Mason Mount

[YorkshireBlue 3,122]

I don't get the hate, I really don't, this lad lives and breathes Chelsea, Chelsea player of the year what? 2 years on the trot? Stick he got under lampard was disgusting. I for one want more players like mount here alot more!!

[Blue Armour 4,278]

I was against him going off today, but I suppose even an engine like his needs rest, given the number of games he's started lately, in quick succession.

Hope he's fresh for the United game.

 

 

[Reddish-Blue 2,345]

22 hours ago, YorkshireBlue said:

I don't get the hate, I really don't, this lad lives and breathes Chelsea, Chelsea player of the year what? 2 years on the trot? Stick he got under lampard was disgusting. I for one want more players like mount here alot more!!

Probably more the fact that alot of the media dubbed him as the next Lampard and you know as soon as Lampard's name is put in any conversation, all people want to see is goals, goals and more goals.   Pretty crazy to think that we actually had a midfielder who could score 20 goals a season for us, was almost like a cheat code, him in midfield, Terry, Cole & Cech at the back.  

Also, he didn't have the best part to the season, but again that could be said for every player in that horrid start we had under Tuchel...

[King Kante 1,474]

2 hours ago, Reddish-Blue said:

Probably more the fact that alot of the media dubbed him as the next Lampard and you know as soon as Lampard's name is put in any conversation, all people want to see is goals, goals and more goals.   Pretty crazy to think that we actually had a midfielder who could score 20 goals a season for us, was almost like a cheat code, him in midfield, Terry, Cole & Cech at the back.  

Also, he didn't have the best part to the season, but again that could be said for every player in that horrid start we had under Tuchel...

Well this also makes no sense if people are going off stats; 

Mount

3rd year: 

53 games - 3782 minutes - 13 goals - 16 assists - goal involvement every (GI) 130 mins

2nd year: 

54 games - 4242 minutes - 9 goals - 9 assets- GI every 235 minutes 

1st year: 

53 games - 3741 mins - 8 goals - 6 assists - GI every 267 minutes 

 

SFL

3rd year:

58 games - 5041 mins - 15 goals - 6 assists - GI every 240 mins

2nd year:

48 games - 4127 mins - 8 goals - 5 assists - GI every 317 mins

1st year:

53 games - 4483 mins - 7 goals - 2 assists - GI every 489 mins 

 

So, every season Mount has been here is has significantly outperformed SFL in terms of year for year (their first three years) stats. In addition, SFL started to take pens in the latter part of his third season whereas Mount I think has only had the peno against Norwich last year. Certainly from the 4th season SFL became the no.1 penalty taker, so that will need to be considered moving forward. 

Furthemore, Mount is 2.5 years younger than SFL was when he came into the team, so SFL was already more developed and had more experience of the PL from West Ham. Additionally, Mount has had to also adapt to playing in the CL straight away whereas SFL didn't do this until the latter part of his mid-20's (he only started playing CL in his 4th season here.)

For me, the SFL comparisons are a good one, but not in terms of stats and contribution as the stats and the eye test show he is performing better overall than SFL was in his first three seasons. People also forget that a lot of people where complaining that SFL at Chelsea was overpriced and overrated until Jose rocked up. 

The real comparison here is how football fans in England don't particularly like educated players who come from what the deem middle class backgrounds. This was seen with SFL and the supposed 'nepotism' he recieved from Ol' Arry and his Dad at West Ham; and the comments about how he attended a private school and had a Latin GCSE. Another example of this is Bamford who has had difficulties with fans and coaches because he is quite middle class (probably more so than both SFL and Mount.) 

Edited October 20, 2022 by King Kante

[Superblue 6,370]

31 minutes ago, King Kante said:

Well this also makes no sense if people are going off stats; 

Mount

3rd year: 

53 games - 3782 minutes - 13 goals - 16 assists - goal involvement every (GI) 130 mins

2nd year: 

54 games - 4242 minutes - 9 goals - 9 assets- GI every 235 minutes 

1st year: 

53 games - 3741 mins - 8 goals - 6 assists - GI every 267 minutes 

 

SFL

3rd year:

58 games - 5041 mins - 15 goals - 6 assists - GI every 240 mins

2nd year:

48 games - 4127 mins - 8 goals - 5 assists - GI every 317 mins

1st year:

53 games - 4483 mins - 7 goals - 2 assists - GI every 489 mins 

 

So, every season Mount has been here is has significantly outperformed SFL in terms of year for year (there first three years) stats. In addition, SFL started to take pens in the latter part of his third season whereas Mount I think has only had the peno against Norwich last year. Certainly from the 4th season SFL became the no.1 penalty taker, so that will need to be considered moving forward. 

In addition to this, Mount is also 2.5 years younger than SFL was when he came into the team, so SFL was already more developed and had more experience of the PL from West Ham. In addition, Mount has had to also adapt to playing in the CL straight away whereas SFL didn't do this until the latter part of his mid-20's (he only started playing CL in his 4th season here.)

For me, the SFL comparisons are a good one, but not in terms of stats and contribution as the stats and the eye test show he is performing better overall than SFL was in his first three seasons. People also forget that a lot of people where complaining that SFL at Chelsea was overpriced and overrated until Jose rocked up. 

The real comparison here is how football fans in England don't particularly like educated players who come from what the deem middle class backgrounds. This was seen with SFL and the supposed 'nepotism' he recieved from Ol' Arry and his Dad at West Ham; and the comments about how he attended a private school and had a Latin GCSE. Another example of this is Bamford who has had difficulties with fans and coaches because he is quite middle class (probably more so than both SFL and Mount.) 

I think before last nights game there was a stat flying around that Mount and Lampard had the same number of goals from the same number of games up to this point in their Chelsea careers.

I think it's difficult to truly assess both when they don't even really play the same position. Mount plays in a naturally more advanced and higher position than Lampard, but I think that deeper position suited Lampard anyway. When Carlo first came in, I'm pretty sure he tried Lampard a few games at the tip of a diamond and it didn't work. He perfected the knack of being able to run late into the box unmarked.

Rather than compare Mount to one of, if not, the best players that ever played for this football club, I'd rather just focus on continuing to see natural progression in Mount - his all-round game, his influence, and ultimately his raw stats of goals and assists. He's definitely a stronger, more durable, more confident player to the boy that was thrown into the team 3 years ago. And as you've shown above, his goal output is improving year on year whilst also being able to maintain a high number of games and minutes in a position that is usually easier and heavier to rotate players.

We're lucky to have him and hopefully like Reece, he commits his long-term future to the club very soon.

[Vesper 28,772]

On 04/07/2022 at 16:43, Magic Lamps said:

I first thought this would be a some kind of deep fake mix with Kyle Walkers face lol

 

Seriously, this is just the angle, pose and lighting of the photo. He will still looks skinny in person.

[Special Juan 27,424]

If we buying Nkunku this guy will really struggle to get in.

[MoroccanBlue 5,296]

1 hour ago, Special Juan said:

If we buying Nkunku this guy will really struggle to get in.

Not if Potter does what we all expect and play Nkunku out wide isolated just so that he can shoe horn Mount in. 

[robsblubot 3,502]

What you guys at? 😅
Mount is about to sign a huge contract and will remain the centre of the team for years to come. Don't worry -- he will play.

Sometimes I forget Mount is only 23. I for one am excited to see how he improves and becomes a better player.

[Blue Armour 4,278]

Has rejected the offer of 200k a week apparently., according to the mail.

Seeking parity with Sterling at 300k a week supposedly.

Reece is on 250k a week.

[Henrique 9,133]

Words cant describe how average and boring to watch Mason Mount is. 

[chelsea_4_eva 1,157]

If it is true that he wants somewhere near 300k when Reece is on 250k... wow. Now think, which one is easier to replace...

[Reddish-Blue 2,345]

8 hours ago, Blue Armour said:

Has rejected the offer of 200k a week apparently., according to the mail.

Seeking parity with Sterling at 300k a week supposedly.

Reece is on 250k a week.

Let's put it this way, no other top club would be offering Mount anywhere near 200k a week. 

We really are becoming a mid table side by overpaying average talent...

[OhForAGreavsie 5,890]

On 17/11/2022 at 22:27, robsblubot said:

What you guys at? 😅
Mount is about to sign a huge contract and will remain the centre of the team for years to come. Don't worry -- he will play.

Sometimes I forget Mount is only 23. I for one am excited to see how he improves and becomes a better player.

My favourite old chestnut again. In terms of their basic talent level, 23-year-olds don't improve. While we remain a side struggling to reach a higher level, Mason will remain an important player for us. If we reach that level Mason will no longer be a key player, but he may find a niche roll in what would then be a much better squad.

Edited November 26, 2022 by OhForAGreavsie

[OhForAGreavsie 5,890]

On 07/09/2022 at 08:55, Jype said:

or uninterested

Thank you!!! If you ever spot me in a pub, come claim a free drink.

The whole world has forgotten the word uninterested because they think disinterested means the same thing and makes them sound cleverer. Well originally disinterested did not mean uninterested. These days however, after being so widely misused, for so long, it has to be accepted that it does mean uninterested. Indeed, dictionaries now give both its original meaning and the uninterested definition when you look up the word disinterested.

Still hurts my head though when people say disinterested, when what they really mean is uninterested. I wonder how many of those people know what disinterested really means?

Edited November 26, 2022 by OhForAGreavsie

[OhForAGreavsie 5,890]

On 07/09/2022 at 08:55, Jype said:

Either way it would do him good to sit out for a few games and sort out his head, though if the alternatives are Pulisic and Ziyech then I don't fucking know anymore.

And you've put your finger on our problem. Mase is an important player for us because our squad is what it is. If we ever build a squad capable of challenging for the title again, Mason's role, and importance, will change. I've previously used the phrase that I don't think we can be good without Mase, but that I don't believe we can be great with him. When Mason starts, we see the shortcomings and find them frustrating. When he doesn't, the current squad has no better alternatives and we see why he has to start. 

A better squad won't need Mase to start but, when he does, it will show off what he can do better than the current one does.

Edited November 26, 2022 by OhForAGreavsie

[OhForAGreavsie 5,890]

On 18/10/2022 at 17:18, King Kante said:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/football/mason-mount-doubters-a-puzzle-to-Chelsea-boss-graham-potter/ar-AA135JS6

And yet there are still people who fail to realise how good Mount is and want to slag him off as soon as he goes a few games without a goal or assist. 

I have to admit that I am a Mason doubter but, for me, it's not about goal count or assist count. It's about opportunity conversion. In my opinion he too often nearly gets it right rather than actually gets it right. How many times have we seen Mason's grimace of frustration when he hasn't quite pulled off whatever it is he just tried to do? Frequently accompanied by a hands to face gesture. No one gets it right 100% of the time. No one even gets it right 75% of the time but based on my own impression when watching Mason, he does not get it right often enough.

[Fulham Broadway 16,832]

53 minutes ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

I have to admit that I am a Mason doubter but, for me, it's not about goal count or assist count. It's about opportunity conversion. In my opinion he too often nearly gets it right rather than actually gets it right. How many times have we seen Mason's grimace of frustration when he hasn't quite pulled off whatever it is he just tried to do? Frequently accompanied by a hands to face gesture. No one gets it right 100% of the time. No one even gets it right 75% of the time but based on my own impression when watching Mason, he does not get it right often enough.

Shooting practice required. One to one coaching from Zola (the original stay behind after training player until it was perfect player) wouldn't put much of a dent in his wages. Gianfranco would probably do it for free !