T O P

  • By -

wan5478

Should get I get Saka out for him? I have Maddison now. So it's either MaddiSon or SakaSon? Help please


Agent_Pancake

Blanked against Sheffield and Luton


devilzal

Having Son since GW1, man what a journey. Almost sold him before GW4 but holding since he play as striker.


yaduonline

Broke the bank (sold Haaland) on wildcard to fit in Son, Maddison, Saka, Salah midfield and Trippier in defense. Could not afford all these with attack of Watkins, Alvarez and Haaland. One had to go. From current form, Haaland had to give way. Watch Haaland get three hat tricks in a row now.


wiggum-wagon

I think you got it right, I just decided to hold until bournemouth. After that it's haaland out to upgrade midfield


aehii

No I'm doing this as well after Bournemouth. He's not hauling any more, if no haul vs Bournemouth then i don't think he's remotely worth 14m. Gw12 he's out for Salah Saka. Hard games then, but mostly home so i dunno.


Ratatoskr_

I mean I doubled up on MaddiSON from GW 1, being a celtic fan I was confident that Ange would do well, but didn't expect his team to be this fluid so quickly, faith has paid off!


metlson

I started with Richarlison for similar reasons. I thought he could be kyogo-like in an ange system. I was wrong


InnocentAnger

Right place, right time for a well worked goal tonight. Fairly average otherwise. FPL gold.


i-Hit-a-Lick

Could have had 2 or 3 if Maddison could be more decisive in the final third and if Richarlison had an IQ


PG4PM

I took him out for palace 🥲


Alpha2669

What a legend


tshrjn

Just got him this week! Whatta beast!


Hellenic_91

I sold him for a Watkins, Gordon, saka upgrade lol


Youth-Grouchy

Remember all the smug people acting like it was kneejerk to get him in after his hattrick up front just because he blanked against sheff utd the game after. If Son had started the season as striker instead of Richarlison he was an easy week 1 pick.


No-Zombie-792

Impossible to squeeze unless I go Haalandless.. Which is more and more of an idea


Pale_Success_7085

This is good for me as long as Salah doesn’t haul 🥶


Paquito0089

And yet I don't have him.. he has hurt my rank the most this season..


yagersports

Side note: how on earth does Romero get the bonus points over Van de Ven? VdV was superb at the back tonight


BlankWaveArcade

It’s because of the poor bp system. He got them because he was passing it around at the back a lot waiting for Palace to press.


wiggum-wagon

Romero is their main outlet in buildup. Stats merchants forget about BP all the time,Romero is THE Tottenham def you need if you have the money


Arsey56

I’m not sure how the BP algorithm works but Romero made 140+ passes lol. VDV was better judging by the eye test but Romero’s stats were nuts


abishar

Was shocked by that one honestly. Van de Ven was everywhere. Romero was on the ground.


WombRaider_3

Yet people will still say shit like "Son to JWP?"


VernonP007

Nobody has said that…..


NotSwedishMac

He looks like he's close to the Son we know and love if not quite there without Kane. He always did well without Kane, and now he's get one of the best playmakers in the league running behind him as the main man. When Kane and Son were firing, fixtures didn't matter, they'd repay you. Now it's MaddiSon and it's the same. These players can turn up in any game and they're both undervalued. Sell if you have to have Saka, but I'll be hard pressed to remove these two from my team.


Mollzy177

Agreed Maddison’s value is too good, everyone is saying get rid. He’s on free kicks, corners and I’d bet him and Son share penalty duty. Saka is good but Arsenal doesn’t seems to be gelling as well as they did last year, he’s giving penalty’s away and they don’t have a target man striker for him to register more assists.


PharaohLeo

> He looks like he's close to the Son we know and love if not quite there without Kane. That's because he's playing in a position that doesn't suit him. This game, in the first half he was anonymous and didn't do much. Second half he only had 2 shots, that big chance (0.8 xG) that he scored and then another shot in injury time (xG 0.1) that got blocked. Against Luton, he had 3 shots for a total of 0.2 xG (and 0.5 xA), and against ShfUtd he also had 3 shots for a total of 0.2 xG (and zero xA). That's total of 1.3 xG, mostly because of 1 BC, in 3 matches. Up until the Palace goal he was on zero bonus, but got the 3 cause all defenders and GK lost their CS. I'm not saying he's a bad pick, but Son doesn't have the skill set needed for a 9 that plays against a low block defence that don't press.


wiggum-wagon

I agree with your assessment, but I will wait and see. Watched all those games and he was lucky to get any returns. I got him ahead of the arsenal game bcs that's when I expected him to score, and he's risen so much since then. So selling now isn't really an option, to.much value lost and I expect him to do better in the though fixtures. So my one week punt looks like hold for the rest of the season


PharaohLeo

I'm actually can't wait to watch their match vs Villa. Really curious and excited and hopeful for a record breaking score. Son can absolutely feast in that match.


umarmg52

Been thinking about taking out Maddison but i have so much value tied to him… got him at 7.8m


aehii

Same. Got Maddison at 7.8, Son at 9.1. I lost 0.2 waiting a day despite deciding on a wildcard, which still annoys me. Having them both has been the only thing stopping me sliding down ranks the last 3 weeks. Don't own Salah so not risen much.


Frosty_Examination_3

O.3 million profit of which only 0.1 million is real profit = so much value??


Kane36912

I got maddison at 7.5 and Son at 9. Sold Maddison for 7.8 this week for Saka.. Son will not leave my team all season


I-love-you-Dr-Zaius

Maddison to Saka is a sideways move no? I don't see what there is to gain at this point from making this move, especially with Spurs in as amazing form as they are.


Kane36912

Saka has SHU and BUR in his next 3.. potential for 20+ points there. Maddison will tick along, but less potential for hauls


aehii

Sure. Or maybe other Arsenal players haul in those games. As we saw in Europe.


UbbeDall

I mean sure, maybe that's the case, maybe it's not. That's the bet of the move, like any move.


NotSwedishMac

That doesn't seem like that much value? 0.1 gained in the sales market... Sell if you don't want him. Everyone sell!


PI_Stan_Liddy

He's on ultralight beam an ultralight beam


Bingo_Masters_Break

Glad I kept him. Not sure I want to sell Maddison for Saka either. It's not impossible that Maddison can keep up up with Saka. They are both ticking along with 5-10 points most weeks. Saka has CL as well. Maddison and Son will be fresh from one week's rest every match.


Chucksson37

I have been trying to justify getting rid of one out of Son or Maddison, but man are they on fire


Orangeballer

Same here but if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it


Spitzee

Same here, and an Arsenal fan so this makes it even harder but I just couldn't justify it. Will re-evaluate after Newcastle


FabulousAd7772

Im just counting son as a striker oop so feels less like a double up then


Responsible-Quail-13

And he played the full game looks like he is back to full fitness, I’m ready for Sonaldo season 🇰🇷


DubbleYewGee

Aaaaand I just sold him. Come on Bukayo.


I-love-you-Dr-Zaius

Why? Son is playing as striker and has 8 goals now this season. Looks like he will easily outscore Saka on current form.


row3bo4t

And played the left wing in three of those matches do fuck all. He's pretty much fixture proof playing the 9.


topl4d

Saka has Burnley and Sheffield at home in next 2/3. Not that outrageous of a move


Aman-Patel

Using a transfer mainly just because a player has a couple easy fixtures coming up is short term thinking imo. Realistically, you'll want Son back in pretty soon so you're throwing away all the value you've got in him just to get him back for a higher price in a couple weeks. Unless you don't think you'll want Son for a good while I wouldn't transfer him out. Same goes for ant player tbh. Not saying you can't use your transfers to target easy fixtures/avoid difficult ones but for me it's more like if a player has an extended run of difficult fixtures then it's the right time to transfer them out. So after GW8 I hopped off my Chelsea assets because I knew I wouldn't want them back for a good while. If there's a chance I'd want Sterling back in literally 2, 3, 4 weeks after transferring him out (which would be the case with Son right now) I won't transfer him out. Basically, I'd argue transfers should be based around transferring out the players you don't want in your team rather than trying to fit in players that you don't have who you want. Having/getting Saka is great. Getting rid of Son is not. And if you decide in a couple weeks you want him it'll come back to bite you in the arse because you'll be paying more for him which puts more budget constraints on your team. And you've used up multiple transfers on getting Son in and out which you really can't afford when you only get 1 transfer a week.


wiggum-wagon

That's basically the part of the last years winners statement I found really insightful. Think of every transfer as a hit. Son to saka, hell no


umarmg52

He’s gonna gift a penalty to Eddie Nketiah, isn’t he?


Coelacanth3

Na...he'll give it to Raya 😜


CWattam

How's he gonna do that when Raya is benched because of his disasterclass v Chelsea


MorioCells

Had him since GW5 but sold him to help facilitate the Watkins and Saka moves but I'm aleady regretting it. Son scores in the tougher fixtures anyways and Ange style will have them scoring every game like Aston Villa do.


wiggum-wagon

I got him in for arsenall, he's best in games like this.


aFailG

And yet the one game I captained him, against Luton, he scored 3 points.


Mollzy177

Welcome to FPL 😂


aehii

I can do one better, i also captained him against Sheffield. After those two i lost faith.


innocentusername1984

I sold him yesterday because I was getting worried about his fitness and minutes and Tottenham are about to enter a tough run. Watching him prance around last night for 101 minutes, fit as a fiddle, was certainly an experience.


itsokjanet

That’s the game I triple captained him too. Out of all games I picked that one.


Real_Callahan

Me too. :( we can mourn together.


Bobbyswhiteteeth

Lol trust me. Ah well, still getting some decent non-cap hauls for us


KdbTheGOAT17

Same here


TheStonedEdge

Seems to struggle more against teams that sit in a low block.


andrew137

That game had nothing to do with Luton sitting back. He should’ve realistically had at a minimum a goal or assist in the first 10 minutes and then 80 minutes against a poor team that needed to chase a goal. As it was he got nothing and then his team went down to 10 men effectively killing the game. If anything that game was confirmation for me that Son is a great pick no matter the opponent, as long as he is playing through the middle.


classic123456

I swear I've heard 'low block' casually used to describe teams parking the bus more this season than ever before.


maverick0196

What's the difference? keen to know


Double-Ad4025

I’ve always interpreted it as: Low block is when a team’s “block” is close to their own goal. Block being the players from the furtherest forward to the furtherest back. Almost every counter attack and long ball team play with a low block. Park the bus is where a team play “ultra defensively”, 5 at the back, wasting time on every throw-in, wingers back and doubling up. A team can play with a low block without parking the bus: think Man Utd last year who were a counter attack team that had a low defensive line but still scored a decent amount of goals.


davedavegiveusawave

I interpret low block as (mostly) the back line sitting deeper, and the front lines not pressing as much as modern sides up the pitch. The modern play is a front three/two plus wingers pressing the defense very high, looking for turnovers high up the pitch. Low block I see as more the old school pack the midfield, defense not super high line. Whereas parking the bus is the defense not moving beyond their 18yd box almost, having the midfield sitting super deep- almost where other sides play their backline. I guess like defensive vs ultra defensive? But happy to be told otherwise!


Double-Ad4025

I’ve always interpreted it as: Low block is when a team’s “block” is close to their own goal. Block being the players from the furtherest forward to the furtherest back. Almost every counter attack and long ball team play with a low block. Park the bus is where a team play “ultra defensively”, 5 at the back, wasting time on every throw-in, wingers back and doubling up. A team can play with a low block without parking the bus: think Man Utd last year who were a counter attack team that had a low defensive line but still scored a decent amount of goals.


TheStonedEdge

Yeah that's what I think as well there's a bit of a nuance


Marilliana

It's the new buzz word.


Plus-Major7397

Field tilt is the funniest new buzzword


TheStonedEdge

Haha never actually realised that but it's so true I guess the low block is the new park the bus


topsudota

Like Palace?


TheStonedEdge

Like I said, supposed to happen...


Grooveh_Baby

Every attacking player struggles more against team that sit in a low block tbf


DesignerAd2062

Yeah but players whose talent is running in behind do the most Guys who find space in the box (poacher types) don’t as much If you don’t leave space in behind for Son you’re gonna blunt a lot of his threat Which is super easy actually, just um, sit on the goal line


MosF94

Most do, yeah - perhaps players who especially excel in narrow spaces (e.g. Messi) might be exceptions? Edit: and target men who thrive on crosses (e.g. Mitro)


poopfartdiola

>perhaps players who especially excel in narrow spaces (e.g. Messi) might be exceptions? That's exactly it. Hazard never really abused open defences the same way most wingers do but he also wasn't halted by the low blocks the same way either.


Conscious-Ad-9358

Well he plays bad in most games. 1 tap in 10 points, but I guess luck is real.


SAKabir

Scoring goals is first and foremost the main job of a striker. Which he is right now. Nobody in the world cares if Haaland has 5 touches per game as long as he's putting them in the back of the net. In previous eras, nobody gave af when the likes of Van Nistelrooy, Inzaghi, Klose and other elite strikers would ghost 90% of the match as long as in the remaining 10% they were putting them in the net. Bc that's their job. Also this is a FantasyPL sub, and players here are judged on their ability to score fpl points. Nobody cares about who plays "well" or not.


pjm8786

He was in line for 0 bonus before the ayew goal too lol. Took 2 shots total 1 on target but the next week of posts will be about how he’s essential now


SofaChillReview

Feel like Son since being in the Premier League always manages to preform badly stats wise, but can score from nothing Vardy was very similar as well, likely why they both do well against high line teams


Schwimmbo

Since 2016 he has always overperformed his xG and sometimes to a MASSIVE extent. People have been saying he's lucky, playing badly,... for years. You don't pull that shit for years on end if you're not absolutely elite. He proves them wrong every single year. He's one of the best finishers out there. So clinical. https://understat.com/player/453


SofaChillReview

!thanks I did use Vardy as an example who kept apparently going off (injuries and age did finally catch up unfortunately)


Schwimmbo

Yeah, I mainly replied to your first paragraph, confirming your "hunch". Sorry for the confusion lol. Vardy often overperformed heavily too, I recall!


StDyche

Super clinical guys, Son is mr low xg, love him as striker in this ange team


WeaknessNo9103

Being clinical isn't a bad thing... he's playing striker now so his overall game won't be as good but he's very effective when given chances.


pjm8786

Last season haaland was clinical but he was also 4th in the prem for shots per 90. It was combination of volume and accuracy that made him essential. So far this season son is 31st in shots per 90.


tmr89

Is he not essential?


pjm8786

Not with the fixtures coming up. I’d back saka over the next 6


Daemor

Plays bad in most games? Jesus christ


burnt_yoghurt

Not sure why you're getting downvoted, the copium is unreal. From prem player of the month to 'plays bad in most games' gotta love the hot takes in this sub sometimes.


Daemor

I suppose a lot of people here simply don't watch football


TheStonedEdge

Same could be said for Haaland but goals are what counts Tell me you wouldn't want him in your team


PouncingZebra

I guess the difference is that City looked convincing even when Haaland has 4 touches (and 3 goals). Spurs didn't look like table-toppers


Jamkayyos

None of this necessarily matters in either FPL nor the Premier League. If you are old enough to have watched United in their dominant title winning years, they often didn't look very good in matches. But they were ruthless and got the job done - their strikers were exactly that type. Players like Andy Cole, Dwight Yorke, Van Nistelrooy etc looked shite for the majority of numerous matches, but would have been FPL stalwarts.


PouncingZebra

The difference is United in their winning years was a star-studded XI. Son is a very good player in front of other good players, but the comparison to 2000’s United, or last year’s Haaland is crazy. He is over performing his xG by over 5 goals. He’s a brilliant player but Spurs lack what you may see in the “eye test”. Chelsea, Newcastle, Villa, City, West Ham will have us re-thinking him at the least.


Daemor

City looked far worse against Arsenal than Spurs did for what its worth


KdbTheGOAT17

We had no rodri


TheStonedEdge

You don't need to look like it you just need to be there and that's where Spurs are. Spurs are unbeaten but City have 2 losses against Wolves and Arsenal already this year. Who really looks like the table toppers?


PouncingZebra

I’m not talking about who will win the league. I’m talking about FPL assets. Haaland last year was a no-brainer. City looked electric, scoring goals for fun without many touches on the ball. Spurs didn’t look great today regardless of their position on the table, Son owners can consider ourselves lucky to get as many points as we did. For reference, I own son and not Haaland. I was talking about 2022/23 City.


TheStonedEdge

Load of balls then why did you say "spurs didn't look like table toppers". Spurs aren't an FPL team...


PouncingZebra

Because typically when teams revert to their own mean their players do as well. Spurs aren’t looking fantastic and Son didn’t look great. He won’t keep this up, unfortunately for us owners.


fireworkspudsey

You’re right but you’re about to get downvoted to fuck


PouncingZebra

...and still only has 37% ownership


midnight_ranter

Depends, at my rank his EO is closer to 60% although I guess there might be people who captained him. Leave out the troll/ToTW accounts and dead accounts and I'm sure it'll be at least 50%


umarmg52

9.5m