Most liked posts in thread: Adam Chicksen vs Conor Wood: Statistics

I think there is far too much player bashing in general. Chicksen has errors in his game, as does Wood, but they are typical of league 1 players. Meredith was very good which is why he is not playing in league 1.

 

Coming up with diligent research won't wash on here!

 

I don't think the approach is pointless, but I would say it is problematic. There are just too many variables: the rest of the team changes, the opponents change, the referees change, even the weather... Because of all that, I think it's difficult to say differences in results/performances are due mainly to which LB was playing. (Of course, if you can point to mistakes that led directly to goals against, and balance that out with plays that led directly to goals for, for each player, it might help the approach.) And now it seems that we may have found a successful formation in which both play a part.

Some of the criticism does seem over-the-top, however. Chicksen's not Meredith, which may be a factor; injuries and sendings-off/suspensions may be another; add in some weak performances and he becomes an easy target.

RCB

 

FFS, this getting really tedious now.
Everyone knows that Chicksen is a downgrade on Meredith (except for his crossing, which is far better than Mezza's).

Everyone knows that Rahic has royally shafted us and that the squad we have is a massive downgrade on the one he inherited.

Everyone knows we're in the bottom four for a reason. But that reason is NOT because we are a poor team; it's because we WERE an unbelievably terrible team for the first three months of the season. We were a shambles in defence (and midfield and up front) back then.
Chicksen was a part of that shambolic defence, but he was no worse than NKP, O'Connor, McGowan or Mellor, who were all awful under Collins, all made numerous goal-conceding errors and all took time to improve under Hopkin.

Our form since November is upper mid table/lower playoff level. We are unrecognisable from that early season shambles. We have thrashed some teams off the park and got battling away draws that would have been heavy defeats in September or October. We'd be nowhere near the bottom four if we'd had a conventional start and pre-season.

Chicksen has played a part in that revival. He's had some dodgy games but also some pretty good ones. He was part of the defence that kept several clean sheets in December and again on Saturday.
I don't know if you were at Wycombe on Saturday, but I was, and Chicksen was steady throughout - making a number of important interceptions, tackles and, yes, blocked crosses.

We have the squad we have until May. Yes, let's hope that Woods is fit for most of the remaining games because he's clearly an upgrade on Chicksen and Wood defensively. But Chicksen has shown that he can play a part in an efficient defence when called on, and if we go down it certainly won't be his fault.

 

It’s not ‘Chicksen bashing’. He’s a poor player. He’s not alone and he isn’t the only one to have come in for criticism.

We’ve been in the bottom 4 all season. What’s to be expected? Glowing praise all round?

 

Just to demonstrate how pointless the above is, Park Bantam used to use a similar set of stats which showed how we were significantly better off starting with Kai Bruenker, and that as a result, Kai Bruenker was clearly a decent player who was key to our success.

 

Nah, I don't buy that. I don't see that. If Chicksen was producing Josh Wright effort levels he'd be training with the outcasts and not even getting on the bench, just like Wright. Hopkin doesn't tolerate lazy players.

There's a huge amount of confirmation bias going on here. Many people have made up their minds that Chicksen is useless and pounce on every bit of evidence to confirm that view. But when he has a good game like on Saturday, or contributes to several clean sheets, that goes unrecognised.
I'm not saying that he's the standard we need, but he's nowhere near as bad as some make him out.

 

Get a Girlfriend,

 

Chicksen’s a decent League One player. Lacks the usual physicality but I don’t get the hate. And the stats tell their own story.

 

That's what happened last week, with Chicksen on the bench. Woods wasn't brought in as cover, he was brought into replace Chicksen.

 

Sorry Jon, but I think the stats mean zippo, there are far too many variables to consider. Team mates, team mates form, weather, oposition, opposition form, tactics etc etc.

It is clear though without any need for stats, that as ever, some have latched onto a player to bash. Probably the same ones who lauded his arrival as at last, a player who could deliver a cross, good riddance to wanky Meredith.......

 

The problem with Chicksen is that he's out of his depth a bit. He's really suited to bottom of the table, league one football.

Oh. Wait.

 

Seriously? You're citing Luton away to prove anything?

Luton are flying. Check the table. They've scored goals for fun at home all season against much better teams than us.

Injuries and suspensions meant that Chicksen played centre back that game, with Woods at LB and Mellor, another fullback, at right CB. So, with a short notice makeshift defence - square pegs in round holes against the runaway top scorers, in a game we'd almost certainly have lost with our regular defence - you're using that game as evidence that Chicksen and Wood are bab?
Unbelievable Jeff!

There are valid arguments that we could do with better than Chicksen and that Wood isn't yet defensively reliable enough in a team scrapping relegation. But the Luton game is certainly not part of that argument.

 

Another thoroughly depressing thread. Let's all have an argument about which player we should be booing the loudest.

 

Without doubt Chicksen is a scapegoat and is nowhere near as bad as some make out I do think Wood was unlucky to lose out when Chicksen came back from injury. He now seems to have found a niche in midfield

 

How about taking into account David Hopkins opinion. He sees both players every day and obviously prefers Chicksen over Wood at LB. I actually think both look better with Wood playing left mid in front of Chicksen

 

How do you know that Hopkin doesn’t rate Chicksen? The window certainly didn’t tell me that. It just showed me that he doesn’t rate Wood at all, not even as cover, so brought in someone that can.

The telling aspect will be if Woods starts when fit and Chicksen dropped

 

He started ahead of Chicksen when both were available.

 

Stuart McCall selected Rehman, even making him captain.

Managers selecting players does not automatically make them the best option.