Aston Villa News 24/7Luke Young’s recent interview caused a predictable little debate here and there about how Carlos Cuellar isn’t a right back, etc. etc. Yes, he’s a better defender, but “he doesn’t offer the same as Luke going forward”. Or words to that effect. Seems like a good time to put their stats alongside each other.
I’ve trawled through the 38 Premiership games from the 2009/10 season and pulled the metrics for the games each player played at right back only. In order to make a like-for-like comparison, I’ve used a “per game” calculation based on the number of minutes played.
For instance, Luke Young played a total of 786 minutes at right back and during that time made a total of 162 successful passes in open play. To calculate the per game rate of successful passes I simply divided the number of passes by the number of minutes and then multiplied by 90 minutes.
( 162 / 768 ) x 90 = 18.55 successful passes per game.
In comparison, Carlos made 499 successful passes over the course of his 2,160 minutes at right back:-
( 499 / 2,160 ) x 90 = 20.79 successful passes per game.
The numbers in the table below back up the assertion that Luke is slightly better going forward, although not spectacularly so, and Carlos is better defensively. It’s clear that Carlos is a better tackler, clears more balls and blocks more efforts on goal. Luke has a better pass completion rate and his mobility allows him to intercept more passes, but if he offers more going forward, he doesn’t deliver. Carlos has the goal and assist to his name, Luke has zip.
The biggest difference between them reveals that those long throw-ins that Carlos takes aren’t very useful.
| Carlos Cuellar | Luke Young | |||||
| 1 | Goals | 0 | ||||
| 1 | Assists | 0 | ||||
| 24 | Appeances at RB | 9 | ||||
| 2,160 | Minutes at RB | 786 | ||||
| Per Game Metrics and Success Rate % * | ||||||
| 0.33 | Shots | 0.34 | ||||
| 0.08 | On Target | 0.11 | ||||
| 0.13 | Off Target | 0.11 | ||||
| 0.13 | Blocked | 0.11 | ||||
| 28.17 | Successful Passes | 27.48 | ||||
| 20.79 | Open Play | 18.55 | ||||
| 0.63 | Crosses | 0.69 | ||||
| 0.13 | Free Kicks | 0.57 | ||||
| 6.63 | Throw Ins | 7.67 | ||||
| 9.29 | Unsuccessful Passes | 4.92 | ||||
| 3.17 | Open Play | 2.06 | ||||
| 1.17 | Crosses | 0.80 | ||||
| 0.04 | Free Kicks | 0.23 | ||||
| 4.92 | Throw Ins | 1.83 | ||||
| 75.19% | Pass Success Rate % | 84.81% | ||||
| 86.78% | Open Play | 90.00% | ||||
| 34.88% | Crosses | 46.15% | ||||
| 75.00% | Free Kicks | 71.43% | ||||
| 57.40% | Throw Ins | 80.72% | ||||
| 1.92 | Interceptions | 2.18 | ||||
| 6.63 | Tackles | 6.41 | ||||
| 4.63 | Tackles Won | 4.01 | ||||
| 2.00 | Tackles Lost | 2.40 | ||||
| 69.81% | Tackle Success % | 62.50% | ||||
| 7.00 | Clearances | 4.92 | ||||
| 4.96 | Successful Clearances | 3.21 | ||||
| 2.04 | Unsuccessful Clearances | 1.72 | ||||
| 70.86% | Clearance Success % | 65.24% | ||||
| 0.67 | Blocks | 0.46 | ||||
| 0.25 | Fouls Won | 0.46 | ||||
| 0.92 | Fouls Conceded | 1.26 | ||||
You might also like...
11 Comments to “Tale Of The Tape: Carlos Cuellar vs Luke Young”
Leave a Reply
I think Carlos has some deficiencies as a right back, and it’s a position that I think Villa could stand to upgrade. With that said, I’m not convinced (as you seem to be) that Luke is any better overall, and given Villa’s style I’m certainly not convinced that he’s the better player to have in that slot if the choice is between only those two.
There’s a case to be made that perhaps Young is one of the four best defenders on the squad and that Cuellar and Dunne should be in the center, but that’s different subject altogether I think.
I’d love to see the team make an external upgrade at this position; it seems to me that it’s the second most glaring weakness on the squad. But it does seem as though the folks that are clamoring for Young over Cuellar are sort of missing the forest for the trees as it relates to the team’s style of play/
“I’m not convinced **(as you seem to be)** that Luke is any better overall”
no, i think you’ve missed the point.
over the course of several posts, i’ve said that luke young offers more in the final third in a system specifically designed to employ the power of full backs. it would be demented to claim otherwise.
but, based on what *has* happened, not some hypothetical, i’m perfectly convinced that cuellar has been the better *overall* option.
that’s the purpose of this post, the stats show that defensively he’s ahead, but offensively he’s not as far behind luke as some people imagine.
also, this:
“[...] but if he offers more going forward, he doesn’t deliver. Carlos has the goal and assist to his name, Luke has zip.”
Very poorly worded on my part; I intended for this to read as though we were in agreement re: Cuellar being the better option overall. And then I went and wrote it as though the opposite were true. When internetting late at night I need to perhaps save comments as drafts for posting after I’ve had coffee the next morning.
haha, no worries. we’ll call it the west coast effect!
Nice stats.
I don’t see that you’ve cherry picked them to prove a point either.
So what is it with the vocal people on the net that insist you should always play players in the preferred position?
As it happens, I’d rather see LY at left back in place of Warnock.
(the latter has yet to convince me defensively and I hope he’s better next season).
But I’d obviously be talking out of my proverbial, as I’d be asking LY to play out of position too
nooo, i never cherry pick (well, mostly never!)
this is as fair a comparison as i can draw between them. it would probably benefit from a more detailed analysis of exactly where they’re passing. cuellar is prone to getting a bit far up the pitch, stopping and passing backwards, although less so now than in the past.
the problem with young as a left back is that he’s very right footed. full backs lose all their attacking benefits if they’re on the wrong side and can’t use their other foot so well.
“full backs lose all their attacking benefits if they’re on the wrong side and can’t use their other foot so well”.
Unless they cut into the middle somewhat, much as you suggested about our wingers?
I’ve just been on News and Views, looking at John Lerwell’s memoirs.
He speaks of Alan Evans, who was a striker.
He just happened to be one of the finest Centre halfs I’ve seen down the Villa.
A certain Mr Barry could play various positions, as can James Milner.
I guess I just have a bee in my bonnet when people say you can only play one position.
No, Cuellar isn’t a right back, I agree.
But you’ve proven he’s on a par with someone who I’ve heard some Villa fans saying is the best English RB (LY).
“Unless they cut into the middle somewhat, much as you suggested about our wingers?”
true enough, but the point was the wingers have the option to cut inside, the full backs provide the options on the overlap. warnock is very good at that, cuellar…. not so much.
eh, dion dublin was pretty handy at centre half himself.
i’m with you, milner is exceptionally versatile, but decent players should be comfortable in more than one position or role.
“No, Cuellar isn’t a right back, I agree.
But you’ve proven he’s on a par with someone who I’ve heard some Villa fans saying is the best English RB (LY).”
yeah, i think so too. it’s close and probably still subjective in the final analysis, but it’s not the no brainer some seem to think it is.
Interesting stats and they support a feeling I always had, that L. Young isn’t as effective going forward as he is given credit for.
Since Carlos has made the R.B. position his own a myth has grown that Villa are missing a huge attacking threat with Young sitting on the bench and that’s all it is, a myth.
“No, Cuellar isn’t a right back, I agree.
But you’ve proven he’s on a par with someone who I’ve heard some Villa fans saying is the best English RB (LY).”
yeah, i think so too. it’s close and probably still subjective in the final analysis, but it’s not the no brainer some seem to think it is.