Rising to 29m actually

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksd9gH7i0SY

Yeah, because it's logical to judge a LB based on goals and assists.

Shaw is 10x the player that Rodriguez lad will ever be and well worth what Man Utd paid for him

Rodriguez

Kamran

Mignolet - 0 career goals

Pletikosa - 4 career goals

why have you not signed him?

comment by Kamran. (U1204)
posted 49 seconds ago
Yeah, because it's logical to judge a LB based on goals and assists.

Shaw is 10x the player that Rodriguez lad will ever be and well worth what Man Utd paid for him
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who am i judging? I never said Rodriguez was better than Shaw

comment by Kamran. (U1204)
posted 3 minutes ago
Yeah, because it's logical to judge a LB based on goals and assists.

Shaw is 10x the player that Rodriguez lad will ever be and well worth what Man Utd paid for him
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on what? A good season as part of a well drilled southampton side? He's a decent LB with some potential, but I really don't buy this hype surrounding him.

Rodriguez just had a boss season.

Source for your stats?

Nobody said Rodriguez was better than Shaw or vice versa. Defensive much?

Kamran
How many times have you watched Rodriguez? Enough to conclude that he will never be as good as Shaw.

http://www.whoscored.com/Players/61610/Show/Ricardo-Rodriguez

http://www.whoscored.com/Regions/81/Tournaments/3

Nuff said

That team has Henrick mkhkitaryan in it despite the fact he was extremely inconsistent, which is why judging players in stats alone is pointless

And no Marco Reus in the Toty? He was the best player in the league last season

Rodriguez looks decent but Shaw is a physical beast which makes him very suitable for the Premier League.

It's hard to compare two players from different leagues to be honest, and obviously Shaw is going to cost more because of his English tax.

If Shaw plays for Man Utd for 10 years or more he will be an absolute bargain. Then again if struggles he could be an expensive flop.

If Rodriguez got brought to England he could be a flop too, then again he could be a bargain.

It's a very unstable science.

its based on an algorithm obviously

comment by righteous1 (U7048)
posted 17 seconds ago
Rodriguez looks decent but Shaw is a physical beast which makes him very suitable for the Premier League.

It's hard to compare two players from different leagues to be honest, and obviously Shaw is going to cost more because of his English tax.

If Shaw plays for Man Utd for 10 years or more he will be an absolute bargain. Then again if struggles he could be an expensive flop.

If Rodriguez got brought to England he could be a flop too, then again he could be a bargain.

It's a very unstable science.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Point well made. Even though they are both LB's the are different styles. Shaw would seem to be better defensively, but is not the type to beat players with skill, whereas Rodriguez offers better passing and skill, but offers more options in attack.

I'd say they are worth about the same money, depends what your team needs, and which would fit better with your style. What is glaringly obvious is that shaw is incredibly overpriced.

This Rojo playing for Argentina looks the muts nuts!

One suggestion is that it's because he is playing in the world cup!

much like we didn't sign lallana when he was there. Agree that rojo looks good too.

Goal stats don't mean a lot for LB IMO, assist stats are a little more interesting though and suggest that Rodriguez is a good attacking full back.

I just haven't seen enough of Rodriguez to judge, just the World Cup. Shaw will turn into a great player though, I have little doubt of that. Strong, quick and good on the ball. He'll be a good signing for Utd albeit one that's coming at an almighty price if the £160k per week reports are to be believed.

Imagine judging a fullback on goals/assists.... So many idiots around these days...

comment by Analog (U17200)
posted 1 minute ago
Imagine judging a fullback on goals/assists.... So many idiots around these days...
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree that goals is a bit of a spurious stat for a full back.

Just out of interest though, given that attacking full backs are a feature of modern football why would you not consider assists to be an interesting thing to look at?

If we're going to pick some stats in order to measure a player's ability:

Defensive errors leading to goals:
Shaw 0
Baines 2
Cole 2
Evra 1

Dribble success:
Shaw 57%
Baines 55%
Cole 39%
Evra 54%

Aerial duels won:
Shaw 55%
Baines 39%
Cole 31%
Evra 54%

It should show how many defensive areas overall, shaw may have made more but the others just didnt get bailed out