Best Striker at the Club?

balde has 3 votes though so I wouldn't say hes much of a favorite.

 

I completely disagree with that. Imo hes our most selfish player and the previous poster was pretty spot on when describing his tendency to shoot when there are better options. I can't think of many from the most recent games but for the past few seasons when watching the games it seems like stokes has to have one or two shots that have no hope in * of going in just to get it out of his system. Although this was most prominent in his first seasons here and has improved somewhat since.

 

It's a thing I've always never liked about stokes. But when he wasn't playing and we seemed to try walk it In every week I wouldn't mind it if stokes came on and had a pop when needed. I like when a player has the balls to try the extraordinary but only when you've little to no hope in other areas of play

 

Difficult question to answer, Boyd is, was a phenomenal finisher and holds the Scottish all time record whatever you think of him, the stats don't lie, but Stokes is a phenomenal finisher too, and is probably a better all round player and you have to remember Boyd scored a stack of his goals from penalties from which he had many, I think he only ever missed one at Rangers.

I can't understand your logic here because Griffiths has been very impressive since he arrived here, and certainly has geed up Stokes, who looks a different player with Griffiths beside him, but I have no doubt Watt could play this role successfully too.As for Stokes you have to remember he was always under tremendous pressure to score constantly under Lenny or he was out the team or yanked off early in a game. while Hooper got a free pass under Lenny This may account in some way for the impression that Stokes can be a tad greedy at times ( though I think Stokes has improved in that area since Hooper vamooshed).

 

Stokes would be in my team over Boyd every time. Boyd's overall game is poor, very poor in fact. I don't buy the whole argument that strikers should only be based on goals, it's nonsense in my opinion. Stokes brings 20+ goals to the table, but he also offers a lot more. He trumps Boyd when all things are considered I think.

 

Probably? Stokes is twice the player.

 

I think Stokes edges out Griffiths due to his all round ability on the ball whereas Griffiths is more of and out and out goalscorer. I think together the 2 look like they could be a great combination for us up front.

 

Stokes

 

Stokes has done more than the others. Watt has potential.

love that big Amido's got some votes

 

Spot on..

Decision making is stokesys biggest flaw, mainly and can be infuriating at times..

 

Stokes is the bookies favourite with Griffiths close behind but I'm putting my money on a left field candidate than no one has heard of to come in and take the prize as Celtic's best striker. Watch this space

 

None of them and would happily see the back of all 5, never Celtic class strikers.

Our best striker is Commons (a midfielder!)

 

I can't believe that people have chose Watt as our best striker

He's only about 20 years old and not really had a chance. Lots of potential but we've seen that lots of times before. I hope he turns out to be our best but would like some of whatever the people who chose him are on

 

Pukki is the best footballer of the group. If a big European club was offered the choice of any of these players I think Pukki is the guy they would take.

Being the best footballer and being the best striker aren't the same thing though. Pukki doesn't strike me as a natural finisher so seeing as the question is 'Who is the best striker?' I would say Anthony Stokes. There's not much between him and Leigh Griffiths, and the poll result so far indicates that, but I think Stokes is slightly better. Stokes doesn't have as much pace as Griffiths but he has more football intelligence. They're about equal in their finishing ability I would say.

Best player - Pukki.
Best striker - Stokes.

 

Been telling some critics these past few years that Antony Stokes has been a bargain for us,but I picked Griffith for I think the kid is more clinical.

 

I don't think he is. Griffiths seems to take lots of shots without much success.

 

In terms of current, realised ability:
Currently it's Stokes by a distance; but I want to look to the future by 2 or 3 years and the team Deila may have built by then, so...

Stokes>>Griffiths>Pukki>Watt>Balde

In terms of potential that may or may not be realised:

Watt>Pukki>Griffiths>Stokes>Balde

 

Really surprised at the poll results.

I think people aren't choosing an option with regards to ability, rather finishing/scoring goals.

More goals do not equate to a better player, see Kris Boyd.

 

See you never know after one season.

Not for one minute would I have thought Kelvin Wilson at the start of his career would become our best centre half, but he did.

Pukki, Watt, Balde and Griffiths could all become better than Stokes.
Player development is a lottery and often surprising.

 

Regardless of which one is the best, we need a considerably better one.