Giovani Dos Santos

[Coyboy]

I wholeheartedly concur that stats very much do not tell the whole story. But certain individual stats are very, very relevant. For example passing stats are invaluable when assessing a player's actual contribution.

The assist stat does not for example allow for a player who carries a ball past two man then shows great poise and vision to lay off to a team mate in space who merely has to tap it to the next guy to slot home.

But as far as players that are primarily charged with playing in the final third the stat is at least uniform for all. Modric for example only had a couple more assists than Lennon, but stats showed he also passed about 700 times more. He saw more than double the amount of the ball than Lennon. Which means he is attracting opposing players to him and alowing Lennon more space. Not the other way round as perported by some.

I posted an article on here a year or so ago about an acedemic american guy who was trying to introduce his very complex system for analysing player contribution to the team dynamic from a sport (can't remember which one) in america.

It assessed the effect that player had on his team mates and how his performance interacted and effected those around him. It was interesting and valid I think.

Huddlestone would be a great candidate for this type of analysis as he appears to be a stylish and great passer of the ball but he also appears to have a negative effect on the amount of work those around have to do to compensate for his immobility of mind and body.

Purported:grin:

To compare Modric's passing quantity to Lennon's is not fair because he is to all intents and purposes a central midfielder so will of course see more of the ball. Even when he was on the 'left', his game was about drifting in and dictating play. Gareth Barry made twice as many passes as Ashley Young last year; Cesc Fabregas more than double than Theo Walcott pro rata. It is natural they would see more of the ball.

I have agreed with you that Lennon hugs the touchline a tad too much but I think there is a tactic at play here to keep the left back stretched and have an outlet on that side to collect the ball in his stride and attack the full back. If he were to, as you suggest, exploit the space created by Modric the left back could push in more and I can't see Corluka sprinting down the right-if we had Hutton it might be different but then the goals allowed would be greater.

In saying that rather than Lennon creating space for others ie Modric it is vice-versa is a little simplistic- it's surely a bit of both which is what I was getting at saying football is a team sport and that what one player does has an affect on the rest of the pitch. You say Huddlestone's lack of mobility creates extra work for others, I would say that he is not that immobile anymore and that his retention of the ball and silky passing create as many, well more, opportunities for other players and keep the defence on the back foot more than him being a liability.

 

[leffe186]

...but as far as players that are primarily charged with playing in the final third the stat is at least uniform for all. Modric for example only had a couple more assists than Lennon, but stats showed he also passed about 700 times more. He saw more than double the amount of the ball than Lennon. Which means he is attracting opposing players to him and alowing Lennon more space. Not the other way round as perported by some...

But that analysis suggests that the opposition would chase the ball like children. It might be more useful to find out how much space each had when they received it, for example, or how many options each had. It is useful (and I would like to see it, have you a link to the stats for the Brum game?) but not the whole story. I would argue that McLeish might have asked his players to defend in a particular way, bearing in mind Lennon's pace and the problems his team had at left back in the run-up to the game. Modric was picking the ball up all over the pitch and didn't appear to be man-marked, an oversight by McLeish. My point is that you have to take the stats in conjunction with an overall view of the game, with an eye on what the opposition did too.

What team would you pick, with everyone fit?

 

[gibbs131]

Giovani dos Santos is feeling better about his future at Tottenham.
Harry Redknapp last week hinted that the 20-year-old could still play a part in his plans.
And Dos Santos has stepped up his game as he looks to impress the Spurs boss.
He said: "In the past things did not go the way I would have liked but the truth is I began working harder every day until I improved and, thanks to God, things have been improving."

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Football is about winning games and the way to do that involves scoring more goals than the opposition. Beyond that, there are an infinate number of systems you can set out to achieve this objective. It's equally easy to imagine very direct sides that can do this well as well as sides which rely more on passing the ball around. Who is to say one is better than the other? If you then move down to the player level, then it's the combination of individual contributions that matters. That attacking and defending as a whole. Yes you can say defenders should be judged more on their tackles than goals but by doing that you're making assumptions about the way you think the team should play. For example, a manager could potentially set out a team with strikers whos primary objective is to offer a physical presence and not necessarily to score. If this is the case, it would be wrong to judge the striker merely on goals.

I think what I'm getting at is what Coyboys's been saying. Even with player statistics, it comes down to peoples opinions of the value of each variable and assumptions about what that players role is within the team. This means it's very easy to pick stats that support pre-concieved notions of players. As football is about winning games, maybe we should step back and take a macro view of the number of victories achieved by various combinations of players (and manager) to see how successful the group are as a whole.

Coyboy and I seem to have drifted from an argument about the validity of ITK - which was largely peripheral to the main discussion - to the validity of statistics - which is probably more relevant to the main argument.

The defence when someone throws a stat is invariably "stats don't tell the whole story"; this is an absoloute truism that I don't dispute.

But to say that we shouldn't change a winning side (which is effectively what you are saying) is IMO, incorrect.

Unfortunately it is more complicated than that, which is why even the greatest teams strengthen their squads. You can always improve and god knows we need to unless we want to tread mid table for eternity.

But as far as GDS goes that is not even what I am saying. I am saying that he is clearly talented enough IMO, to be sitting on our bench and is talented enough to be used when the Lennon's and Keane's and Defoe's are having poor games or brought into the side when they have had a bad run of games.

As far as Lennon goes I believe, based on watching him that he flatters to deceive often in terms of what he actually contributes. That does not mean he contributes nish - far from it - but for example against Birmingham he saw less of the ball in 95 minutes than Modric did in 45. He also created less opportunities in that time. But he pops up and scores a 95th minute winner and everyone votes him man of the match. Would he have been anywhere close to being MOTM if we'd drawn or lost that game - because we nearly did - my answer is no fucking way on earth. You could vote him singular most important moment of the match or shot of the match, but player ?? no way. In fact if he hadn't scored most of those voting him MOTM would have been on here slagging him off for his woeful contribution.

You can magnofy that over the course of last season where he was voted Player of The Season. A riduculous choice.

Does this mean I don't like Lennon ? hell no. just take a more realistic view I believe, and occasionally try to back that opinion up with a stat to prove it's more than just hypothosis.

Do I want to sell Lennon ? hell no. Do I want to see him subbed or dropped occasionally and GDS given some time (and patience of the fans and manager) in his place ? hell yes.

And the same applies for the all other incosistant players of ability in equal measure, othewrwise why have a great squad - why not just have a great 11. I have always maintained that over the course of a season it is the best squad that invariably champions over the best 11 in the league. ManU prove that frequently.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

COYBOY

The argument about Modric being a central midfielder is a little moribund I feel in the context in which you use it. He primarily plays wide left. Lennon primarily plays wide right. Modric has played wide left for the majority of his career from what I have seen.

Gareth Barry primarily played central left of a midfield 5 for O'neill's Villa with Young.

 

[TheQuestforMerlin]

I wholeheartedly concur that stats very much do not tell the whole story. But certain individual stats are very, very relevant. For example passing stats are invaluable when assessing a player's actual contribution.

The assist stat does not for example allow for a player who carries a ball past two man then shows great poise and vision to lay off to a team mate in space who merely has to tap it to the next guy to slot home.

But as far as players that are primarily charged with playing in the final third the stat is at least uniform for all. Modric for example only had a couple more assists than Lennon, but stats showed he also passed about 700 times more. He saw more than double the amount of the ball than Lennon. Which means he is attracting opposing players to him and alowing Lennon more space. Not the other way round as perported by some.

I posted an article on here a year or so ago about an acedemic american guy who was trying to introduce his very complex system for analysing player contribution to the team dynamic from a sport (can't remember which one) in america.

It assessed the effect that player had on his team mates and how his performance interacted and effected those around him. It was interesting and valid I think.

Huddlestone would be a great candidate for this type of analysis as he appears to be a stylish and great passer of the ball but he also appears to have a negative effect on the amount of work those around have to do to compensate for his immobility of mind and body.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/28/sports/basketball/28morey.html

I'm unsure if this is the article you mentioned B-C, but I think you will like it. Daryl Morey (GM of the Huston Rockets basketball team) is leading the way with team based statistical analysis in basketball. Unlike baseball, where a lot of advanced sports stats were first utilised he is trying to gain an edge in a team based sport, traditionally - like football - where stats have either not been used properly or not been used with much depth (in football you have assists, goals, passes completed etc which as we all know, do not adequately tell you what is going on in a match).

He's pretty successful at it as well, would love to see if his knowledge could be adapted to football. Interestingly, Billy Beane (one of the 'founders' of gaining a stats edge in baseball with the Oakland A's) has become a massive football fan. If I remember reading correctly, he supports Spurs as well!...

 

[Bus-Conductor]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/28/sports/basketball/28morey.html

I'm unsure if this is the article you mentioned B-C, but I think you will like it. Daryl Morey (GM of the Huston Rockets basketball team) is leading the way with team based statistical analysis in basketball. Unlike baseball, where a lot of advanced sports stats were first utilised he is trying to gain an edge in a team based sport, traditionally - like football - where stats have either not been used properly or not been used with much depth (in football you have assists, goals, passes completed etc which as we all know, do not adequately tell you what is going on in a match).

He's pretty successful at it as well, would love to see if his knowledge could be adapted to football. Interestingly, Billy Beane (one of the 'founders' of gaining a stats edge in baseball with the Oakland A's) has become a massive football fan. If I remember reading correctly, he supports Spurs as well!...

I am pretty sure that's the very same. good find.

 

[steve]

COYBOY

The argument about Modric being a central midfielder is a little moribund I feel in the context in which you use it. He primarily plays wide left. Lennon primarily plays wide right. Modric has played wide left for the majority of his career from what I have seen.

Gareth Barry primarily played central left of a midfield 5 for O'neill's Villa with Young.

Come on you know he doesn't if you're watching - he plays all over the gaff and doesn't hug the touchline like Lennon does but comes infield far more and links with both midfield and attack. He plays left but not in the same way Lennon does on the right.

 

[Coyboy]

COYBOY

The argument about Modric being a central midfielder is a little moribund I feel in the context in which you use it. He primarily plays wide left. Lennon primarily plays wide right. Modric has played wide left for the majority of his career from what I have seen.

Gareth Barry primarily played central left of a midfield 5 for O'neill's Villa with Young.

I think that is notional- he doesn't stay out wide like Lennon stays out right. He is not a natural winger, Lennon is. And referring to last season, Modric was often central for the first half of the season.

Did Villa play 4-5-1 that much? Didn't Carew and then Heskey play up with Agbonlahor a fair bit?

 

[karennina]

Come on you know he doesn't if you're watching - he plays all over the gaff and doesn't hug the touchline like Lennon does but comes infield far more and links with both midfield and attack. He plays left but not in the same way Lennon does on the right.

I'd agree with this - Modric is a midfielder whose strengths are strengths anywhere on the pitch, and not suited particularly to the left. I don't see that it makes too much sense to call Rosicky a left midfielder, but events could have meant he played on the left most of his career too.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Come on you know he doesn't if you're watching - he plays all over the gaff and doesn't hug the touchline like Lennon does but comes infield far more and links with both midfield and attack. He plays left but not in the same way Lennon does on the right.

I think that is notional- he doesn't stay out wide like Lennon stays out right. He is not a natural winger, Lennon is. And referring to last season, Modric was often central for the first half of the season.

Did Villa play 4-5-1 that much? Didn't Carew and then Heskey play up with Agbonlahor a fair bit?

You both are being deliberately obtuse of ignoring what I said.

Modric's starting position/default position is left midfield.

The fact that he doesn't play it the same way Lennon plays RM is down to the superior skill set that Modric possesses.

We see Lennon rove inside too, and it appears that he is given license to do so. His goal against Birmingham came from a starting position of the left.

The massive difference is that Modric actively seeks the ball far more than Lennon and uses it far better when he has it.

No two players are ever identical but I don't care what criteria is applied, or what caviats, only someone who doesn't understand football properly would value the contribution made by Lennon last season over that made by Modric.


PS
Even when Villa switched to their very unsuccessful 442 last season Gareth Barry still played LCM with Young outside left. And it saw them barely win a game.

 

[Coyboy]

You both are being deliberately obtuse of ignoring what I said.

Modric's starting position/default position is left midfield.

The fact that he doesn't play it the same way Lennon plays RM is down to the superior skill set that Modric possesses.

We see Lennon rove inside too, and it appears that he is given license to do so. His goal against Birmingham came from a starting position of the left.

The massive difference is that Modric actively seeks the ball far more than Lennon and uses it far better when he has it.

No two players are ever identical but I don't care what criteria is applied, or what caviats, only someone who doesn't understand football properly would value the contribution made by Lennon last season over that made by Modric.


PS
Even when Villa switched to their very unsuccessful 442 last season Gareth Barry still played LCM with Young outside left. And it saw them barely win a game.

No I am not either. Luka Modric is not a winger, yes it is his skill that sees him come inside but also his nature-being right footed is surely key. And as I said, he started a lot of last year in the middle anyway before Palacios came in. As far as I am aware, Lennon never did. It is where he starts or is on the teamsheet but only those who don't understand football would equate him directly with Lennon.

I would say you were being obtuse using Lennon's goal against Brum as a fragile form of comparison. Modric had gone off, it was the last kick of the game and we were on the counter. No one is saying he stays glued to the right just that he is a natural winger in a way that Modric isn't. It is not that he doesn't seek the ball like Modric because he is inferior, it's that it is his role to stay outwide and latch onto passes from the likes of Modric and Hudd.

It would also explain why he may have inferior stats as when he gets the ball and gets into positions to pass or cross, it is much harder than the give and gos that Modric carries out. Though he has been guilty of poor delivery, finding some of our strikers from wide postions has often being like trying to hit treble 20 with a drawing pin.

Look, if you want to compare who is a 'better player' then it is Modric in terms of passing, intelligence and movement but I would say Lennon trumps in terms of control, running with the ball and shooting. You seem to be really miffed that people voted him player of the season last year over Modric. Does it really matter?

And I believe Villa won a fair share of their games in the first part of the year with JC and AB- not five in midfield. What I was trying to show was that though Barry was pivotal for them, that he made so many more passes than A Young hardly means he is 'better'. Their roles, positioning, skills and natural tendencies on the ball are different- like Modric's and Lennon's.

 

[diegooners]

I agree that Lennon and Modric are incomparable players, but I would debate Lennon having better control, or shooting actually. Modric almost never miscontroles the ball, and hits it sweeter than Lennon. He hasn't been lucky for Spurs as of yet but given the same oppurtunities on the pitch I would put money on Modric putting more away than Lennon. Thats just my opinion though.

 

[rebrab]

Lennon has a fabulous first touch. Walcott may be quicker, but Lennon would have controlled and gone before Walcott had the ball at his feet. Lennon IMO has a better first touch than a man recently gone to Real Madrid for 80 million.


He's also better at going around someone. Yes Ronaldo is skilful, but much slower off the mark than Lennon (though ronaldo is quick!)

Modric is better with the ball at his feet though. I can't remember one instance last year when Modders miscontrolled a ball!


They both make it look easy.

 

[gibbs131]

Dos Santos is a better player than all of them. Gotta trust ole Gibbsy. Better than Modric, better than Lennon, better...just..better.

 

[ggibbs1971]

Now if only I can the match on tv tonight?

 

[SpurSince57]

But as far as GDS goes that is not even what I am saying. I am saying that he is clearly talented enough IMO, to be sitting on our bench and is talented enough to be used when the Lennon's and Keane's and Defoe's are having poor games or brought into the side when they have had a bad run of games.

A view with which no-one seems to disagree.

 

[Rumbaldo]

our boy just won a penalty. he is playing ok tonight, out on the right.
The game has pretty much been played in Honduras' half
not been concentrating too much on the mexico game though as venuzuela v peru has been a much more open and exciting game!

 

[Kendall]

I love BC.

Aaron Lennon wins man of the match for England straight after his cries of poor form, excellent.

 

[Spurs_Bear]

Dos Santos is a better player than all of them. Gotta trust ole Gibbsy. Better than Modric, better than Lennon, better...just..better.

I know what you're saying Gibbsy.....and I respect it......but it's complete and utter bollocks.