In goal, Plymouth Argyle have replaced C Hazard with M Cooper. It’s something Ian Foster probably did just in time in the 2023/24 season, and something many Argyle fans may wish they could have done in the two years since. Let me clarify though: academy project Mike isn’t returning. Rather, Murphy Cooper has joined the club on a permanent deal for a fee worth, depending on who you listen to, anywhere between £150,000-£500,000.
To add to the name-related confusion, Argyle’s new recruit hasn’t always been a Cooper. He went by Murphy Mahoney before changing his name by deed poll in the summer of 2024, and not all footballing websites have caught up to the change. Don’t be taken aback, therefore, if you see “Mahoney” on certain team sheets in the coming season; I know I was when he lined up against Argyle for Barnsley on opening day last year.
Cooper’s time at Barnsley is one of three loan spells he had from former club Queens Park Rangers over the last two years. That’s our data source for this piece. It’s a useful sample given he made 66 league appearances, played the full 90 minutes in all of them, and the vast majority (58) came at League One level. The eight that didn’t were in the Championship for Sheffield Wednesday, who were a League One team in waiting all season. Wednesday lost all eight games Cooper started but, as you’ll come to see, that was hardly his fault.
Cooper joins as first-choice goalkeeper ahead of fellow new arrival James Storer. As we did with Storer, we’ll analyse Cooper’s shot stopping, distribution and command before looking at the wider implications of his arrival. We can compare his numbers to Argyle’s ‘keepers from last term, and where possible we’ll throw Storer’s stats in too for the clearest possible picture.
Shot stopping
Call me old-fashioned, but I’ve always considered keeping the ball out of the net to be a goalkeeper’s main attribute. There are several ways we can measure that quality; fortunately for my sanity, the data available for Cooper is far more extensive than what we had for Storer.
As ever, we can start with the basic metric of save success. Across the last two years, Cooper has made 144 saves and conceded 81 goals. That’s enough to give him a save success figure of 64%. It’s narrowly above what Luca Ashby-Hammond managed last season, but behind the corresponding figures for both Storer and Conor Hazard.
| Player | Saves Made | Goals Conceded | Save Success |
| Conor Hazard | 65 | 31 | 68% |
| James Storer* | 121 | 60 | 67% |
| Murphy Cooper* | 144 | 81 | 64% |
| Luca Ashby-Hammond | 55 | 32 | 63% |
Those numbers, probably around average at best, are reflected when we delve deeper into the quality of those shots. Post-shot xG data, which we regularly use to judge a ‘keeper’s shot stopping prowess, suggests Cooper has posted a goals prevented figure of -2.76 over the last two years. It’s in the negative range and is therefore, by definition, below average.
All that said, I think there are some mitigating factors in Cooper’s favour. For instance, across those two years, Cooper’s teams have scored several own goals against him, which always counts as 0.00 post-shot xG in the data. I don’t consider it best practice to remove them completely from the equation but, if we make an allowance there, Cooper’s numbers are much closer to where we’d like them to be.
That problem is exacerbated by the fact we’re talking about a significant time period in Cooper’s career. Yes, I’m always of the view that the greater the sample size, the better, but it can lead to difficulties when comparing to players across a shorter timeframe. Take Cooper’s -2.76 goals prevented figure compared to Ashby-Hammond’s -3.80. There doesn’t seem much in it, but it’s important context to say Cooper’s figure came over two years, with Ashby-Hammond’s only covering 18 games.
We can use a goalkeeper’s prevented rate (post-shot xG faced divided by goals conceded) to take this out of the equation. Here, Cooper still lags behind Hazard’s number from last season, but clears Ashby-Hammond fairly comfortably.
| Player | xGOT Faced | Goals Conceded | Prevented Rate |
| Conor Hazard | 32.40 | 31 | 1.05 |
| Murphy Cooper* | 78.24 | 81 | 0.97 |
| Luca Ashby-Hammond | 28.20 | 32 | 0.88 |
We also need to take one more thing into account: Cooper’s shot stopping appears to have notably improved over the last two years. His numbers at Stevenage were disappointing, they were fairly ordinary at Barnsley, but they were outstanding at Sheffield Wednesday. As I mentioned, yes, Wednesday lost every game Cooper played, but it was often thanks to him that they managed to keep the score down.
| Murphy Cooper at… | xGOT faced | Goals Conceded | Goals Prevented | Prevented Rate |
| Stevenage | 30.21 | 34 | -3.79 | 0.89 |
| Barnsley | 32.13 | 33 | -0.87 | 0.97 |
| Sheffield Wednesday | 15.90 | 14 | 1.90 | 1.14 |
Cooper’s spell at Hillsborough covers just eight games, so it’ll be down to him to prove that this wasn’t just a flash in the pan. Still, if his numbers overall don’t necessarily excite, there is at least evidence of his potential when at his best.
Distribution
When assessing distribution, we’ll look at exactly the same metrics we did for Storer. We can separate this into sweeping and passing, both of which require a goalkeeper to be good with their feet. Spoiler alert: Cooper’s numbers don’t excite me quite as much as Storer’s.
The best tool we have to assess sweeping is a goalkeeper’s number of defensive actions. In effect, it measures the extent to which a ‘keeper needs to come outside their box to deal with an attack, and use their feet rather than their hands. Cooper averaged 1.33 defensive actions per 90 minutes across the last two years, lower than both Hazard and Ashby-Hammond posted last season, as well as Storer’s figure when we assessed his sweeping.
| Player | Defensive Actions per 90 |
| Conor Hazard | 1.68 |
| Luca Ashby-Hammond | 1.51 |
| James Storer* | 1.41 |
| Murphy Cooper* | 1.33 |
As for passing? It isn’t much better, though can probably join his shot stopping in the “disappointing but with some caveats” category. Cooper’s pass success rate over the last two years has been 44%, substantially behind Storer’s 78% whilst also trailing behind Ashby-Hammond’s (50%) and Hazard’s (51%) figures last season. That’s partially explained by the fact Cooper went long with more of his passes (73% of the time, compared to 71% for Ashby-Hammond and Hazard), but it still isn’t terrific.
Unlike Storer, Cooper hasn’t been able to improve his figure with accurate long passing. To be fair, I discussed how Storer’s numbers were astronomically (and almost suspiciously) impressive. However, Cooper’s long pass success also lags behind both Ashby-Hammond and Hazard’s numbers from last season.
| Player | Long Passes Attempted | Long Passes Completed | Success Rate |
| James Storer* | 809 | 550 | 68% |
| Luca Ashby-Hammond | 461 | 146 | 32% |
| Conor Hazard | 631 | 193 | 31% |
| Murphy Cooper* | 1,610 | 387 | 24% |
I do think it’s important to clarify that these numbers can’t paint a complete picture of a goalkeeper’s distribution. We can certainly get an idea, but there are no freely available stats covering the speed of distribution, nor can we draw any firm conclusions about Cooper’s decision making when it comes to that distribution. That’s something we’re probably going to need to discover together as he gets some Argyle games under his belt.
Hopefully, those will be areas where Cooper excels more than his numbers may suggest.
Command
Commanding a penalty area can mean many things when describing a goalkeeper, and as with Storer we’ll measure all we can. Some things are beyond us; we can’t ascertain from stats alone how well a goalkeeper marshals his defence. Although, having had to deal with Sheffield Wednesday’s lot from last season, Cooper is probably prepared for anything.
What we can absolutely do is assess how Cooper has dealt with crosses. Over the last two years, his punches per 90 and high claims per 90 figures came in at 0.42 and 0.80 respectively. That totals 1.22 when combined. It’s easily enough to outrank Storer, for whom crosses have been a significant weakness early in his career, and puts Cooper roughly on par with Hazard.
| Player | Punches per 90 | High Claims per 90 | Total |
| Luca Ashby-Hammond | 0.50 | 1.06 | 1.56 |
| Conor Hazard | 0.78 | 0.46 | 1.24 |
| Murphy Cooper* | 0.42 | 0.80 | 1.22 |
| James Storer* | 0.00 | 0.30 | 0.30 |
So, all largely fine? Well, arguably, but I’m not wholly convinced. Both Ashby-Hammond and Hazard were maligned (usually fairly) for their inability to deal with crosses during their respective Argyle spells. But even though the differences are relatively tight, last season’s numbers suggest both command their box slightly better than Cooper. It’s something I’d certainly like to see improve during Cooper’s time at Home Park.
Command can also cover how much confidence a defence has in their goalkeeper. Gaining this confidence requires a lot of things, but one element is limiting the number of significant errors. Here, the numbers for Cooper are much more encouraging. Across the last two years, he’s made just one error leading directly to a shot, and one leading directly to a goal. That equates to around 0.03 notable errors per 90, a comfortable upgrade on both Hazard’s (0.07) and Ashby-Hammond’s (0.11) numbers last term.
Again, we’re in a situation where Cooper shows both good and bad signs for a certain attribute. My hope is that the upward trajectory we’ve seen in Cooper’s shot stopping will be reflected in how he deals with crosses from next season. If so, there’s no reason why he can’t become Argyle’s most commanding ‘keeper since his namesake left for Sheffield United in 2024…though that perhaps says more about the other contenders for that particular crown.
Wider reflections
Speaking completely from an objective and statistical standpoint, this signing has surprised me. Perhaps Argyle have seen something in their more sophisticated data models that my reliance on publicly available data cannot find, but right now I’d have to say there’s nothing jumping off the page to help me understand why the club felt Cooper was the man to pursue to fill the coveted number 1 spot.
Of course though, I can completely understand from a practical standpoint. Argyle were getting desperate for a goalkeeper, with their pursuit just starting to look akin to the arduous searches for strikers in past summers. Cooper has significant experience at this level, was available for a reasonable price and clearly willing to join. Getting him in now should ensure he’s fully settled by opening day.
It’s also entirely possible that Argyle want to capitalise on a player whose trajectory is trending upwards. Whilst the sample size was admittedly small, Cooper was clearly in the form of his life before departing Sheffield Wednesday. A slice of the magic that stopped the Owls losing 8-0 every week would certainly be welcome at Home Park this year.
I ultimately believe that Cooper’s arrival creates a fascinating dynamic for Argyle’s goalkeeping department as a whole. In Cooper, they have a player experienced at this level whose extensive stats look around middling. As for Storer, he’s played at much lower levels and there aren’t as many stats available, but his numbers look better on paper. I’m looking forward to seeing both play…and I’m sure we will at some stage, given Cooper’s Sheffield Wednesday spell was curtailed by injury.
I think Cooper will need to improve to truly be seen as a successful Argyle acquisition. I also believe he has the potential to make those necessary improvements. We’ll find out together how he gets on.