Taylor v Pieters

[huw.Y.WattfromWare]

Debate carried over from another thread.
My argument is that Pieters is better going forward. Others disagree.
This season Taylor has 1 assist from 17(1) and Pieters has 1 assist from 10(1).
Last season Pieters had 4 plus a couple of goals in the cup to Taylors 1.
I am not knocking Taylor, he does a fine job defending but for all his charges down the line there is no end product.

144F0C55-AA03-46D1-BCC7-A537ADB8B1C5.jpeg (302.18 KiB) Viewed 3273 times

956E09E5-1ADD-488E-962F-602D33B4C613.jpeg (97.52 KiB) Viewed 3273 times

[Newcastleclaret93]

There is not really a debate. Pieters contributes to a goal every 8 games in the premier league for Burnley. Taylor every 30 games.

Pieters is clearly more attacking statistically. He has a hell of a left peg.

One part of Taylor’s game he needs to work on.

[Aclaret]

Just shows what a good signing Pieters was, when many questioned it at the time.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

This is why we shouldn't stop signing older players from time to time.

[burnleymik]

To be fair I have seen Taylor put plenty of excellent crosses in, but we don't always get on the end of them. Defensively Taylor is head and shoulders above Pieters IMO.

Pieters has done a job for us, without doubt, and is a great back-up.

[Duffer_]

Taylor's stats would have been improved if Brady kept his eyes open when heading tonight. I like both Taylor and Pieters but feel we are stronger when Chas plays due to his consistency.

[warksclaret]

Taylor had not played for 7 games, and I thought he looked composed and was rebuilding a relationship with Dwight tonight. For me there is no debate-Charlie every time (its rare he gets skinned by a winger). Having said that we could not have a better stand by in Pieters, who I am delighted is getting good game time

[ElectroClaret]

Pieters was a good signing, but for me its Charlie every time. They're defenders and notwithstanding Pieters contribution to our attacking prowess, you have to secure your back line before anything else, and CT does this superbly.

Good to have the competition between em.

[Newcastleclaret93]

Saying that I think Pieters has been excellent defensively this season.

[Burnley1989]

What are the stats of goals conceded? It’s ok getting forward but does he get back? Not having a dig btw, be interested to see

[chekhov]

This thing about “assists”. It didn’t even used to be a thing. An assist can be a deflection off a backside, it’s meaningless. Well okay, not meaningless, but there is far too much emphasis on who touched the ball before the chap who scored the goal. The fellow who dribbled past 3 players earlier in the buildup gets no credit.
Me, I think we are better with Taylor playing. He’s just a better footballer.

[Boss Hogg]

I like Taylor who has improved massively in his time with us. Think Pieters is vastly underrated though. He’s a quality footballer and offers versatility. He is capable of some quality balls into the box as he showed against Crystal Palace.

[huw.Y.WattfromWare]

As the OP I’ll just chip back in to say I haven’t an argument with anything added so far.
I believe in our system Charlie will always start, if both are fit. I also think Erik plays better the longer a run he gets and his defending is so much better than his early appearances.
I mentioned on the MDT I just wish Charlie would look back on the videos of Eriks forward positioning and the balls he puts into the box. You don’t have to get to the goal line every time. There is so much to learn there.

[KlyBfc]

For me:
Pieters
Attacking wise, he is a good going forward on the move. He puts great crosses in when he runs on to them and drives forward well and with purpose, both with and without the ball. However when we play the ball casually across the back four trying to build up play he scares the life out of me and often slows it down too much.
Taylor drives forward too and seems better at beating an opponent with the ball but I’d agree his final delivery and strike of a ball seems below EP.

Defensively: No competition. Both are excellent 1v1 when opponents run at them, however Taylor is much much better positionally especially (which is EPs biggest weakness) when the ball is switched /moved quickly across from the opposite side of the pitch.

Like everyone I am more than comfortable and happy with EP as our back up option and I love his commitment, desire and will to win.

[littleboroughclaret]

I think Pieters has done a sterling job when he has come into the side but if we are talking about the partnership with McNeil it's a no brainer. McNeil (bar the palace game) plays well when Taylor plays.

[Rileybobs]

These type of stats can be very misleading as I would hazard a guess that Taylor wins more corners and free kicks when he marauds forwards which both occasionally lead to goals.

I think that Taylor is a more rounded player and generally heads for the corner. Pieters is weaker in possession but plays with more intensity and is generally more direct in attack. At their best I would give Taylor the nod without doubt, but we’ve not seen the best of him this season.

[FCBurnley]

Pieters is a great back up for Taylor but a fully fit CT gets my vote every time

[bodge]

I would prefer Taylor of the two but Pieters was excellent defensively against Mahrez, a player who is the only one i can think of that gives Taylor nightmares.

[Local cricketer]

Pieters is a great back up for Taylor but a fully fit CT gets my vote every time

Bloody hell you really picking a nearly 70 year old CT over a Dutch international?

[RVclaret]

Taylor a far more complete full back than Pieters.

Tonight he did okay considering he's been out for best part of 2 months.

I felt he was holding himself back a bit from the usual lung busting runs on the outside probably due to not being 100% fit.

Interesting a comment I saw from NewcastleClaret saying Taylor isn't comfortable in possession compared to Pieters - isn't it strange because I and most others I speak with say the opposite!

[Newcastleclaret93]

Taylor a far more complete full back than Pieters.

Tonight he did okay considering he's been out for best part of 2 months.

I felt he was holding himself back a bit from the usual lung busting runs on the outside probably due to not being 100% fit.

Interesting a comment I saw from NewcastleClaret saying Taylor isn't comfortable in possession compared to Pieters - isn't it strange because I and most others I speak with say the opposite!

Yes I do genuinely believe Pieters is much more comfortable in possession.

I think Taylor is the better athlete and can get up and down the pitch much more efficiently but generally he is quite poor when in possession.

Would love to see Taylor with Pieters quality on the ball

[RVclaret]

Yes I do genuinely believe Pieters is much more comfortable in possession.

I think Taylor is the better athlete and can get up and down the pitch much more efficiently but generally he is quite poor when in possession.

Would love to see Taylor with Pieters quality on the ball

Crazy how different our opinions are on this one - I think Pieters ability on the ball is one of his biggest weaknesses!

[cricketfieldclarets]

I’ve had plenty of pelters for preferring Pieters.

There’s not much between them and with Taylor being younger and English it’s probably the obvious choice to pick him as first choice. But Pieters is equally as good.

Good position to be in though. Must admit was glad Charlie started tonight.

[diamondpocket]

Interesting thread and stats.
Off the top of my head and looking at the attacking stats, Pieters does seem to get in better positions attacking wise, more towards the edge of the box, or that line, rather than flying down the wing and getting crosses in from wide left touchline like Chaz.

[Slurpy]

Just because Pieters is good for a couple more assists as season doesn't mean he's better 'going forward' especially when a couple of them where balls from the half way line. Going forwards is about the link play for which McTaylor is Better than McPieters.

[Grimsdale]

In terms of attacking potential, here are some interesting stats from this season:

Minutes played:
Pieters: 1022
Taylor: 1409

Chances created
Pieters: 4
Taylor: 8

Crosses (attempted/successful):
Pieters: 17/1
Taylor: 54/12

Dribbles (attempted/successful):
Pieters: 7/5
Taylor: 30/14

Take ons(attempted/successful):
Pieters: 7/5
Taylor: 26/14

[superdimitri]

This thing about “assists”. It didn’t even used to be a thing. An assist can be a deflection off a backside, it’s meaningless. Well okay, not meaningless, but there is far too much emphasis on who touched the ball before the chap who scored the goal. The fellow who dribbled past 3 players earlier in the buildup gets no credit.
Me, I think we are better with Taylor playing. He’s just a better footballer.

Even today football is way behind the times compared to other sports. In most American sports they've been using statistics for both second and first assist for years. Dean Marney was a good example when he played for us. Winning the ball back and playing a good pass for the first assister is just, if not more important.

But back on topic I think Pieters is more composed going forward than Taylor and seems to make the right decision in attack, be it a shot, cross or shot. He's also got a better shot on him.

On the other hand Taylor seems a lot better athletically with better stamina which means a lot in his position. He doesn't find himself in trouble as much off the ball like Pieters does because he's faster. He also seems better at tackling and blocking.

[Mattster]

Crazy how different our opinions are on this one - I think Pieters ability on the ball is one of his biggest weaknesses!

Taylor is far and away more comfortable in possession, how anyone could think differently is beyond me. All the stats back it up in terms of successful dribbles, passes, key passes etc. In fact the only thing Pieters beats Taylor on is he loses possession less but looking at the stats that's simply because he gets on the ball less and takes less attacking risk.

[Stevie Morgan]

Taylor is a more dynamic player and kick starts attacks better. Pieters is excellent back up tho and has done well this season.

[bobinho]

I’m struggling to see why this is being discussed tbh.

Don’t get me wrong, I like Erik, he’s a good player and extremely versatile. Every team needs one of these, if they are to make a go of it. But Taylor is at a different level I’m afraid, as far as being a left back is concerned. I happen to think he’s better both defensively AND offensively.
I understand that stats can prove Erik is more effective going forward, but all that stat REALLY shows is that more players have got on the end of his crosses. There is of course also the argument that sometimes we just play a different game where we don’t cross as much (big centre halves) and attempt to attack through the channels.

I’m just not a fan of stats (can you tell) cos I don’t believe they ever tell the proper story. I am however a fan of both these players.

[ClaretAL]

I think the reason Pieters shows for more assist is because of the link up play and understanding with Dwight. When Taylor plays there are lot more overlapping runs which inevitably frees Dwight up to to put those touchline crosses in, Where as Pieters moves inside and plays the ball direct in to the box without any interaction with Dwight. So it would be good to see the stats of Dwights assists when Taylor plays compared to when Pieters plays.

[claretonthecoast1882]

I’m struggling to see why this is being discussed tbh.

Don’t get me wrong, I like Erik, he’s a good player and extremely versatile. Every team needs one of these, if they are to make a go of it. But Taylor is at a different level I’m afraid, as far as being a left back is concerned. I happen to think he’s better both defensively AND offensively.
I understand that stats can prove Erik is more effective going forward, but all that stat REALLY shows is that more players have got on the end of his crosses. There is of course also the argument that sometimes we just play a different game where we don’t cross as much (big centre halves) and attempt to attack through the channels.

I’m just not a fan of stats (can you tell) cos I don’t believe they ever tell the proper story. I am however a fan of both these players.

They tend to be started fairly quickly after a game ends that we don't win by someone with an agenda.

We had a stupid one recently asking for peoples opinion on Brownhill (similar tone to this one) when anyone offered a potive it was disagreed with and a negative response was given a like. Of course though they never have an agenda

[Swizzlestick]

I actually think this has been a very good discussion thread. Some interesting angles on both players.

Erik had been reliable and doesn’t let us down but we look a def better team with a fully fit Charlie playing, especially when he rampages forward.

[huw.Y.WattfromWare]

They tend to be started fairly quickly after a game ends that we don't win by someone with an agenda.

No agenda here fella and this was raised pre-game. I really like Charlie but he isn’t the FB we were told we were getting when he signed. Back then all the noise was about how good he was going forward. The fact is he does look good, with pace and beating a man, but then no delivery. Because his head is down overlapping EVERY time he doesn’t see the opportunities infield from him. On MoTD last Saturday they were raving about Matt Lowton playing quick balls in to Jay and Ash’s feet. We never see this from him as he has two options, charge blindly up the line or give it to Dwight.
I’ll repeat myself, I just want to see him improve these areas

[Swizzlestick]

No agenda here fella and this was raised pre-game. I really like Charlie but he isn’t the FB we were told we were getting when he signed. Back then all the noise was about how good he was going forward. The fact is he does look good, with pace and beating a man, but then no delivery. Because his head is down overlapping EVERY time he doesn’t see the opportunities infield from him. On MoTD last Saturday they were raving about Matt Lowton playing quick balls in to Jay and Ash’s feet. We never see this from him as he has two options, charge blindly up the line or give it to Dwight.
I’ll repeat myself, I just want to see him improve these areas

Thing is though, if he had all those attributes, he wouldn’t be playing for us. We’re a far more potent attacking threat when he starts.

[Greenmile]

How much are these stats impacted by the run of games where Pieters was playing on the wing? You’d expect a winger to get a few more assists than a fullback.

[Falcon]

I think Charlie causes more panic amongst opposition defenders, and I'm far more excited to see Taylor running at defenders at pace than Pieters's style. I remember the first time I saw him play (think it was a league cup game at Blackburn) and Charlie had a dribble the full length of the pitch culminating in a dangerous cross and I thought 'I really like this guy'. He's a player to get you on your feet, like McNeil and JBG, he has a bit of magic.

[SouthLondonexile]

To be fair I have seen Taylor put plenty of excellent crosses in, but we don't always get on the end of them. Defensively Taylor is head and shoulders above Pieters IMO.

Pieters has done a job for us, without doubt, and is a great back-up.

Frankly I think this shouldn’t be a debate of either or for selection. For me they both get selected. With Brady out - poor fellow - and it seems Gudmunsen, we need both Taylor and Peiters.

[Spike]

Taylor is more athletic and better at just about every aspect of the game than Pieters
Eric has been a great back up this season