If we'd signed Sturridge in the Summer, where would we be now?

 A thread which does what it says on the tin really. I think most everyone would probably think we'd be better off points wise than we are now (I know I do) and obviously it is absolutely impossible to know for absolutely sure, but what are peoples impressions of where we would have been?

 Me? I think we'd be up and around Spurs as of now, not challenging for the title or anything but banfg in it for 3rd/4th. Just as a footnote, the temptation is of course to blame Ian Ayre for not signing him, and it may well be justified. That said, I've seen many posters already being big enough to admit they were wrong on Sturridge, and I think to a lesser or greater extent it applies to just about everyone. I actually wonder if even Brendan has been a little surprised at his impact, and if he isn't then he's probably kicking himself for not signing him instead of Borini or Allen.

 Anyways, what do you think?   

It's easy to say we would be higher up the League having seen the impact he's had since he arrived but it's just as easy to say we wouldn't mate.

He possibly wouldn't have been so keen/determined to make an impact, after all he was still fighting for his place at Chelsea in the summer.  He's also been injured quite a lot missing Club and International games throughout August/September and again during November.  He was also diagnosed with viral meningitus in July, nearly missing out on representing Team GB at the Olympics.

We got him at the right time and for the right money.

Obviously, it is very hard to say. I think since Daniel came in, he has impressed. I never saw him as a player who would score a lot of goals. He has 4 goals in 6 games. If we consider that we have played 25 league games, is that goal to game ratio was so accurate, we would have an extra 16 goals. That would have us having scored 60 goals, levels with United in goals for. That's not to say we would be up with the Mancs at the top. We have an issue where we concede some stupid goals, just like the goal against City yesterday. It is clear that if the ball is with our striker on the opposite side, we are less likely conceded. Mistakes were made and we can't keep looking back on it.

I think Sturridge was second to Dempsey if I'm not mistaken. Once the Dempsey deal collapsed, we rushed to try and bring Danny in on loan. So for me, if we had gotten Dempsey in the summer, we might not have gotten Sturridge in the winter.

I think the short term effect would be about the same, except Dempsey would play LWF or AM with Luis remaining striker, as opposed to Suarez moving for Sturridge. Long term though, Sturridge looks a fantastic purchase.

A thread which does what it says on the tin really. I think most everyone would probably think we'd be better off points wise than we are now (I know I do) and obviously it is absolutely impossible to know for absolutely sure, but what are peoples impressions of where we would have been?

 Me? I think we'd be up and around Spurs as of now, not challenging for the title or anything but banfg in it for 3rd/4th. Just as a footnote, the temptation is of course to blame Ian Ayre for not signing him, and it may well be justified. That said, I've seen many posters already being big enough to admit they were wrong on Sturridge, and I think to a lesser or greater extent it applies to just about everyone. I actually wonder if even Brendan has been a little surprised at his impact, and if he isn't then he's probably kicking himself for not signing him instead of Borini or Allen.

 Anyways, what do you think?   

I think you're right.
We could be up with Spurs right now.

So small have been the margins in games where we have dropped points that Sturridge could easily have made the difference.
In another alternate reality he could also have picked up an injury like Borini and have been out until January.

As it stands though we have three fresh legs in the shape of Sturridge, Coutinho & Borini to help Suarez up front.

Now that I'm looking forward to.


If we can apply positivity to our dealings in January then we could also look at:
A misfiring Jelavic for Everton.
An injured Defoe for Spurs.

In the context of that thank F**k Suarez stayed injury free.
Yes would could be much closer if Sturridge had been signed in the summer and Borini had not been injured,
but we are heading into the business end of the season with some serious firepower up front compared to those above us.

Just been conversing with Stuey in another thread on this Mick.
Its going to be a hard one to prove and work out but if we run the CL close  it could have been a false economy.
Save a dollar and miss the CL.

Here's another question. Given the cost, 12 million for Sturridge & 8.5 million for Coutinho,
Would people have taken Sturridge in the summer for 18 million over the signings in January?

Here's another question. Given the cost, 12 million for Sturridge & 8.5 million for Coutinho,
Would people have taken Sturridge in the summer for 18 million over the signings in January?

 I think it's a fair question mate, and I go back to the point I made in the opener. I've accepted that although I thought Sturridge was a good player I didn't realise he was anywhere near as good as he is, and most have kind of said the same thing. Equally, the much discussed (by me usually) "attitude problem" is nowhere to be seen. I've a hunch though that he has even surprised the manager. His form right now, not just in terms of goals but in terms of his all round play would suggest 18 mill is far closer to his true value than 12, and if Brendan had known he was quite that good he would have pulled out all the stops to get him. I know for instance that each time he plays for us all the Chelsea fans cannot believe it's the same player they were glad to get rid of, it seems he has surprised everyone with the possible exception of himself 

I think it's a fair question mate, and I go back to the point I made in the opener. I've accepted that although I thought Sturridge was a good player I didn't realise he was anywhere near as good as he is, and most have kind of said the same thing. Equally, the much discussed (by me usually) "attitude problem" is nowhere to be seen. I've a hunch though that he has even surprised the manager. His form right now, not just in terms of goals but in terms of his all round play would suggest 18 mill is far closer to his true value than 12, and if Brendan had known he was quite that good he would have pulled out all the stops to get him. I know for instance that each time he plays for us all the Chelsea fans cannot believe it's the same player they were glad to get rid of, it seems he has surprised everyone with the possible exception of himself 

When it comes down to it I'm just glad to have him now.
I remember a few shouts for him to be part of the Torres deal based on his performances at Bolton,
but how often do good players crumble when they come to Liverpool?

It's been the opposite for Sturridge. Looks to have been the making of him.

To the original question, I think 5th place, possibly 4th. I still don't think our midfield is good enough to and we need cover at left back.

Here's another question. Given the cost, 12 million for Sturridge & 8.5 million for Coutinho,
Would people have taken Sturridge in the summer for 18 million over the signings in January?

Too early to say. He's had 4 games and scored in 3. Brilliant. Neither use nor ornament if those three games are the only three games between now and the end of the season.

To the original question, I think 5th place, possibly 4th. I still don't think our midfield is good enough to and we need cover at left back.

Too early to say. He's had 4 games and scored in 3. Brilliant. Neither use nor ornament if those three games are the only three games between now and the end of the season.

You've lost me.
You reckon Sturridge would see us in 4th or 5th if we signed him, having made that estimation based on 3 goals in 4 games,
yet write them off when I pose the question above.

I think there is every chance we would be better off should we have signed him in the summer and he played as he has for us so far.

I don't think an extra 6/8 points would have been out of the question which would have us right in the mix for 4th and even 3rd.

Here's another question. Given the cost, 12 million for Sturridge & 8.5 million for Coutinho,
Would people have taken Sturridge in the summer for 18 million over the signings in January?

With the benefit of hindsight racer I'd pay the money and have got Daniel in the summer even if it meant no one coming in now.

Could have been in double figures, or he could have torn his ACL in the second match of the season.

One of them were we will never no.. Is tempting to think about though.

You've lost me.
You reckon Sturridge would see us in 4th or 5th if we signed him, having made that estimation based on 3 goals in 4 games,
yet write them off when I pose the question above.

No, I was answering two different questions. I have said for a while now that another striker was only one piece of the puzzle for Liverpool, therefore given the absence of true Left back cover, Johnson being sh*te on the left and Enrique's injury, Allen's dramatic dip in form, and Henderson's and Downing's performances over the first half of the season, I still don't think we would have been good enough to compete any higher than 4th place. Afterall, scoring goals hasn't been our problem this season, not conceding them has.

Now the second question is whether or not I think Sturridge is worth £18 million. As I said, three games does not maketh the Kop legend so it is far too early to answer that question. By the end of the season we'll know.

Does that clarify it for you?

No, I was answering two different questions. I have said for a while now that another striker was only one piece of the puzzle for Liverpool, therefore given the absence of true Left back cover, Johnson being sh*te on the left

I'm not sure if I've picked you up wrong but Glen has been anything but sh*te at LB.

In fact even when he has played there he has been one of our best players on the pitch.

No, I was answering two different questions. I have said for a while now that another striker was only one piece of the puzzle for Liverpool, therefore given the absence of true Left back cover, Johnson being sh*te on the left and Enrique's injury, Allen's dramatic dip in form, and Henderson's and Downing's performances over the first half of the season, I still don't think we would have been good enough to compete any higher than 4th place. Afterall, scoring goals hasn't been our problem this season, not conceding them has.

Now the second question is whether or not I think Sturridge is worth £18 million. As I said, three games does not maketh the Kop legend so it is far too early to answer that question. By the end of the season we'll know.

Does that clarify it for you?

Nah.
You lost me again when you said Johnson was sh*te on the left.

We'll leave it though as it's not got much to do with the OP.

I think any decent striker would have improved us. It was clear to me that we were struggling with only Suarez and that he needed help if we were to progress.

Sadly before his arrival I thought of Sturridge as a "poor mans" Darren Bent (and I don't really rate Bent!). Obviously I have been delighted with his goal return and all round play since his arrival. I still have doubts about his chances to goals ratio, but at the moment I couldn't be happier.

I think if we had signed a decent striker in the summer (not necessarily Sturridge) we would be around Spurs points return and really in the mix for CL. Maybe looking back we should have brought in an established striker in the summer rather than Borini. Although Borini still has time to shine, I don't think he looks the type to strike up a partnership with Suarez in the way that Sturridge has so far.

If he played like this from August we'd easily be in the top four. We'd be right up there with Chelsea in 3rd.

But we don't know if these 4 league games have just been a run of good form, will be easier to tell in the summer.

Would have been a great signing in summer for sure.

I'm not sure if I've picked you up wrong but Glen has been anything but sh*te at LB.

In fact even when he has played there he has been one of our best players on the pitch.

Nah.
You lost me again when you said Johnson was sh*te on the left.

We'll leave it though as it's not got much to do with the OP.

We'll have to agree to disagree then because in my opinion, on the whole he's been one of our weak links and cost us two matches (City (August) and Arsenal) due to loosing his marker. Sure he can run and bang a ball in as good at left back as right back but his defending at left back is what I call in to question.

He'd probably have added another 6 to 9 goals in the league which would probably added from 5 to maybe 10 points

Add those points to our current points tally and you have 41 to 46 points. 46 would have us level in 3rd with Chelsea

If he makes the difference from here on in, and we get 4th, who gives a F**k. If we miss out by 2 or 3 points, we'll be forever asking ourselves, " could he have been the difference"  and if the answer to that is YES. then we will most certainly make it next season, plus some, if we can keep the senior members of the squad here that is.

I definitely think we would have been higher up, and to look at it another way with the benefit of hindsight, I wish we'd have signed Sturridge in the Summer and brought in another good defender during this window. Our defense seems to be losing us games, not our lack of goals.