[Link] Gary Hooper return

Aye, it is fairly conclusive, Hooper's far more clinical.

 

Do you think Hooper started all they games as well like? It was you that claimed Griffiths had a better goals to games ratio than Hooper, all I done was prove that wrong. It's you that is making false claims, not me. It's a fairer way at comparing them, to base it on their time with us, as they were both playing at the same level then, and in that time, Hooper's goals to games ratio was better than Griffiths.

 

Facts are facts they don't lie Griffiths has a better goals to game ratio. That's all there is to it.

 

So Griffiths has had more shots already, and played 72 games less. Not as clinical, and makes the wrong choice too often as well then.

 

one of the best finishes i have ever seen. Was like a long golf putt , the curve on the ball was extraordinary . His goal in the last ever game against oldco was another special moment , one of the cleanest strikes of a football you are likley to see.

 

Not in a Celtic jersey though eh. When it's being compared on a level playing field.

 

More clinical?

See post below.

 

He can't shoot though mate, haven't you heard :smiley-laughing002:

 

Should put an end to the argument & straw grasping, I
didn't realise Hooper was that prolific.
Those stats are fantastic, not for thumb obviously.

 

Do you not get the meaning of what being a clinical striker is? Or are you at the wind up. I'm starting to think it must be the latter, as nobody can surely be as daft.

 

Not gonna happen

 

Right fantastic but let me put forward my own little scenario...

Izzy fires a low cross into the box, the striker only has time to control it quickly then fire a shot away. If it's between Hooper and Griffiths, I'd back Hooper to finish that chance. Griffiths probably wouldn't be able to control it.

 

So 0.24 goals per shot for Griffiths
And 0.70 goals per shot for Hooper.

Nope, not having that - sure it's a factor but you can't automatically assume that Griffiths has 3 times many shots as Hooper every game.

That stat added with the goals:game ratio for Celtic clearly shows Hooper was a better Goalscorer/finisher.

 

Heading out lads, I'll finish up way saying.

There a reason Norwich keep Hooper firmly on the bench. Because he can't handle the the top division like the EPL. Failure.

Griffiths has better goal to game ratio than Hooper.

There a reason why Norwich want to swap EPL failure Hooper for Leigh Griffiths. Because there no daft.... He's better and Hooper is on his road out

 

That's not really fair.

Griffiths hasn't had a shot at the EPL so how do you know he would cope?

I suppose in a way it's good that your defending a current celtic player as opposed to an ex one but I can only agree to disagree with your assessment

 

Hooper was their top scorer.

League 1 Wolves were quick enough to sell Griffiths when we bid for him.

 

Let's be honest, Griffiths would be extremely lucky to get a move to the EPL. He'd be lost in that league.

 

I question those stats. I wonder what the shot criteria is.
I wish opta had all the stats the clubs use available to the public.

 

It's beside the point anyway, who would you rather have, Scepovic, Ciftci or Hooper?

 

Keep your deviant thoughts to yourself, Sonny