bazil85
-
Posts
10,444 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by bazil85
-
-
8 hours ago, santaponsasaint said:
So much for the ones on here who wrote him off after his knee injury. Good luck Jason.
Not one person wrote him off.
-
3 minutes ago, Soctty said:
You do like to drone out for no real reason don't you?
Same way as other people MUST keep responding until others come round to their opinion. You can think what signings would be best as can I. Not everyone has to agree with you
-
14 minutes ago, Soctty said:
So he says he's looking to bring in an attacking player but you take that to mean he isn't looking to bring in an attacking player?
Sure...
I'm not sure how else I can say this, I'm really struggling to simplify further.
1. I'm in no doubt he's looking at attacking options and I fully see there would be a benefit in this.
2. Just because he doesn't come out and talk about a CB doesn't mean he isn't looking for one (which you've pretty much said in your previous post)
3. There is a case to be made for bringing in another CB.
4. It's only my opinion giving how many goals we conceded before Davis was fit and the position we'd be in with a CB injury, that a CB could be higher priority than a new striker when we have 3 options (plus Sutton) with JR preferring a single striker.
I think my OPINION and reasoning is pretty clear and certainly valid. Others might not agree and have made valid OPINIONS about a striker being a higher priority. They're all OPINIONS, doesn't mean one is right one is wrong.
-
1 hour ago, Soctty said:
FFS he's not going to come out and blab everything is he? You even mention late in the same paragraph about keeping thing choose to his chest!
Bizarre stuff from you...
Are you high?
yours is the comment saying 'no mention of a center back'
My whole point is that what he said in that interview doesn't mean he isn't looking at options. I've said all along this is purely speculation. You're the one pretty much coming out saying JR doesn't want one because he didn't say it in the interview not me
-
15 hours ago, Sweeper07 said:
Looks Like Jack knows what he is doing -
Yep I imagine so, I also assure you we don't know the full story.
-
16 hours ago, Soctty said:22 hours ago, bazil85 said:Unless we get an injury then he becomes the next choice CB... In that instance we would not have a natural CB option from the bench in the event of a red card or injury (both have happened on more than one occasion this season). That's pretty much my point.
I'd be happy to see both. With McLean looking more likely to go this window maybe that extra money will free up an extra player or two.Money spent on a centre back for the sake of it is money wasted. Jack was on Sportsound tonight - he's looking for another attacking player. No mention of a centre back...
My gathering of that interview was there was nothing concrete about a ST either just inquiries. Made the point a few times, he wanted four at start of the season so why is that so unreasonable now? Might be an unfamiliar notion to some but managers often keep signing chat close to their chest... Would explain why he was vague about the attacking option also.
-
19 hours ago, Isle Of Bute Saint said:
Can't understand the obsession for another centre back when we have cover. Me im going to enjoy the rest of the season for what is way beyond what i could have imagined back in August. Bring on Aberdeen this is a game to get excited about.
Obsession is a bit exaggerated don't you think? A simple observation if one gets injured we only have two natural CBs in the first team squad. JR wanted four at start of the season, not sure why it's so unreasonable to want four now when we're chasing a title...
-
21 hours ago, Sweeper07 said:
We have conceded the 2nd least goals in the Championship this season (2 more than Morton). That includes many games when we have had various players out injured (more than our fair share I would suspect).
Stats are great - if we only count the last 7 league games (and put defending down to Davis +) then we have 6 wins, and 1 draw; 12 goals for and only 4 against...with 4 clean sheets...
The truth is that defending is not solely down to centre-backs or even just the defence... the midfield have to track runners and forwards have to defend at corners/freekicks when opposition defenders come up the park...the goalie does his bit too.
I think that where our midfield has been a bit weaker was in helping the defence at times... no doubt J & J worked on this and over the season they are covering better and working better as a team with defenders too...Hill could help here too. Flynn might be even more attacking, and at times that will be great.
When Baird last played with Mac, Mac was not back to match fitness and prior to that, in the Morton game, carrying an injury - that is not helpful, but was the situations we were in.
Losing any of our best players can mean we don't have someone just as good to replace them, but now we have better options all round..
Anyone else who comes in, has to be better, rather than cover or it is best to sit on our money... for next season will be a step change up..
I agree with everything you're saying but it doesn't take away from the point that we may have a reliance on Davis that could become apparent if he was to be injured again. No one can really argue that we're better defensively with him than without him. For me another CB option would be great to limit the worries of him, Baird or Mac getting injured.
-
20 hours ago, Wilbur said:
Are sell-on payments based on an agreed percentage of the full fee paid or would it be just the incremental amount received by Aberdeen beyond what was originally paid to us ?
Can be either. Can be percentage profit or percentage of full fee. From all available news stories it seems percentage of next fee as stories are saying £50k (although may not be accurate)
-
https://stv.tv/sport/football/1406361-transfer-talk-norwich-want-mclean-leeds-after-windass/
Reported £500,000 for McLean. If goes ahead £50k for saints based on previous comments about a 10% sell-on. Imagine some of the transfer would be performance based though and we wouldn't get it all at once. better than a kick in the teeth.
Also makes a mockery of Sevco bidding £300k for him last summer.
-
17 minutes ago, Soctty said:
We have 14 lake matches left to play. At this point, Jack is going to bring in whoever he thinks can be most effective in those games.
I totally understand the point about another centre back, but a fourth choice centre back is unlikely to be used, and we're unlikely to get one who is of great quality.
As I pointed out earlier, strikers are far more likely to be used from the bench given Jack's substitutions this season. We are also far he likely to be on the front foot in games, with a different option being important in trying to break teams down.
With so little of the season to go, I will be happy if Jack makes a positive, proactive signing rather than a cautious one that may prove unneeded. That's my position anyway.Unless we get an injury then he becomes the next choice CB... In that instance we would not have a natural CB option from the bench in the event of a red card or injury (both have happened on more than one occasion this season). That's pretty much my point.
I'd be happy to see both. With McLean looking more likely to go this window maybe that extra money will free up an extra player or two.
-
13 minutes ago, Sonny said:
But that is the point is it not? Sutton is not a direct replacement for Reilly, Smith or Mullen if injuries occur - we would have to change the style if Sutton came in for one of then. And we have nearly played everyone 3 times now and Jack hasn't yet found opposition that we would benefit from Sutton's style. I am not having a go at Sutton but the reality is Sutton is not in the Manager's plans.
I reckon we can go on and win the League with the squad we have. However as we come to the sharp end of the season when games take on huge importance as Clubs try and stay in the League or get into the play-off places there will be a lot of shutting up shop from teams as they try to get a point against us. That will be when we may need a Plan B up front (or play Gary Mac there
).
No, it's not my point at all. My point is we still have three strikers in JR plan + Sutton if needed, we also have an additional two midfield options now to change things up on the park to provide different attacking and holding options.
For CB we have three options, then we would either have to move Eck out of position or bring in Irvine who's hardly kicked a ball. My whole point has been we're in a better position going forward than defensively. And IMO the stats all prove that. Like you say played each team almost three times and we have three players on a combined 40+ goals. The other side of that when Davis hasn't been playing our goals against record was pretty worrying. My point is if we lose him again, Mac picks up another injury or if Baird gets an injury + suspensions. You're then stuck with two CB in the squad and very limited options. Mac and Baird hasn't worked together more than it has, it's a concern.
Yes it might be nice to have another option up front for teams that Reilly, Smith, Morgan, Magennis (Who's been missing early in the season but is now looking like a real menace) McGinn, McShane, etc can't break down. But those games have proven a bit of an exception, we're very free scoring. I don't know if you're grasping that I DO see the benefit in another striker but for me a CB would be much more comforting.
-
7 minutes ago, Kemp said:
Nail on the head. If teams look at the table and decide a point is enough against us they will park the bus from the start. And we constantly struggle to break teams down when they play like that. A couple of 0-0s and its advantage United.
We absolutely need a big mobile striker to give us another way of playing. Easier to invest in that now and get the title in the bag than to start a new season in this league and hope we can assemble a team of this quality again. (Hint: We won't. Players like Davis, McGinn and Morgan don't stay at this level for long).
No one is saying it wouldn't be good but would I be disappointed if we didn't? No. Morgan, Reilly and Smith have scored over 40 goals between them this season, Mullan may be a similar type player to Reilly but will bring fresh legs to tired defenders from the bench. Another striker option would be played very much as the exception to the norm. So as I've said the same challenges will be encountered to signing a CB.
I'd also argue teams parking the bus hasn't really worked for them this season. As you've suggested some of our players are another level. Morgan is unplayable on occasions at this level, McGinn can pick a pass no one else in the stadium can see and we have a constant aerial/ attacking threat from corners and set piece play.
-
16 minutes ago, Sonny said:
We have three strikers who are all similar (Reilly, Smith and Mullen) and fit into Jack's style - a style that works well and has got us to the top of the League. They are fast, fit, close down defenders, track back and are lethal on breakaways when we are having to defend. Sutton does not fit into this system. A potential problem is we have no plan B. You reckon Sutton is the Plan B. However the manager does not see it (or he wouldn't be so willing to offload him) and his performances have not indicated it. I am thinking of games such as Dunfermline away and Falkirk away when Reilly wasn't doing it and Sutton came on for the second half and had no impact. I think we need another type of striker to complement the other three and offer us something different if we have to change things around. Somebody that can change a game if Plan A fails to be working. And we do not have that in my opinion. I think Ross Stewart was earmarked for that role but it hasn't happened yet. I think Jack only brings Sutton on to waste time or because Reilly is knackered - not to change a game. With Mullan now with us I can see Sutton's chances decreasing even more. But we still need a Plan B.
I agree with all the Sutton comments but my point remains, he doesn't want to leave so he's still an option if injuries occur or JR thinks a game will benefit his style. Again i'm not saying another striker would be a bad thing. I'm only saying an argument (and in my opinion a stronger one) can be made for a CB. I know and appreciate the styles Reilly, Smith and Mullan play but I'd also say it'll be the style we use in the vast majority of games. Therfore a striker coming in will only get limited game time the same as another CB would.
Arguments for either and arguments for both. Need to stress this is all speculation and whatever JR decides I will agree with. he knows way better than anyone on here. I wouldn't be trusting a couple news stories though linking us to a striker as gospil that that's all he wants.
-
9 minutes ago, Sonny said:
Gary McKenzie has made 3 League appearances this season and scored the same number of goals as Sutton has in 14 League appearances.
. Last season Sutton scored 7 League goals and MacKenzie scored 5. So Sutton playing as a striker ain't any better than MacKenzie playing as a CH.
And Jack has recently stated he is looking for another striker. No mention of a CB. Let's see what position he fills next, eh?
As I've said several times, I'm fully aware Sutton isn't in JR plans. But he isn't going anywhere so he's still a fourth choice striker option. An option we don't have at CB unless we play a starting LB out of position or a players that's played about 30 minutes of football in four months.
I've not seen any quote from JR about another striker, newspaper articles but no direct quote. If there is fair enough but a quote for a striker does not mean he isn't looking at a CB. I would not be surprised if a striker signed but I would also imagine the CB situation is being considered.
-
11 minutes ago, billyg said:
Although things are looking good for us just now I still think we're too predictable in forward areas , everyone knows we're going to play one wee striker with another wee guy dropping off . JR obviously feels that we need a more mobile big forward so he has the option to change things about , that's why he's trying to get one in on a permanent deal. As for the defence , we're well covered just now, but should the worst happen re Davis or Gary Mc then JR knows how to play the emergency loan market , the way he did with McCart !
I've taken the emergency loan point Billy, I would just be more of a fan of a permanent signing. JR wanted four at start of the season and not sure what's changed. As for strikers I'm not saying don't get one or it won't be beneficial but with Mullan coming in and also two new midfielders to offer us something different I would be more concerned about not bring in a CB. Emergency loan is an option but there's risks attached to that as well. Can we get the right player? will he gel if asked to do an immediate job? what if we need cover for longer than they're allowed to sign?
I just don't think the security of another CB option is a bad thing. Might even get a versatile one that can play elsewhere.
My point has always been as well people saying he'd have to settle for fourth choice. That's exactly the position a striker would be in. Yeah maybe he'll get off the bench more, not sure that would satisfy a striker of the caliber we require.
-
1 hour ago, Soctty said:
He's a decent option but Jack wants better, someone he can bring on in most games, or start if he feels like it.
"Management feelings doesn't cut it in this debate." - Fair enough.
Any striker coming in will get far more opportunity off the bench than Buchanan got once Gary Mack was fit, hence the reason he wanted out.
So we don't want another striker and do want another centre back - another exclusive from The Jack Baird Fan Club...
Just incorrect, I'm only saying my opinion on what we need like everyone else. JR hasn't came out saying he wants one and not the other. It baffles me people can't see a debate for a new CB with the position we'd be in if one got injured.
Jack Baird has been doing better I have to say, still a few recent moments where I've wanted to boot a seat right enough
-
31 minutes ago, Sonny said:
I give up on you Basil. Maybe Davis will never be the same again but it did not stop Darren McGregor and if Harry is now a lesser player then his current performances will do me. And Gary played 37 games last season so how did he miss 'a good bit early last season'? How many games did he miss exactly through injury last season? You are also arguing that Gary has not had much game time so do you suggest we bring in someone who has been playing regularly to be fourth choice? Someone like Buchanan who left because he could not get a game? Whatever way you want to look at it we are better covered better now in central defence than we have been in years.
And whatever you think of Sutton is irrelevant - the manager does not rate him and won't consider him for a starting position. Sutton mostly comes on to wind the clock down.
But I am finished with this. We do not need to sign another experienced, regular playing centre half. And Jack thinks so too.
Seems like you give up on me because I'm not willing to bow down to your point of view? The irony is whatever argument you throw for not bringing in a CB you have to mirror for a striker. They'll still have to come in second fiddle to Reilly, Smith and have Mullan as competition as well. How's that any different from Mac, Davis and Baird?.. One difference is we play with two CB and one striker. We have options for the role Smith plays and other midfield options to shuffle our offensive.
Last season Mac didn't play until September and also missed a few games through the season, he played 37 out of 49 games so almost 1 in 4 games for our first choice CB. He's missed the last two/ three months roughly with injury and reports are it's more than one injury. When Baird and Mac were playing the start of this season we were leaking goals a lot more than we are now which leads me to the concern if Davis gets injured again.
I'm not saying Davis will 100% get injured but if you don't think McGregor is somewhat of an exception I don't know what to say. Davis could be injury free for rest of his career, he could be out for 10 months tomorrow. If that happens we have a reliance on only two CB and a pairing we know struggled early in the season. Again look at goals conceded when Mac and Baird were our CB this season.
i know Sutton isn't in the plans but has still featured off the bench and scored this season, he doesn't want to leave so ultimately he's an extra option we don't have at CB. I'm pretty sure that's been JR choice to bring him on. Take him out the equation we still have three ST options, same as CB so to make an argument that we need one and not the other is complete nonsense. (again when we only play one feckin striker and two CB)
As for Jack thinking so to, show me one interview with him where he's said that? this is all speculation.
-
1 minute ago, Soctty said:
If you haven't realised by now that the manager doesn't rate Sutton I don't know when you will. I'm happy to go with the feeling of the management team who have us 8 points clear at the top of the league.
I can see the merit in another centre back, but as has been pointed out, it would be a guy willing to settle for being 4th choice with little chance of playing. My preference is that of Jack and James - get another option in, bit of power with more mobility than Sutton offers at this point.
We are actively trying to sign another striker. We have no links with any central defenders. This may change, but I'm relaxed about the whole thing, knowing we can go to another emergency loan if need be.
I fully appreciate he doesn't fancy him, all I'm saying is he is still a decent option as JR has also felt in games this season bringing him off the bench. As for management team feelings, as far as I'm aware this is all speculation. I haven't heard JR say anything along the lines of he's just looking for a striker and not a CB so management feelings doesn't cut it in this debate for me sorry.
Any striker coming in will be in the exact same situation as a CB or worse off. potentially coming in behind three strikers (and one position) so again I'm not seeing your point? Either that or Mullan falls to fourth choice which i also don't think he'd be happy with.
-
5 minutes ago, Sonny said:
For half the season we only had two fit CBs (our weakest two at the time) and we got to the top of the League. We now have 3 fit CB's and 2 back-ups so are stronger now than we were from July to Xmas!
Harry has had two bad knee injuries (different knees) so has been unlucky but does not have a history of injury problems - a bit like Darren MaGregor. He is now fit but Jack is nursing him back so did not want to play him in only his second or third game on an artificial surface - this has not ruled him out of artificial pitches for all time. Harry played nearly 200 games for Crewe over 6 years - more than 30 games a season. Gary MacKenzie played 37 games for us last season so I do not know where you think that Gary has glass legs.
And Sutton will not start for St Mirren. Jack has tried to get rid of him at least 3 times. I believe jack is looking for a big, (well bigger than Reilly, Smith or Mullan), mobile striker to provide a different option if necessary and that is not going to be John Sutton.
Look at the goals against stats this season before Davis was back mate, they're not the best reading. I appreciate Davis has injured different knees however who's to say they'll ever be the same again. You can easily risk further injuries. Mac has missed a lot of this season and also missed a good bit early last season as well with several different injuries (reported) things are good right now with Baird and Davis having a good partnership but I feel if something happened then we could be in a bit of trouble. Especially with Mac not getting much game time to cover.
Sutton is still a good impact player as is Mullan. Reilly up front with Smith behind him will be what we go with for rest of the season unless there's injuries or a major form dip. Having Mullan as another option and Sutton off the bench for me has us pretty rich for choice in that area and good options to cover injuries. We don't have the same in defense.
-
Just now, Soctty said:
Because a striker is far more likely to be used off the bench than a central defender. It's not for an emergency we're looking to sign a striker, it's to give us a different option off the bench or for certain games.
We have Mullen and Sutton as options. We also have the option of changing the way the midfield sits with two new signings in that area if we need to change the way we attack.
If we get one injury to a CB we don't have a natural replacement on the bench, with our luck with injuries and possible suspensions I'm not comfortable with that. Granted the CB option from the bench isn't a regular one but is still needed sometimes to protect a lead or in the event of injury or red cards (which has happened a good few times this season)
-
3 minutes ago, Drew said:
See my post above.
Any centre half we would bring in now would be a make weight. We have, arguably, 3 of the best central defenders in the division (I certainly believe so) competing for two places, and at least two other players who can cover in there. Would we attract a player of decent calibre to sit on the bench (at best?).
Obviously, this argument could also be applied to the forward position, but I would tend to favour strengthening that area if it is a choice of one or the other.
I guess that's the only difference. I would favor CB just purely based on the facts that Reilly and Smith are on fire, Morgan is scoring goals and Mullan/ Sutton are good back-up options. One CB injury and we don't really have an option but to play the other two and we are then reliant on playing players out of position (Possibly one that's time has come to an end at the club in Irvine)
-
11 minutes ago, Bud the Baker said:
Unlike basil85 I'm not ready to put Davis into the injury prone category yet but he missed 5 months for Crewe with a knee injury in 2015/16 and 8 months for us last year, again with a knee injury. Gary Mack is injury prone as is one of the supposed alternatives Eckersley. Like I said earlier JR must have confidence in HD's recovery in relation to letting Buchanan go but I'd still put an extra central defender as a higher priority than a striker.
You could use the same logic for the extra striker - seems incredible to be having this argument doesn't it?
What I would say is it's a breath of fresh air to have such an argument (I would call it a debate) talking about areas where we don't need cover instead of last season when we were desperate for new recruits.
-
The debate also begs the question, why would an emergency loan work for a CB but wouldn't work for a ST?
Jason Naismith Leaves
in General St. Mirren Discussion
Posted
I don't remember a single person writing him off after his knee injury. People (including myself) were frustrated with his performance in the first half of last season. Not just him, pretty much all of our defenders were having a shocking time. No one can question his ability, likely just going through a bad spell. Wouldn't say it was related to his injury though.