Taylor vs Laxalt- it seems like such a simple question. However, it is one of the more complicated questions I have investigated and considered over the past year relative to Celtic. The challenge is one of sample size and trying to compare apples to apples. Laxalt has

played just 1158 minutes in competitive games for Celtic. Even Taylor's time at Celtic has been "only" 2450 minutes. Strength of opponents in those minutes is also vastly different. Taylor has only played about 17% of his minutes against what I would classify as quality opponents

where as Laxalt's minutes so far are heavily tilted towards quality opponents. I include Hibs, Aberdeen and Rangers in this "quality" bucket, as well as Ferencvaros and better in Europe. Laxalt has played 80% of his minutes vs high quality opponents- so almost completely inverse.

The comparison is further complicated by going back to pre-Celtic records, given the disparity in leagues and playing styles.

When confronted with this degree of complexity, I try to look for simplicity which can offer some insight. The first thing which jumps out for both

is that neither are particularly good at passing. For example, Taylor's accuracy rate with forward passes was in the low 63-64% range at Kilmarnock, with it up to about 66% overall at Celtic. La6xalt's record across the board in similarly in that 63% range. For comparison,

Tierney was around 70% and Bolingoli 78%, while Lustig on the other side was around 76%. For crossing, Taylor has consistently been better, in the low 30% accuracy range, while Laxalt has been consistently poor in the low 20% range. Taylor's lost possession at a 10-15% higher

rate than Laxalt, who has been pretty close to the other group. Another area where Laxalt's record is poor is in generating expected assists (xA)- even in Italy we have to go back to 2017 for any decent production, and even then it wasn't good.

I think apples to apples for

defensive stats like duels is difficult due to the disparity in levels. Generally speaking, I would say that Laxalt's volumes are a good bit higher than Taylor, but that his efficiency is a good bit lower - meaning he engages in more duels but wins them at a lower rate.

So when I balance all of this out, the main takeaway I have is that Celtic's best left back is........playing in Turkey. But other than that, I think the question of Taylor vs Laxalt is better considered within the context of utilization. With the derby fast approaching, let me

give an example.

One of the things St. Mirren appeared to have some success with Wednesday was targeting Tavernier and Bassey/Barisic. Fullback play is key to Rangers' system and their collective output in attack and creatively has been incredible.

I was a huge St. John's college basketball fan growing up, with the 1985 season a memorable one. What the hell does this have to do with what I am talking about? Well, St. John's had a legendary player and future NBA HoF and Dream Team member, Chris Mullins. Their main Big East

league rival that season was Georgetown, which had Patrick Ewing & was coached by the legendary John Thompson. Mullin struggled against Georgetown that season as Thompson deployed a "box and one" defense, which was 4 men playing zone with 1 man sticking to Mullin no matter what.

Incredibly, both teams made the Final 4 in the March Madness tournament, with fellow Big East underdog Villanova winning the final over Georgetown in one of history's biggest sports upsets, while of Villanova's point guard later admitted to having played some tournament games

while high on cocaine - ahhh the 80's.

I digress- given Laxalt's skill profile and relative athleticism, I think an interesting role would be to play a sort of "box and one" on Tavernier. Man mark him all over the place and completely disregard any attacking responsibility.

Force Rangers to funnel their attack away from Tavernier.

Generally speaking, bombing either Taylor or Laxalt forward at the expense of restraining McGregor in attack seems a terrible tradeoff. Pull a "reverse Lustig" and have our left sided FB play defensively and free up

our midfield to be more creative and attacking.

Fat fingered- and sent before finishing my bloviating.

In summary, how our left sided FB's are deployed relative to their strengths/weaknesses is more important than which, outside of the remaining derbies. For those games, I am left with another basketball analogy from the

movie Hoosiers, when Gene Hackman's character asks one of his players to defend his man so close that he is able to tell what flavor gum he is chewing. I think Laxalt should know what flavor Tavernier chews, if any. End.