Jump to content

Andy Carroll V Lambert


spyinthesky
 Share

Recommended Posts

The value of players goes up exponentially with the leagues.

 

Top League 2 striker (eg. Le Fondre) - £500k

Top League 1 striker (eg. Lambert) - £1m

Top Championship striker (rumoured bids for J Rod, Maynard etc.) - £5m

Top Premier League striker - £20m and upwards

Top Champs League striker - £35m, £50m, £80m etc.

 

You can't really make comparisons for prices and different leagues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, well, I had exactly the same thought watching him this afternoon and pondered relative values. £35M ... oh dear, not worth £3.5M based on his performance today. Rickie Lambert cost £1M and he is 35 times as good as Carroll.

Really hope SRL gets to play in the Prem and we can run the rule over him against Prem defenders. I think he will shine even at that level as his movement will make him hard to mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel sorry for Carroll in some way. Not many ways mind!

 

He was starting his career, had a good albeit unspectacular season in the championship, got promoted, then had a good start to the next season. He never claimed to be a great player, anyone watching closely could see he was about effort and power rather than composure and class. Newcastle played to his strengths.

 

Liverpool overpaid for him by about 27m! Not his fault, he jumped at the move, but expectations were high due to the fee. They don't play to his strengths, he's still a useful strong striker but not a very good footballer, and that's been found out as his performances are analysed in more detail.

 

Liverpool got what they deserved, but not sure he did. Still, limited sympathy with a millionaire pony-tailed footballer.

 

I think you have got that spot on, one of the dangers of a big club paying mega bucks for a largely unproven striker (at Prem level anyway).

 

Having said that I would have Rickie any day over him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I quite like Carroll, he's a pretty effective striker if you play him correctly. Plenty of balls in from the wings and he'll create chaos in the opposition's box.

 

Not his fault Liverpool paid a mad fee for him and don't play to his strengths thus lowering his confidence. He's no Pele but he's decent at what he does.

 

However does make you think how much Ricky would be worth if we were to sell him? Guess his age would go very much against him now in terms of cash value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I quite like Carroll, he's a pretty effective striker if you play him correctly. Plenty of balls in from the wings and he'll create chaos in the opposition's box.

 

Not his fault Liverpool paid a mad fee for him and don't play to his strengths thus lowering his confidence. He's no Pele but he's decent at what he does.

Well I can't claim to have seen much of him other than what I've seen on telly, but yesterday was a pretty poor display by him and it was even picked up by the commentators that at times when, as a striker, you would expect to see him busting a gut to get into the box and get on the end of something, he was often languishing on the edge of the area with seemingly no urgency about him at all.

 

Now, we know that Lambert pulls out wide and often doesn't get into the box but his link-up play is so much better than anything I've seen from Carroll, and if the one thing that Carroll is supposed to do is 'cause chaos' in the box then he really has no excuse IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The value of players goes up exponentially with the leagues.

 

Top League 2 striker (eg. Le Fondre) - £500k

Top League 1 striker (eg. Lambert) - £1m

Top Championship striker (rumoured bids for J Rod, Maynard etc.) - £5m

Top Premier League striker - £20m and upwards

Top Champs League striker - £35m, £50m, £80m etc.

 

You can't really make comparisons for prices and different leagues.

 

When was Carroll either a top premier league or champions league striker?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hehe.

 

I was commenting all through the match that Liverpool would have done better with Lambert. The missus eventually got the hump and started all the "one man team" bolox.

 

But, as in so many of the contests we have, particularly on football, I am right and she is wrong.

 

Lambert's scoring for fun, and I back him to do just the same in the Prem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thinking about this today also.

 

Carroll = Long haired carthorse. Plays a game from another era.

Lambert = Short haired goal machine. Plays in a very modern fluid way linking up and operating all through the front positions.

 

I back him to at least do a Grant Holt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andy Carroll has played to date 155 senior games (since 2006) and scored only 59 goals (many of them last season) all in Prem.

 

Ricky Lambert has scored 82 goals in 145 games the last 2½ seasons with Saints, and in all 138 goals in 300 games since 2006

 

It doesn't need anyone else to say that RL got his tally in a lower league,(thats obvious) but just because someone costs £35 million - should he be an automatic choice for England?.

If Dalglish thought Carroll was a great CF-he was in a minority of one. AC's predecessor(at Liverpool) was a bigger flop..andonly cost £50 million.

 

I can't see any reason a sane manager wouldn't play the "in-form player" and give Ricky a few games - in friendlies - in games where he will likely use 18 players anyway, just to prove himself. I recall one "brave" England manager (forgot who) played Wolves CF Bull in a few games - when they were the wrong end of Div.2 ...and he scored, too.

 

Past England managers like Venables and Hoddle in the 1990's stubbornly refused to play MLT - when he was clearly the top English goalscorer at that time and all because the Saints were at the lower end of the Premiership. The " incestuous London football mafia " is at it again.

 

Any English player from a London club (and there aren't so many of them)...stands a better chance of getting a game, than does Ricky.!

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited by david in sweden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Liverpool paid £35m for Carroll. Saints paid ~£1m for Lambert.

 

35/1=35.

 

Therefore in monetary terms, Carroll is worth 35 times more than Lambert. But Lambert is a better player.

Thanks for confirming what the OP meant. I am sure we were all struggling before that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lambert has improved hugely since he came to Saints. He is fitter, much more mobile and his all round game has improved. Huge credit to NA and the backroom staff. Will definitely be fine in the Premier League, assuming that we get there this season. Only problem is that he has just turned 30.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andy Carroll has played to date 155 senior games (since 2006) and scored only 59 goals (many of them last season) all in Prem.

 

Ricky Lambert has scored 82 goals in 145 games the last 2½ seasons with Saints, and in all 138 goals in 300 games since 2006

 

It doesn't need anyone else to say that RL got his tally in a lower league,(thats obvious) but just because someone costs £35 million - should he be an automatic choice for England?.

If Dalglish thought Carroll was a great CF-he was in a minority of one. AC's predecessor(at Liverpool) was a bigger flop..andonly cost £50 million.

 

I can't see any reason a sane manager wouldn't play the "in-form player" and give Ricky a few games - in friendlies - in games where he will likely use 18 players anyway, just to prove himself. I recall one "brave" England manager (forgot who) played Wolves CF Bull in a few games - when they were the wrong end of Div.2 ...and he scored, too.

 

Past England managers like Venables and Hoddle in the 1990's stubbornly refused to play MLT - when he was clearly the top English goalscorer at that time and all because the Saints were at the lower end of the Premiership. The " incestuous London football mafia " is at it again.

 

Any English player from a London club (and there aren't so many of them)...stands a better chance of getting a game, than does Ricky.!

 

 

 

 

 

.

What a load of Rubbish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can say, without the slightest hint of bull****, that I would rather have RL playing for us at the moment than Carroll.

 

Yes quite agree

 

Apart from Ron Davies who was the best CF in Europe after joining SFC I think Lambert has been our best signing in the past forty years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said he became the best CF in Europe after joining us so I think he was the best signing but Lambert has been extremely good too

 

Ron was joint top goal-scorer 1967–68, along with George Best. On 16 August 1969 he scored four goals, all headed, in a match against Manchester United at Old Trafford, Matt Busby said that Davies had no peer in Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can say, without the slightest hint of bull****, that I would rather have RL playing for us at the moment than Carroll.

 

Agree.

 

What WOULD be interesting is IF Adkins (and his team) were given 2 years of working with Carroll whether he would actually improve as much as Rickie has.

 

Taking Rickie's perfromances in the nPc this season, the nearest equivalent player I can think of to compare him to is Alan Shearer. Shearer's contribution to build up play and ability to score screamers, penalties and scappy goals.

 

Compare Rickie at the same age as Carroll and I think we would pick Carroll (just).

 

But I think the key ingredients (as NA said on Saturday) has been Rickie's attitude & appetite to improve and the coaches he has around him to bring that out of him.

 

Can RL perform in the PL? Playing for us in a style where we play to his strengths? Hell yes.

 

Playing for someone else? Doubt it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said he became the best CF in Europe after joining us so I think he was the best signing but Lambert has been extremely good too

 

Ron was joint top goal-scorer 1967–68, along with George Best. On 16 August 1969 he scored four goals, all headed, in a match against Manchester United at Old Trafford, Matt Busby said that Davies had no peer in Europe.

 

I work with a fella who claims to have played with Ron during his time at the LA Aztecs. Nothing but praise for the man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You can't really make comparisons for prices and different leagues.

 

Nonsense! Of course you can. Quality is absolute and price should have everything to do with it.

 

Ricky is worth nothing to anybody else 'cos he ain't going anywhere. As for Carroll... Pards is no effing fool is he, if the long-haired geordie bean-pole had been worth £35m Pards would not have let him go in the first place.

 

Think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense! Of course you can. Quality is absolute and price should have everything to do with it.

 

Ricky is worth nothing to anybody else 'cos he ain't going anywhere. As for Carroll... Pards is no effing fool is he, if the long-haired geordie bean-pole had been worth £35m Pards would not have let him go in the first place.

 

Think about it.

you really think he had a choice...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A scouser mate of mine texted me a couple of weeks back. "Spielbergs making a sequel to Warhorse. Their filming it at Anfield, and its called Carthorse"

 

He also reckons Carroll is utter shlte, but I have to agree with those above saying its hardly his fault if Liverpool overpaid massively for him. Which they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad Ricky is 30. If he were 25 this season, he'd be at Liverpool.

 

I think this is the most important Lambert stat of all. Huddersfield said he was too old at 28 to take a punt on, as his resale value would be poor. Now he's 30, I still think we'd recoup more than what we paid for him, and quite a bit more to boot. Our chances of keeping hold of him are boosted because of his age - and yet I reckon he still has a good 5 years at the top level ahead of him. He loves it here, we love him, I can see him retiring with us.

 

As for Lambert over Carroll? No thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is the most important Lambert stat of all. Huddersfield said he was too old at 28 to take a punt on, as his resale value would be poor. Now he's 30, I still think we'd recoup more than what we paid for him, and quite a bit more to boot. Our chances of keeping hold of him are boosted because of his age - and yet I reckon he still has a good 5 years at the top level ahead of him. He loves it here, we love him, I can see him retiring with us.

 

As for Lambert over Carroll? No thanks.

 

Lamberts better for me. Stop being so negative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...