using a back-up striker or number 10. Also, you can play an absolute blinder in your position - 10/10 performance and still lose the match because it's a team game.

Also, rating Diaz and Jota higher than Brennan is subjective but also extremely unfair considering they are well established players at their peak in terms of their age and Brennan is only 22 and really just starting out as a first team player in a top 6 side. Even at this, as you acknowledge he had a more productive season in terms of goals/assists than either of those players yet you still are viewing him as not as good. Honestly struggling with your arguments here mate.

 

[fecka]

I know a lot of fans who find Diaz very frustrating.

Those guys are more experienced and further along in their development.


They're 27 ffs, in their supposed peak.

They are, but that's irrelevant to the point I'm making. My point is that G/A isn't the most accurate way to apply worth to an attacker.

Another example. Who'd you rather have, Son or prime Spurs Bale?
Son's had more G/A than Bale in three out of the last four seasons than Bale had in his best season for us, yet I'd be more inclined to bet on that Bale providing the extra push when the going gets tough. His record in finals speaks for itself.

 

[fecka]

I think I know what you are getting at however I think it's a flawed way of thinking. Not all positions are of equal value within a team. Needing to use a back-up wing back is probably easier to deal with than using a back-up striker or number 10. Also, you can play an absolute blinder in your position - 10/10 performance and still lose the match because it's a team game.

Also, rating Diaz and Jota higher than Brennan is subjective but also extremely unfair considering they are well established players at their peak in terms of their age and Brennan is only 22 and really just starting out as a first team player in a top 6 side. Even at this, as you acknowledge he had a more productive season in terms of goals/assists than either of those players yet you still are viewing him as not as good. Honestly struggling with your arguments here mate.

See my post above for further explanation. Sure, you can play blinders and lose, but there are plenty of cases where you drag your team along with you without getting a goal contribution.
Just look at the worth of Park Ji-Sung for United, or Shinji Okazaki for Leicester. Or Firmino for Liverpool for that matter.

Not all positions are of equal value, no. But surely you must agree that goal contributions as the end all, be all, is flawed when measuring an attacker? That was my point.

 

[soflapaul]

They are, but that's irrelevant to the point I'm making. My point is that G/A isn't the most accurate way to apply worth to an attacker.

Another example. Who'd you rather have, Son or prime Spurs Bale?
Son's had more G/A than Bale in three out of the last four seasons than Bale had in his best season for us, yet I'd be more inclined to bet on that Bale providing the extra push when the going gets tough. His record in finals speaks for itself.

It's not the only factor but it is a significant factor. You probably would agree that numbers have to always be in context. Consider who Sonny was playing next to(Harry) and that impact on not only the ratio directly esp Harry's passing but also the amount of extra space he would be given. I think it was Ron B who suggested the either or approach on these players is silly. He's a young man, we don't know his ceiling and if this is it, then he is at best a squad player. but if and when he grows mentally, tactically and skillfully then he could be very valuable.

The one thing that caught my eye this year was that he was so afraid to make a mistake at the beginning of the season refusing to take players on. Yet as the season wore on, you saw him playing so aggressively taking players on even when he probably shouldn't have. That suggests two things. First, Ange told him to play fearless and second, he did which means he's coachable and still learning. He's a great player to have on the team at the moment precisely because Ange is helping him change the way he plays and he responds. Now if he could only make better decisions once he's in the box and pick up some accuracy on his shooting, he'd be a keeper. That may be more of a function of taking the shot at the right time and place more than technique as it seems he sometimes hurries the shot. oh, and crashing the far post more consistently.

 

[Mr Pink]

They are, but that's irrelevant to the point I'm making. My point is that G/A isn't the most accurate way to apply worth to an attacker.

Another example. Who'd you rather have, Son or prime Spurs Bale?
Son's had more G/A than Bale in three out of the last four seasons than Bale had in his best season for us, yet I'd be more inclined to bet on that Bale providing the extra push when the going gets tough. His record in finals speaks for itself.

Its all about opinions of course, but Johnson is a young player in his first season who has done pretty well.

If I was grading him, his report card would read a good solid 'B'.

 

[Wheeler Dealer]

Its all about opinions of course, but Johnson is a young player in his first season who has done pretty well.

If I was grading him, his report card would read a good solid 'B'.

I think a B is far too generous. He's 23 years old, same as Foden, but older than Palmer and Saka, who are far more effective.. He lacks conviction and bravery, which I'm not 100% certain this can be coached. Next season will be a big one for Johnson and the club in general. We need as a collective to become much more ruthless and less accommodating.

 

[Finchyid]

Saka got 10 more goals and assists than Johnson.

And played 842 minutes more

1 g/a per 117 mins. Johnson 139 mins per g/a

mad to compare the stats alone imo

 

[dontcallme]

I think a B is far too generous. He's 23 years old, same as Foden, but older than Palmer and Saka, who are far more effective.. He lacks conviction and bravery, which I'm not 100% certain this can be coached. Next season will be a big one for Johnson and the club in general. We need as a collective to become much more ruthless and less accommodating.

I don’t think we can buy a player then sell just based on if he isn’t as good as the best in the Prem.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

same as Foden,

Johnson is actually a year younger than Foden. Foden 28 May 2000, Johnson 23 May 2001

Foden's age 22 season - for Manchester City - a fair bit more talented, and a team that collectively scored 20 more goals than Spurs did this season:

1842 minutes - 17 goal contributions.


Johnson - this year:

2085 minutes - 15 goal contributions.



So, he is not far off this year's player of the year, when he was actually Johnson's age.


How about we give our lads a minute or two to develop into better players, before deciding they are crap. Johnson may never win player of the year - but he is already far better than most assume he will be when he reached his peak.

 

[npearl4spurs]

Keep bringing the stats and comparisons at his age, it's getting me hotter and hotter