Chat All-around player or one-trick pony?

[veerus]

This question applies to basically any outfield position.  Would you rather have a player with 20 in the two/three most important attributes and 10 in the two relevant physical attributes OR 15 in each of those attributes?

[Dar J]

15 in each

[BleedsBlue]

Well, at those extremes, I'll take the 15s. Pace is so vital, a field of 20s won't make up for 10 pace and strength - in my opinion. 

That.... might change this year. I'm finding myself needing a much deeper bench than in years passed. Might have to grab some more flexible all-rounders capable of filling in at a wide breadth of positions. I prefer having a couple of "perfect" players for the key positions in my current tactical setup, even if those perfect players aren't green across the board.

[veerus]

At what point would you say does the equation change?  What if it was 20/13 OR all 16 (or all 17)?

[veerus]

To give a more concrete example.. Please refer to the below table and pick two best starting Central Defenders.

Defenders	Player 1	Player 2	Player 3	Player 4
Aerial	12	17	15	15
Tackling	18	14	13	12
Positioning	19	13	14	13
Decisions	15	14	13	11
Aggression	11	14	8	12
Teamwork	9	12	13	14
Stamina	11	11	16	18
Strength	9	11	15	13

 

[BatiGoal]

This could make for great talking points. Nice. 

I'd like to see pace included as well but anyways from the info above I'd instantly pick player1 despite his lower physical attr. he's just got great tackling and positioning can't be overlooked.

And then after careful consideration probably player3 to complement the pair. Good positioning too and each have different strengths which makes for a good pairing. So 1 and 3 for me.

Edited November 26, 2016 by BatiGoal

[Dar J]

I'd also go for players 1 and 3 because player 1 lacks strength and aerial ability and player 3 covers in that 

[Scott]

Player 3 is first choice, 2 or 4 as not much between them and I'd sell 1 because most of his attributes are terrible for a centre back.

[Dar J]

2 hours ago, Scott said:

Player 3 is first choice, 2 or 4 as not much between them and I'd sell 1 because most of his attributes are terrible for a centre back.

Terrible? He's got the best tackling and positioning of them 4

[Meow]

3 is certainly good. Good and physical. If young could develop into a monster too. 1 could possibly be a limited defender to cover for 3. If he had good physicals he'd be perfect (physicals are pretty much derived independent from technical abilities anyway). 

Rule for me is always at least 15 on 2 of 3 physicals, with one not less than 12-13. All aerial above 15. Limited defender tackling 18 or above with decision or positioning one at least 15. CD/BPD maybe tackling 14, but good passing.

You'd be surprised how good someone with 20 pace 20 stamina is. Just that plus an all around decent stat can be a ridiculous player that outlasts every player and can kill it as a late sub.

Edited November 26, 2016 by Meow

[Scott]

30 minutes ago, Dar J said:

Terrible? He's got the best tackling and positioning of them 4

Yeah he has 3 positives with good decisions but the other 5 attributes are negatives, any half decent target man will have chances because of that CB.

[Dar J]

27 minutes ago, Scott said:

Yeah he has 3 positives with good decisions but the other 5 attributes are negatives, any half decent target man will have chances because of that CB.

Yes but you're not playing him alone 

[BatiGoal]

13 minutes ago, Dar J said:

Yes but you're not playing him alone 

Exactly.

I always look at pairings. Two strikers, two CBs, a triangle in midfield, CMs with DM or AMC.

If both are worldclass then it makes little difference but if they're mediocre like players1-4 above it's important to look at the combined skillset.

[Scott]

So instead of getting 2 centre backs who are decent at everything you will sign 2 that are great at one thing but terrible at everything else and expect both players to have the quality to constantly cover for each other?

 

[BatiGoal]

10 minutes ago, Scott said:

So instead of getting 2 centre backs who are decent at everything you will sign 2 that are great at one thing but terrible at everything else and expect both players to have the quality to constantly cover for each other?

 

I get better results with a strong pairing that covers all essential attributes than two decent individuals which just make for a no more than decent defence.

IME the former is great but inconsistent too and the latter is never great. So both not ideal of course.

[Dar J]

I agree with @BatiGoal 

 

[Scott]

22 hours ago, Dar J said:

15 in each

 

1 hour ago, Dar J said:

I agree with @BatiGoal 

 

You sure? 

[veerus]

I didn't include pace because I believe it's the least important of the three physical attributes for Central Defenders (please correct me if I'm wrong).  For the record, pace attributes are as follows (1-4): 11, 11, 8, 11.  You guys still like the 1+3 pairing?

Also, in general, it seems like you guys prefer strength over stamina, right?  So maybe the two primary stats for CD's are strength+pace and not strength+stamina?

[Dar J]

12 minutes ago, veerus said:

I didn't include pace because I believe it's the least important of the three physical attributes for Central Defenders (please correct me if I'm wrong).  For the record, pace attributes are as follows (1-4): 11, 11, 8, 11.  You guys still like the 1+3 pairing?

Also, in general, it seems like you guys prefer strength over stamina, right?  So maybe the two primary stats for CD's are strength+pace and not strength+stamina?

I look at aerial, tackling, decision and positioning for my CDs 

I'd prefer if they are a little bit pacy if not I try to pair 1 slow and the other fast

[BatiGoal]

Pace is indeed not as important as the other attr. but it can be a deciding factor in case you have two nearly identical players.

@Scott

I must add tho that the major downside of this 'pairing up' is when one's out thru suspension/injury or whatever the other CB is significantly weaker. This wouldn't be the case with 2 decent CBs. Both have their (dis)advantages.