Ratings vs Chelsea

MOM

  • Lloris

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Chiiriches

    Votes: 1 0.4%
  • Fazio

    Votes: 15 5.8%
  • Verts

    Votes: 1 0.4%
  • Davies

    Votes: 2 0.8%
  • Bentaleb

    Votes: 151 58.8%
  • Mason

    Votes: 1 0.4%
  • Lennon

    Votes: 1 0.4%
  • Lamela

    Votes: 6 2.3%
  • Eriksen

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Kane

    Votes: 65 25.3%
  • Paulinho

    Votes: 1 0.4%
  • Chadli

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Soldado

    Votes: 2 0.8%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 11 4.3%

  • Total voters
    257

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
To be perfectly honest, I couldn't give a tinkers toss if Lamela tackles more than Lennon or Townsend - none of which are going to go down in the annuls as 'hard nuts' on the field.

This comparison with Lennon and Townsend has got to stop because it's a completely redundant subject as neither are proving to be long term players at this club. Being slightly better then them is hardly a ringing endorsement for a side looking to get back in the Champions League and win some silverware is it?!

Lamela was brought in to be a match winner, a goal getter - someone who can create something from nothing and turn defeat into a draw and a draw into a victory. He hasn't done this. He doesn't look like doing this.

Dempsey was a proverbial donkey on the pitch yet popped up match winning/saving moments - all of which hold far more credence than making one more tackle or intercepting a pass with his bollocks.

Hell, even Siggy after being routinely panned here (myself included) would probably have similar stats to Lamela this season.

Point is, Lamela's contribution is easily replaceable which is sentiment that myself, JH, Blake, Spurs Idol et al are all alluding to and their hasn't been a compelling argument to sway our views other than "he's a bit better than Azza and Andros" or laughably he could be the next Bale!
Ok, that's your prerogative.If it's easily replaceable why have we had so few top quality creative players over the last few years ?

It's not just about one facet or one set of those stats, it's about the whole set, everything he does that can be quantified and everything else we think we see.

He was brought in to improve the team. I think, though it may be marginal right now, he has.

That is the bottom line right now, surely ?
 
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
10,303
Ah I see, sorry, I must not be a fan then because I'm willing to give a young player some leeway and not analyse every single kick of the ball. My mistake. And here I was thinking I'd been supporting Spurs for thirty years. What a silly sausage I am!



I don't think a fan's level of nitpicking is commensurate with their level of support for the club, mate. I understand that you're very interested in the incredibly fine details, but that doesn't mean someone who isn't (for perfectly good reasons) is less of a fan somehow.

I'm not one of these 'football's a simple game innit' people, but I do think micro-analysis like this helps very few people (except the player, sometimes, when it comes from the coach). The bigger picture is more important, which is as I said above - is he contributing to the team, and is it at a level over and above the potential contributions of his rivals for the position?
You've got me wrong, Bobbins, and I apologise if that's how it sounded-I'm not saying you're less of a fan than me. This kind of discussion is the whole raison d'être for this place.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
Against Everton, Spurs looked far better as a team when Lennon played, which is up until he was subbed by Lamela.

You can only look at individual games to form an opinion - and this is a good one as its a direct comparison where one player replaces another.

And if you are not happy with that example, ask the other question. Did the extra £20m+ price tag show up against Everton - did Lamela make that much more of a difference than Lennon when he came on ?

Well I could look at about 250 of Lennon's individual games and tell you he did fuck all. So that's 250-1 to Lamela.
 

Spursidol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
12,636
I don't demand results these days, Spursidol, but I believe there is an opportunity there for us this season if we can put a few results together.
I'd agree with that - but only if more of our current players perform to the higher standards currently being showen by some of our younger players such as Kane and Bentaleb - and unfortunately its mainly our expensive players who need to step up more (including Lamela)

Plus of course any changes we can make in January TW
 

Chris12

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Messages
7,187
Against Everton, Spurs looked far better as a team when Lennon played, which is up until he was subbed by Lamela.

You can only look at individual games to form an opinion - and this is a good one as its a direct comparison where one player replaces another.

And if you are not happy with that example, ask the other question. Did the extra £20m+ price tag show up against Everton - did Lamela make that much more of a difference than Lennon when he came on ?
He come on when pressure was high and was only going to get higher as is the case in most games where one team is only wining by 1 goal and was for like 20 minutes, my lord.
 

Spursidol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
12,636
Well I could look at about 250 of Lennon's individual games and tell you he did fuck all. So that's 250-1 to Lamela.
Lamela's not been here for 250 games, and at the moment he seems as likely to have bad games as good games.

We also acquired Lennon fior £1m versus £30m (or £25m) for Lamela - and if I pay that many times one player's price I want that much more player - no ? And I have not seen it yet.
 

Bus-Conductor

SC Supporter
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
39,837
at the moment ... yes, well with regards to lennon, probably not townsend. lamela closes the space, he's unpredictable in that his teammates don't really know what he's going to do(other than run into defenders currently) and i think lennon really set the tempo for others to follow in our pressing game on sunday, lamela's just not as sharp or as mobile to be as effective in that sense.

What about the Chelsea game where thanks to Lennon's failure to track Hazrd we found ourselves behind to the worst team in the league to be behind, having made a good start ?

Do we conveniently block out the couple of hundred games where Lennon hasn't pressed or actually engaged the opposition properly and has been largely invisible ? Did that help his team mates more than Lamela has been ?

I do not think so.
 

Spursidol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
12,636
He come on when pressure was high and was only going to get higher as is the case in most games where one team is only wining by 1 goal and was for like 20 minutes, my lord.
He came on when we hoped his fresh legs would make a big difference. It didn't. So as I've said welsewhere, he needs to up his game to play well in PL
 

Bobbins

SC's 14th Sexiest Male 2008
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
18,129
is that the be all and end all then? how about if everyone else around lamela suffers and we look shit as a result? was it happenstance that we looked far improved with lennon in the side against everton? would we have looked just as good if not better with lamela instead?
That is a very good point - I honestly don't know. I have thought about that. I certainly don't think Lennon was the reason we looked far improved. He probably contributed to the effectively stifling of Baines. But his defending against Chelsea was shit, so is he great, or crap? Or something in between?

But the first bit is just silly - no-one around Lamela is 'suffering'. He is not making us look shit.

This debate has spiralled out of all control and common sense if people are going to start claiming that Lamela is making the team look shit. That is quite clearly not the case.
 

Bobbins

SC's 14th Sexiest Male 2008
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
18,129
Lamela's not been here for 250 games, and at the moment he seems as likely to have bad games as good games.

We also acquired Lennon fior £1m versus £30m (or £25m) for Lamela - and if I pay that many times one player's price I want that much more player - no ? And I have not seen it yet.
One thing I don't understand, why do you keep saying he cost £30m (£25m)?

He cost £26m. That's it. Not £30m, not £25m. £26m. Can you please stop with this £30m stuff? It undermines your every post.
 

felmani26

SC Supporter
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
15,235
Ok, that's your prerogative.If it's easily replaceable why have we had so few top quality creative players over the last few years ?

It's not just about one facet or one set of those stats, it's about the whole set, everything he does that can be quantified and everything else we think we see.

He was brought in to improve the team. I think, though it may be marginal right now, he has.

That is the bottom line right now, surely ?
If we spent £30million for a marginal improvement on Lennon then that's a damning indictment of our transfer policy if ever I saw one!
 

Blake Griffin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2011
Messages
12,170
What about the Chelsea game where thanks to Lennon's failure to track Hazrd we found ourselves behind to the worst team in the league to be behind, having made a good start ?

Do we conveniently block out the couple of hundred games where Lennon hasn't pressed or actually engaged the opposition properly and has been largely invisible ? Did that help his team mates more than Lamela has been ?

I do not think so.
yes, lennon should've done better in that instance, just like lamela should've done better against arsenal and city. i don't know what relevance lennon's previous 250 games has on who is better for the team right now so i wish you'd stop bringing up such a nonsensical point. i wouldn't be against both lennon and lamela playing in the same team were it not for eriksen and kane being much better/more effective players than lamela currently, not to mention chadli. i want lennon in the team at this moment, we have little pace without him, he opens up the game for others around him, he's a more effective presser and his teammates trust that he'll make the right decision more often than not even if it is usually the safer choice.
 

Bobbins

SC's 14th Sexiest Male 2008
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
18,129
And that useless prick Sigurdsson has bagged 2 goals and 8 assists for Swansea this season. Are we doing something wrong?
Nail on head.

We've been doing things wrong for several seasons now. We buy players for the sake of buying players. We should be buying players to play in a specific position which is also their natural position, which fits into a system they're comfortable with.

We don't buy the right players for whatever system we seem to be trying to implement, on a regular basis.
 

Blake Griffin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2011
Messages
12,170
One thing I don't understand, why do you keep saying he cost £30m (£25m)?

He cost £26m. That's it. Not £30m, not £25m. £26m. Can you please stop with this £30m stuff? It undermines your every post.
it was 26m + 4m in add ons. 2m being cl dependant and i guess the other 2m being performance related, so i guess we can thank lamela for saving us 2m so far.
 

Spursidol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
12,636
Ah I see, sorry, I must not be a fan then because I'm willing to give a young player some leeway and not analyse every single kick of the ball. My mistake. And here I was thinking I'd been supporting Spurs for thirty years. What a silly sausage I am!

/QUOTE]

@felman26 put it very well ' Lamela was brought in to be a match winner, a goal getter - someone who can create something from nothing and turn defeat into a draw and a draw into a victory. '.

We paid £30m (or £26m according to BC) for that

Big difference from the likes of Kane brought through the Spurs youth ranks - and we have many more coming through. Many of these will be squad players so we need to buy genuine high priced stars. That's what we thought we were getting with Lamela

So far we have seen very little of that - just a few glimpses. But we have seen a lot more from both home grown talent - and indeed from other purchases such as Eriksen (£11m rather than £25m/£30m).

Which is why we need Lamela to do a hell of a lot more thanh we have seen so far.
 
Top