You’ll have to forgive me for thinking I was done with writing this sort of piece until at least January. The transfer window closed at the end of August, with Plymouth Argyle having made nine signings across the summer as well as hiring a new head coach in Wayne Rooney. Within two weeks of that window slamming shut, they made a tenth.
An emergency occurred when in-form goalkeeper Conor Hazard was ruled out for around three months with injury. He heroically galloped up field for a last-minute corner against Stoke City and…had his ankle broken. Dan Grimshaw was practically an oven-ready replacement for that number one spot, but without further reinforcements Argyle would be forced to have 19-year-old Zak Baker, who has yet to make a professional appearance, on the bench for a significant portion of the season.
The Pilgrims, therefore, decided to act. Having scoured the free agent market, they swiftly brought in Slovakian stopper Marko Marosi to bolster their ranks. Perhaps curiously for a third-choice, Marosi arrives as the most experienced goalkeeper at the club, having made more professional appearances (303) than both Hazard and Grimshaw combined (234).
If you read the piece upon Grimshaw’s announcement as an Argyle player, much of this one will be familiar. When assessing a goalkeeper, there are three main attributes to keep in mind: shot stopping, distribution and commanding the penalty area. We’ll assess Marosi for each, and end with a more general discussion about what his arrival means for the club.
Shot stopping
As I’ve mentioned before, I’ll always regard stopping the ball from entering the goal as a ‘keeper’s main responsibility. I’m willing to accept shouts that such an opinion makes me old-fashioned. Come at me.
When assessing Marosi’s shot stopping stats, I guess I’d describe them as a fairly non-committal “fine.” He hasn’t stunk the place out with his numbers, but I don’t think it can be realistically claim to have been one of the best shot stoppers in League One during his spell with Shrewsbury Town last season.
As an example, his save success rate last year came in at 65%. Bluntly, that’s below average. It’s a figure that was beaten by Grimshaw, Hazard and, predictably, Michael Cooper.
Our old friend post-shot xG can help provide some more context to the numbers. Here, Marosi’s rankings improve slightly, but still do not challenge any of the others on this particular list. Last season, he conceded 59 league goals facing a post-shot xG number of 55.56. That gives him a goals prevented figure of -3.44. Or, put that in terms of prevented rate, for every goal Marosi conceded the average goalkeeper would concede 0.4 goals.
As ever, I’m keen to emphasise that a quirk in this stat means that a slightly negative figure doesn’t necessarily mean it’s below average – that’s to do with own goals always counting as 0.00 post-shot xG against the goalkeeper. Marosi’s figure must therefore be assessed with that caveat in mind. Nonetheless, his prevented rate figure compares unfavourably to Grimshaw, Hazard and Cooper.
There are plenty of worse shot stoppers around than Marosi, but I wonder if his failure to hit the heights of others is what prevented him from getting the move he was looking for this summer. He could have remained at Shrewsbury, but turned down a new deal to seek a move elsewhere. He, or perhaps more realistically his agent, clearly thought his stock was high. I’d imagine benchwarming for Argyle wasn’t on his list of desires; had his shot stopping numbers been comfortably above average, I suspect he’d have a starting spot somewhere by now.
In this case, perhaps other clubs’ loss will be Argyle’s gain.
Distribution
I’ve found it particularly difficult to analyse Marosi’s distribution, at least when compared to Grimshaw’s last month. In the Slovak’s case, many of his numbers seem to reflect his team’s style of play, rather than Marosi’s own merits.
Let’s take his total pass success as an example. Last year that came to 46%, which is very low for a goalkeeper (particularly compared to Championship standards). However, most Championship goalkeepers are instructed to pass the ball out from goal kicks, whilst Shrewsbury’s agricultural style last season meant Marosi was often required to go long. He wasn’t able to build up his pass success with simple balls to his centre backs.
That’s reflected in his long passing stats. Across the last campaign, Marosi completed 8.33 long passes per 90 minutes. Comparatively, that’s a significant number for a goalkeeper – only four ‘keepers in the Championship last season completed more long passes per 90. It’s also very close to Grimshaw’s own figure of 8.93.
So, does that mean Marosi will have everything Argyle desire when it comes to long distribution? Well, not necessarily. Grimshaw built his figure up with quality, accurate long passing, whilst Marosi completed such a large number because of the amount he was asked to attempt. His long pass success figure of 32% is much more average when compared to Grimshaw’s excellent 39%.
32% isn’t awful, and I feel it’s worth mentioning that Marosi completed more long passes per 90 at a better success rate than both Hazard and Cooper last season. Still, those strike me as the hallmarks of an adequate-to-good distributor, not an exceptional one.
If Marosi ever does get onto the pitch, his distribution will be a voyage of discovery for us all. I think there is enough in his numbers to suggest he could be the sort of distributor Rooney desires, but plenty would have to fall in his favour. Undoubtedly though, three years at Shrewsbury means he won’t be overly familiar with such a style. Work on the training ground will therefore be vital.
Commanding the penalty area
As I mentioned in the Grimshaw piece, the idea of “command” can take a wide range of definitions. Some of those are easier to measure than others. For example, at this stage we can’t definitively say how Marosi will order his defence into shape. We’ll have to watch (and listen) for ourselves.
Admittedly, the initial signs are promising. As a 30-year-old, Marosi arrives at Home Park with more experience than any other goalkeeper on the books. And whilst age doesn’t necessarily mean authority, he’ll have surely developed a good level of know-how across his career in the EFL.
I’m also encouraged by Rooney’s words in Marosi’s announcement article, where he remarks that the Slovak “will challenge Daniel for the shirt but is also another seasoned professional for our crop of young goalkeepers to learn from as well.” To some, that may sound like bluster to fill a line in an unveiling piece, but it still isn’t the sort of thing you’d say about a shrinking violet who isn’t the best communicator.
One thing we can measure, however, is his command when dealing with crosses. And here, I’m pleased to say Marosi looks strong. In fact, I think you can make a reasonable argument that Marosi arrives at Home Park as the best ‘keeper at the club when it comes to dealing with balls into the area. Not at Cooper’s level, but very solid.
An obvious place to start is his high claims. Last season, Marosi made an average of 0.75 high claims per 90 minutes. Far from groundbreaking, but certainly above average, and enough to beat those he’ll be competing with at Argyle.
The same is also true with regards to punching the ball clear. Marosi made 0.49 punches per 90 last season, and it leads us to exactly the same ranking with Cooper well clear but Argyle’s new arrival ahead of both Hazard and Grimshaw.
A natural caveat to consider is that Shrewsbury finished 19th in League One last season, and are therefore likely to have been under pressure in many of their matches. Thus, they’d have faced a higher number of crosses than average, giving Marosi more opportunities to catch or punch them away. Of course though, that’s the case with Argyle too, so the comparison is still valid. If anything, Grimshaw suffers the most using this metric.
Familiarity between a goalkeeper and his defence is important, so I’m not suggesting rotation between the sticks is likely. It poses an interesting thought though – against physical teams who like to pepper the penalty area, do you throw Marosi in and trust him to deal with this specific threat? I don’t hate the idea.
The total picture
As with last time, I’ll add in a couple of graphics to demonstrate how the ‘keepers would have ranked last season if we put Marosi and Grimshaw’s numbers against the rest of the Championship. Given Marosi hasn’t come in to replace him directly, I won’t include a comparison with Cooper. But his charts with both Grimshaw and Hazard make for interesting viewing.
With Hazard’s injury, Grimshaw will be Marosi’s direct competition, so that’s where we’ll start. It tells the story you’d probably expect: Grimshaw has posted better numbers for shot stopping and distribution, with Marosi having the edge when dealing with crosses.
Meanwhile, I honestly believe there is enough evidence to suggest that Marosi is better with his distribution than Hazard, particularly long distribution. Again, he also has the edge when dealing with crosses, with Hazard showing signs he’s the better shot stopper.
When Cooper was initially sold, some suggested Argyle should make Marosi their number one target, with transfer fees saved to spend elsewhere in the squad. I’m not necessarily sure that would have been the best course of action – the charts above suggest Grimshaw is a better choice, and his performance in the dramatic 3-2 win over Sunderland adds credence to those numbers.
But as a backup, someone who can come in when necessary whilst providing sufficient competition, Marosi looks to be a shrewd pickup. He’s probably more suited to Rooney’s playing style than Hazard, and has skills in some areas that he can pass on to both ‘keepers. In isolation, his arrival makes a lot of sense.
Was this really necessary?
Well, we can see this question in two ways. Was it necessary for us to have taken precious time away from our lives to assess a player who may never play a single minute for Argyle? I’ll leave that question hanging, though appreciate that when asking “what to expect,” we could perhaps summarise the likelihood in two words: no minutes.
However, I want to eek out a few more words by considering whether the deal itself was necessary in any way. Would Argyle have been better off trusting Baker to sit on the bench, saving the wages spent on Marosi for what could be a crucial January transfer window? My gut feeling is yes.
The 2017/18 season, and a notable game away to Blackburn Rovers, provides an example. Admittedly, Argyle had three goalkeepers (Luke McCormick, Robbert te Loeke and Kyle Letheren) injured on that occasion, but the freak circumstances gave Cooper the chance to make his debut. Marosi has arrived in case Grimshaw experiences a similar setback, but if he did, wouldn’t it serve Baker well to be thrown into a league game at short notice? It certainly did Cooper no harm.
It's important to note that, in the event of a Grimshaw injury, Argyle wouldn’t have had to rely on Baker for a sustained period. Just as they did in 2017/18, they’d have been entitled to an emergency loan to cover whilst Hazard and Grimshaw were absent. Baker may be a professional by contract, but EFL regulations define a professional goalkeeper as someone “who has been named in the starting eleven on five or more occasions.” In these circumstances, Baker would have made a maximum of one appearance, and wouldn’t qualify.
Given Argyle’s elimination from the League Cup, they’ll only be playing league fixtures until January, by which time Hazard should have fully recovered from his injury. Grimshaw will therefore surely start every game provided he doesn’t pick up a similar injury setback. With that in mind, and considering Argyle could bring in an emergency loan if necessary, would it not have made financial sense to stick with what they had?
Marosi is decent, and as I mentioned I have no issue with Argyle bringing him through the door in isolation. Considering the bigger picture though, was his arrival strictly required? Perhaps I’ll be proved wrong in time, but I’m really not convinced.