++Charlie Kelman signs on a 4 year deal++

cafc_se7

Zulu said:

fenaddick said:

Zulu said:

RonnieMoore said:

Zulu said:

I dont rate him - L1 level at best.

So you dont rate a goalscorer … ???????

AI tells me ...'During the 2025–26 season with Charlton Athletic, he has made 30 total appearances and scored 6 goals. '
Is that what you call a goalscorer?

Well he’s made 28 league appearances and 31 in total so that’s a good start. 

He’s in the top 27% of Championship forwards for goals per 90 and has 4 non penalty goals from an xG of 2.65. That suggests he’s a goal scorer if given the chances 

So, (forgive my ignorance) does that mean, (let’s say there are 100 champs forwards for ease), he's 27th in list ? 

Would be interested to know where Stansfield sits within these stats @Zulu bearing in mind he cost £16 million more.

MarcusH26

LargeAddick said:

Zulu said:

RonnieMoore said:

Zulu said:

I dont rate him - L1 level at best.

So you dont rate a goalscorer … ???????

AI tells me ...'During the 2025–26 season with Charlton Athletic, he has made 30 total appearances and scored 6 goals. ' (and weren't 2 of those pens?)

Is that what you call a goalscorer?

In how many minutes on the pitch though? Some of those 30 appearances are as a sub. And his stats per minute on the pitch are better than Kone (5m) and Idah (Swansea, 6+ m). I don’t know exactly what you expected for 3.5m but if you expected a 20 goal a season striker then even 20m wouldn’t have guaranteed you that. Factor in he didn’t have a proper pre season, factor in the fact he was out a while with an injury and I’m happy with what he’s done so far. There is more to come. A full pre season and with the experience of this season behind him I’m sure he’ll do very well next season.

Absolutely agree with you! £3.5m might have been a lot of money to us where we haven't spent that kind of money for years but it's comparatively peanuts for this level in terms of striker fees at this level. 

With a good preseason , better service and a settled strike partner I'm pretty optimistic about what he can do next season. 

fenaddick

cafc_se7 said:

Zulu said:

fenaddick said:

Zulu said:

RonnieMoore said:

Zulu said:

I dont rate him - L1 level at best.

So you dont rate a goalscorer … ???????

AI tells me ...'During the 2025–26 season with Charlton Athletic, he has made 30 total appearances and scored 6 goals. '
Is that what you call a goalscorer?

Well he’s made 28 league appearances and 31 in total so that’s a good start. 

He’s in the top 27% of Championship forwards for goals per 90 and has 4 non penalty goals from an xG of 2.65. That suggests he’s a goal scorer if given the chances 

So, (forgive my ignorance) does that mean, (let’s say there are 100 champs forwards for ease), he's 27th in list ? 

Would be interested to know where Stansfield sits within these stats @Zulu bearing in mind he cost £16 million more.

77th percentile 

Crispywood

fenaddick said:

killerandflash said:

LargeAddick said:

Zulu said:

RonnieMoore said:

Zulu said:

I dont rate him - L1 level at best.

So you dont rate a goalscorer … ???????

AI tells me ...'During the 2025–26 season with Charlton Athletic, he has made 30 total appearances and scored 6 goals. ' (and weren't 2 of those pens?)

Is that what you call a goalscorer?

In how many minutes on the pitch though? Some of those 30 appearances are as a sub. And his stats per minute on the pitch are better than Kone (5m) and Idah (Swansea, 6+ m). I don’t know exactly what you expected for 3.5m but if you expected a 20 goal a season striker then even 20m wouldn’t have guaranteed you that. Factor in he didn’t have a proper pre season, factor in the fact he was out a while with an injury and I’m happy with what he’s done so far. There is more to come. A full pre season and with the experience of this season behind him I’m sure he’ll do very well next season.

But why has been sub so often? If NJ was happy with him, he'd have started a lot more matches than he has.

Kelman has been ok, but as our biggest money signing last summer,  it's perfectly reasonable to have expected more. 4 open play goals is pretty underwhelming,  when he offers less than Dykes and Miles as an attacking focal point.

Kelman himself addressed this, he often starts on the bench because TC brings something different in his gameplay. Now you might question why that might be any different next season but if we’re playing on the floor more TC’s ability to stretch defences becomes a bit less important and might not require a big man next to him. TC and Godden worked in L1, I think if we got everything else right a similar pairing could work in the Championship too. It would require real attacking involvement from the wingbacks and midfield though 

Middlesborough, Brum, Stoke, Oxford and Leicester are the only teams at this level who don’t utilise a forward who can hold the ball up and arguably their attacks -Leicester (because James and fatuwu are jokes) are their weakest areas. If we do play Kelman I’d argue it has to be with a target man.

If you look at his 6 goals all of them have come with Leaburn (5) and Dykes (1) been on the pitch. 

LittleAddick

Poor bloke had TC as his strike partner for his first 12 or so games, was hardly going to be setting the league alight.

stoneroses19

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Crispywood

stoneroses19 said:

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Because end of the day statistically you have 80% chance of scoring a pen any player or even a fan should score one. Say you give Leaburn both those pens suddenly there’s only 1 goal between the pair. It’s also an isolated moment even with taps in you can argue there’s an element of positioning/runs etc which pens don’t account for. 

Yes there are definitely better penalty takers than others and Kelman is one of the better ones but that shouldn’t be used as a justification for a good striker. Otherwise you can argue well Ederson was one of city’s best pen takers so he’s a quality forward

Addick Addict

Crispywood said:

stoneroses19 said:

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Because end of the day statistically you have 80% chance of scoring a pen any player or even a fan should score one. Say you give Leaburn both those pens suddenly there’s only 1 goal between the pair. It’s also an isolated moment even with taps in you can argue there’s an element of positioning/runs etc which pens don’t account for. 

Yes there are definitely better penalty takers than others and Kelman is one of the better ones but that shouldn’t be used as a justification for a good striker. Otherwise you can argue well Ederson was one of city’s best pen takers so he’s a quality forward

Michael Owen was one of the most instinctive strikers we ever had. His record of missing 7 out of 21 in the PL proves that he wasn't so good when he had time to think about where to put the ball. 

Crispywood

Addick Addict said:

Crispywood said:

stoneroses19 said:

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Because end of the day statistically you have 80% chance of scoring a pen any player or even a fan should score one. Say you give Leaburn both those pens suddenly there’s only 1 goal between the pair. It’s also an isolated moment even with taps in you can argue there’s an element of positioning/runs etc which pens don’t account for. 

Yes there are definitely better penalty takers than others and Kelman is one of the better ones but that shouldn’t be used as a justification for a good striker. Otherwise you can argue well Ederson was one of city’s best pen takers so he’s a quality forward

Michael Owen was one of the most instinctive strikers we ever had. His record of missing 7 out of 21 in the PL proves that he wasn't so good when he had time to think about where to put the ball. 

End of the day you have 10 other players on the pitch you can bank on one of them being able to bury a pen. What I’ll judge Kelman on are things a midfielder or defender can’t do which is specific for his role such as his pressing + runs his attacking positioning, linking play, goal scoring etc 

Addick Addict

Crispywood said:

Addick Addict said:

Crispywood said:

stoneroses19 said:

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Because end of the day statistically you have 80% chance of scoring a pen any player or even a fan should score one. Say you give Leaburn both those pens suddenly there’s only 1 goal between the pair. It’s also an isolated moment even with taps in you can argue there’s an element of positioning/runs etc which pens don’t account for. 

Yes there are definitely better penalty takers than others and Kelman is one of the better ones but that shouldn’t be used as a justification for a good striker. Otherwise you can argue well Ederson was one of city’s best pen takers so he’s a quality forward

Michael Owen was one of the most instinctive strikers we ever had. His record of missing 7 out of 21 in the PL proves that he wasn't so good when he had time to think about where to put the ball. 

End of the day you have 10 other players on the pitch you can bank on one of them being able to bury a pen. What I’ll judge Kelman on are things a midfielder or defender can’t do which is specific for his role such as his pressing + runs his attacking positioning, linking play, goal scoring etc 

Not disagreeing that Kelman does need to improve some aspects of his game but the scorers of goals really are priceless. As for banking on one of the other 10 players to convert a penalty, our only other taker this season, Docherty, missed. 

Crispywood

Addick Addict said:

Crispywood said:

Addick Addict said:

Crispywood said:

stoneroses19 said:

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Because end of the day statistically you have 80% chance of scoring a pen any player or even a fan should score one. Say you give Leaburn both those pens suddenly there’s only 1 goal between the pair. It’s also an isolated moment even with taps in you can argue there’s an element of positioning/runs etc which pens don’t account for. 

Yes there are definitely better penalty takers than others and Kelman is one of the better ones but that shouldn’t be used as a justification for a good striker. Otherwise you can argue well Ederson was one of city’s best pen takers so he’s a quality forward

Michael Owen was one of the most instinctive strikers we ever had. His record of missing 7 out of 21 in the PL proves that he wasn't so good when he had time to think about where to put the ball. 

End of the day you have 10 other players on the pitch you can bank on one of them being able to bury a pen. What I’ll judge Kelman on are things a midfielder or defender can’t do which is specific for his role such as his pressing + runs his attacking positioning, linking play, goal scoring etc 

Not disagreeing that Kelman doesn't improve on aspects of his game but the scorers of goals really are priceless. As for banking on one of the other 10 players to convert a penalty, our only other taker this season, Docherty, missed. 

God knows why Docherty was ever on pens I could name 7 players I would have wanted over him on that pitch to take it.

Garrymanilow

Crispywood said:

stoneroses19 said:

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Because end of the day statistically you have 80% chance of scoring a pen any player or even a fan should score one. Say you give Leaburn both those pens suddenly there’s only 1 goal between the pair. It’s also an isolated moment even with taps in you can argue there’s an element of positioning/runs etc which pens don’t account for. 

Yes there are definitely better penalty takers than others and Kelman is one of the better ones but that shouldn’t be used as a justification for a good striker. Otherwise you can argue well Ederson was one of city’s best pen takers so he’s a quality forward

Firstly, fucking lol.

Secondly, you can't just discount penalties as having any meaning for a goalscorer. Leaburn was on the pitch both times we got those penalties but he didn't take them, because Kelman is the best finisher at the club and was more likely to score them. We got a penalty against West Brom with Kelman injured and Leaburn on the pitch and Docherty took it and missed it, which means that Leaburn hasn't been good at penalties in training, somehow hasn't been as good as Doc at them in training or didn't fancy it, none of which indicates that he would have been the man to step up and take those penalties. Part of being a good striker is the ability to make the most of opportunities that come your way no matter how few they are and Kelman stepped up to win us a point in the 93rd minute after the keeper had tried every mind game he could pull out, all in a must not lose game against a relegation rival. Mentality is a huge part of penalty taking and a striker staying cool in the moment and getting the job done isn't just something you can shrug about and claim anyone could do.

Crispywood

Garrymanilow said:

Crispywood said:

stoneroses19 said:

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Because end of the day statistically you have 80% chance of scoring a pen any player or even a fan should score one. Say you give Leaburn both those pens suddenly there’s only 1 goal between the pair. It’s also an isolated moment even with taps in you can argue there’s an element of positioning/runs etc which pens don’t account for. 

Yes there are definitely better penalty takers than others and Kelman is one of the better ones but that shouldn’t be used as a justification for a good striker. Otherwise you can argue well Ederson was one of city’s best pen takers so he’s a quality forward

Firstly, fucking lol.

Secondly, you can't just discount penalties as having any meaning for a goalscorer. Leaburn was on the pitch both times we got those penalties but he didn't take them, because Kelman is the best finisher at the club and was more likely to score them. We got a penalty against West Brom with Kelman injured and Leaburn on the pitch and Docherty took it and missed it, which means that Leaburn hasn't been good at penalties in training, somehow hasn't been as good as Doc at them in training or didn't fancy it, none of which indicates that he would have been the man to step up and take those penalties. Part of being a good striker is the ability to make the most of opportunities that come your way no matter how few they are and Kelman stepped up to win us a point in the 93rd minute after the keeper had tried every mind game he could pull out, all in a must not lose game against a relegation rival. Mentality is a huge part of penalty taking and a striker staying cool in the moment and getting the job done isn't just something you can shrug about and claim anyone could do.

You can put it down the middle to the right or to the left if the keeper goes the wrong way it’s a goal which means if u get it on target and don’t have the kicking strength of a 5 year old that’s automatically a 66% chance of scoring. Yes Kelman is a brilliant pen taker and has the ability’s to score even if the keeper goes the right way which is a great attribute but that’s not what you pay 3M for.

Lavelle banged in a pen against Brighton doesn’t mean he’s a 3M forward 

 

Garrymanilow

Crispywood said:

Garrymanilow said:

Crispywood said:

stoneroses19 said:

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Because end of the day statistically you have 80% chance of scoring a pen any player or even a fan should score one. Say you give Leaburn both those pens suddenly there’s only 1 goal between the pair. It’s also an isolated moment even with taps in you can argue there’s an element of positioning/runs etc which pens don’t account for. 

Yes there are definitely better penalty takers than others and Kelman is one of the better ones but that shouldn’t be used as a justification for a good striker. Otherwise you can argue well Ederson was one of city’s best pen takers so he’s a quality forward

Firstly, fucking lol.

Secondly, you can't just discount penalties as having any meaning for a goalscorer. Leaburn was on the pitch both times we got those penalties but he didn't take them, because Kelman is the best finisher at the club and was more likely to score them. We got a penalty against West Brom with Kelman injured and Leaburn on the pitch and Docherty took it and missed it, which means that Leaburn hasn't been good at penalties in training, somehow hasn't been as good as Doc at them in training or didn't fancy it, none of which indicates that he would have been the man to step up and take those penalties. Part of being a good striker is the ability to make the most of opportunities that come your way no matter how few they are and Kelman stepped up to win us a point in the 93rd minute after the keeper had tried every mind game he could pull out, all in a must not lose game against a relegation rival. Mentality is a huge part of penalty taking and a striker staying cool in the moment and getting the job done isn't just something you can shrug about and claim anyone could do.

You can put it down the middle to the right or to the left if the keeper goes the wrong way it’s a goal which means if u get it on target and don’t have the kicking strength of a 5 year old that’s automatically a 66% chance of scoring. Yes Kelman is a brilliant pen taker and has the ability’s to score even if the keeper goes the right way which is a great attribute but that’s not what you pay 3M for.

Lavelle banged in a pen against Brighton doesn’t mean he’s a 3M forward 

You cannot possibly think that penalty taking is just as simple as that. It's a wonder that England ever had any problems at all over the years isn't it? If you remove the entire mental side from the game, the keeper existing at all and make up a statistic then yes, penalty taking is quite simple. None of that is real though, penalties are far more about mental strength than anything else, on top of the ability to strike the ball well. Harry Kane missed a penalty in the World Cup quarter final, which is weird because apparently a fan can score a penalty, does that mean he's not a world class striker? No, obviously not, making these over the top claims is just reductive. Of course we didn't pay £3m just for a penalty taker but then no-one has ever said that we did, what is being said though is that the ability to put away important chances under pressure is a big part of being an effective goalscoring player so just claiming that penalties don't count for anything at all on a striker's record is stupid. They're not indicative of the whole story but they matter and can be hugely significant in a season of small margins. 

It's only a few years ago Ronnie Schwarz missed an injury time penalty against Oxford and we ended up missing out on the Play-Offs to Oxford on goal difference. The following season Sandgaard completely lost willingness to fund the club in the amount needed and we dropped to record low finishes in L1 from there. Obviously it's not all Schwarz's fault but if we'd had a striker who had the capability to sink that penalty in a pressure environment it would have affected our season massively, as Kelman's penalties already have.

killerandflash

Crispywood said:

Addick Addict said:

Crispywood said:

Addick Addict said:

Crispywood said:

stoneroses19 said:

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Because end of the day statistically you have 80% chance of scoring a pen any player or even a fan should score one. Say you give Leaburn both those pens suddenly there’s only 1 goal between the pair. It’s also an isolated moment even with taps in you can argue there’s an element of positioning/runs etc which pens don’t account for. 

Yes there are definitely better penalty takers than others and Kelman is one of the better ones but that shouldn’t be used as a justification for a good striker. Otherwise you can argue well Ederson was one of city’s best pen takers so he’s a quality forward

Michael Owen was one of the most instinctive strikers we ever had. His record of missing 7 out of 21 in the PL proves that he wasn't so good when he had time to think about where to put the ball. 

End of the day you have 10 other players on the pitch you can bank on one of them being able to bury a pen. What I’ll judge Kelman on are things a midfielder or defender can’t do which is specific for his role such as his pressing + runs his attacking positioning, linking play, goal scoring etc 

Not disagreeing that Kelman doesn't improve on aspects of his game but the scorers of goals really are priceless. As for banking on one of the other 10 players to convert a penalty, our only other taker this season, Docherty, missed. 

God knows why Docherty was ever on pens I could name 7 players I would have wanted over him on that pitch to take it.

Carey and Gillesphey for a start. We've previously had non striker penalty takers, the likes of Mark Reid and Buyens spring to mind. 

Of course penalty taking is important,  but you don't pick someone just because their penalty taking record is good. And Kelman hasn't taken enough penalties yet to prove whether he's a REALLY good penalty takers like Buyens was. Or indeed Lyle Taylor. 

Addick Addict

killerandflash said:

Crispywood said:

Addick Addict said:

Crispywood said:

Addick Addict said:

Crispywood said:

stoneroses19 said:

Why do some fans focus so much on open-play goals / non-penalty goals? At end of the day, any goal can help us gain points. We are not gaining extra points from a game because Kelman scored from open play. 

Because end of the day statistically you have 80% chance of scoring a pen any player or even a fan should score one. Say you give Leaburn both those pens suddenly there’s only 1 goal between the pair. It’s also an isolated moment even with taps in you can argue there’s an element of positioning/runs etc which pens don’t account for. 

Yes there are definitely better penalty takers than others and Kelman is one of the better ones but that shouldn’t be used as a justification for a good striker. Otherwise you can argue well Ederson was one of city’s best pen takers so he’s a quality forward

Michael Owen was one of the most instinctive strikers we ever had. His record of missing 7 out of 21 in the PL proves that he wasn't so good when he had time to think about where to put the ball. 

End of the day you have 10 other players on the pitch you can bank on one of them being able to bury a pen. What I’ll judge Kelman on are things a midfielder or defender can’t do which is specific for his role such as his pressing + runs his attacking positioning, linking play, goal scoring etc 

Not disagreeing that Kelman doesn't improve on aspects of his game but the scorers of goals really are priceless. As for banking on one of the other 10 players to convert a penalty, our only other taker this season, Docherty, missed. 

God knows why Docherty was ever on pens I could name 7 players I would have wanted over him on that pitch to take it.

Carey and Gillesphey for a start. We've previously had non striker penalty takers, the likes of Mark Reid and Buyens spring to mind. 

Of course penalty taking is important,  but you don't pick someone just because their penalty taking record is good. And Kelman hasn't taken enough penalties yet to prove whether he's a REALLY good penalty takers like Buyens was. Or indeed Lyle Taylor. 

Carey and Gillesphey between them have made 565 appearances and taken just one which Carey converted. So at no time has either been considered by their teams as a regular taker. Kelman is 5/5. Leaburn has never taken one and Dykes' record isn't great with 10/14. Bob Curtis was a superb penalty taker and he was a full back in the main but he was proven at the job. 

Apart from Godden (who is 22/24 but hasn't played all season) and Kelman, I'm not sure that we have anyone else in the squad, in terms of permanently contracted players, who has taken more than the odd one. Some teams have any number who have done so in their career but we appear to be a club in the land of the blind in that respect. Docherty clearly wasn't the elected penalty taker for the West Brom game. There again, I'm not sure that we had one!