• Tottenham Hotspur Message Board

  • Jlock Jlock Sep 17, 2012 09:18 Flag

    For SB (and Sfer if he wants - or anyone else)

    Maybe I misread or over-react to your posts - but I think SB was having a pop again with her:
    '.....i thought ade was going to play instead of defoe.
    defoe was awesome! u play him regularly & he will get u lots of goals!
    shame harry couldnt see this & persisted with zimmerframe vdv.....'

    So as I mentioned, I'm happy to debate this - hopefully contained here to save 'boring' other forum members.

    Back to SB - I keep repeating SB that Daffy is OK, he's not great. He will score, but his history isn't stunning. Try yourself. Look here http://soccernet.espn.go.com/player/_/id/7975/jermain-defoe?cc=5739 and see what his record is. Then explain what you mean by 'lots of goals'. Give me any season when he's scored (I'll let you count both goals and assists) more than 20 in the league. Give me all the seasons when he's scored more than 15. Then give me when he's scored (including assists) less than 16.
    I'll give you a hand, as stats aren't your thing - the format will be 'season-goals-assists-total - number of shots':

    2002 10 0 10 No Stats
    2003 8 8 16 81
    2004 7 0 7 35
    2005 13 1 14 99
    2006 9 5 14 74
    2007 10 2 12 82
    2008 12 2 14 60
    2009 10 4 14 95
    2010 18 4 22 113
    2011 4 2 6 68
    2012 11 1 12 66

    So from what I can see, he's got more than 15 'goals' (Including assists) twice in his career. And one of those was when he scored 5 in one game.

    So you may have 'faith' in him to score 'lots of goals', but his record doesn't seem to support it. Well, at least it doesn't to me. So maybe 'arry 'didn't see it' because it didn't happen in Daffy's career so far?

    He MAY score more than 16 goals this season - who knows - that's future? I hope he does - or if not him, I hope our team scores 80+ goals. But there's the rub, surely you saw from yesterday, yes Daffy can score, but he's greedy - in my opinion, if he doesn't score, he doesn't lend much else to the team. His role isn't holding up the ball or bringing other players into the game.

    I would guess that out of the 'shots' that Daffy had above, there would have been situations in probably a quarter of the cases, where Daffy elected to shoot, rather than play another player in. That's a guess based on what I see of how he plays. Myopic or what?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • In my opinion, Defo needs a whole season being the number 1 striker at Spurs and plays every game when fit. THEN we can see if he is the goal scorer we all hope he is.

      Personally I think he will be, but time and number of games played (Full games not a 5 min cameo at the end of a match) will tell.

      • 2 Replies to Nick
      • agreed nick. all the stats suggest last season that he would have easily reached 20 goals for the season if he started every game.
        u can say its just projected stats john. but even if u were been harsh on defoe, he would still have made 20 goals if he played every game.
        he would have had to have a huge dip in form for a long period of time not to have reached 20 goals.
        its not his fault harry was being blackmailed by vdv!

        the fact u still support harry not bringing on our best goalscorer when we need a goal just shows how far up harrys bum u realy are!

        that is simple logic. are like a politician who trys to confuse the matter to get out of your stupid decision.

        no matter what pathetic excuse u come up with, not bringing on your best goalscorer when we needed a goal against villa was a huge error.

        in fact rarely starting defoe last season was a big error.

        if harry played friedel upfront & it went wrong (as expected!).
        u would go on about how wonderful hindsight is, & then go on about how friedel holds up the ball better than defoe.
        anything to support harry!

        i dont know why im going in to it again because its clear u will change logic & the most likely outcome to suit your pro harry stance.

        i leave u to convince yourself not picking defoe was the right thing from harry even thou the outcome & all logic suggests otherwise.
        keep deluding yourself john, whatever floats your boat.
        some people cant just admit when they were wrong.
        something both john & harry have in commen!

        over & out!

      • Nick,
        I tried to be fair and show Daffy's whole history. So he hasn't show that he can score 'lots of goals' in the past (I presume lots of goals would mean what, 20+ goals+assists?), only achieving it once in his whole career.
        I sincerely hope he does score 'lots' this season (and if he doesn't either someone else does or the team in general does - as we'll need the goals to attempt 4th), but his track record doesn't show it.

        That's not a dig at Daffy per se, as I don't think we've had a prolific striker at the Lane for ages. Even Keane and Berbatov (I think Berba would have gone on to be - but that is obviously a guess - as he to me is a class act) weren't - they played well together and got a fair total between them, but their individual goal tallies weren't that high for us.
        To me, the closest we've come to having a top striker recently was Ade's performance of 17+11 last season (when most would admit that he could have had more if his finishing had been more clinical).

        If you look at the strike rates for our top goal scorers since the EPL (http://www.myfootballfacts.com/TottenhamHotspurPremierLeagueAppearencesGoals1992-2009.html ) there aren't that many achieving that magical 1 in 2 is there?

    • We are not going to agree regarding HR and his choice of players.

      I felt his team selection/rotation was not good enough, or rather to my liking- WE SHALL NOT REVISIT THAT SUBJECT- for sanities sake, yours, mine and everyone else's.

      I know you feel we played well the vast majority of time, I disagree, I feel we slumped quite noticeably and at that time nothing changed with regards to selection! despite the results and the performances dipping noticeably IMO, our management did nothing, tried NOTHING different! Why?

      Why at that stage or on those occasions didn't Daffy or Niko or Pienaar or Gio get a prolonged run? Why then, when we played teams with 5 man midfield's who basically rendered VDV useless did we persist with starting him? Only Harry (& Maybe Levy) will ever know, but Defoe and others were not even considered, not even tried, other than the almost insulting 5-10mins here and there.

      ' Do you really think any manager who wants to get CL football would drop a goalscorer if he thought he was the best option in his opinion? Just out of favouritism? Really?', for what reason would you suggest that Defoe wasn't given a chance? Why, when Lennon was out, didn't 'we' even consider using a winger as his replacement? instead, opting to move Luka on to the wing, where he was pretty unimpressive. Harry had favourites and if you weren't one of them, you were less than bit part. If it wasn't favouritism what was it? the first team chose itself week in week out by unilaterally consensus?

      We haven't used Defoe consistently enough in recent seasons to know what he could achieve, it is perfectly feasible on current form that Defoe could go on to score 20+, has he yet? no, maybe his lack of opportunity or the teams set up to get this out of him is the reason? maybe he's just not that good, but when he is given a prolonged and sustained run of games in a team set up to compliment his best attributes he seems to do pretty well, wouldn't you agree?

      If we looked back at Ade's 2006-7 (12+6 in 44) or his 2010-11 (13+0 in 36) season, he's less impressive, was the 06-7 season due to Terry Henry being given more opportunities and a goon side being set up to compliment him? it could well be IMO. Other than those seasons he has benefitted for being first choice week in and out, in top quality sides designed to get the best out of his game. As you rightly pointed out Defoe has played for Pompey, West Ham and a vastly weaker Spurs side (from what we are now accustom)- hardly the same calibre as the goons, Citeh and our squad last season.

      Stats NEVER tell the whole story and to write off the potential of one of our 'Purple' strikers using stats, without exploring them thoroughly (the reasons) is beneath, what I perceived to be your level, JL.

      COYS!

    • Joe,
      No you're right, we'll probably never agree - and isn't that the point - in fact that's my whole point. You have your OPINION, I have mine - AND 'arry had his. They 'are all OPINIONS - right/wrong? How can you show in this type of case if an OPINION is right or wrong?
      You can't go back and change what you think was wrong and see what would have happened.

      Yes, I think we played well in 'most' games last season. Much like this season (and any season) though, results do not always follow performance. I thought we were bad against Woolwich and against Norwich. I thought against the Chavs in the cup, we played well until we lost the 3rd goal. I thought we played very well against Utd at home.We played well against Villa, Everton away (61% possession, 22 shots, 9 on target - no goals - and Daffy played).
      I also don't get this '....'arry never gave Daffy a chance...' - as I have pointed out after Daffy's 18 goals season, 'arry started with Daffy the next season. Daffy then got injured and then never seemed to get back the form (actually - if you look at the start/end of the 18 goal season, his goals were in the first part mainly). Last season, Daffy played over at least half a game in 24 games - three quarters of a game in over 20 games ('Only Harry (& Maybe Levy) will ever know, but Defoe and others were not even considered, not even tried, other than the almost insulting 5-10mins here and there' - very emotive, but not quite true in Daffy's case)- he was out for a half dozen injured.
      BUT, 4-4-2 wasn't always 'arry's preferred route. If he played a single striker, he tended to use Ade. Ade was also pretty good, getting 17-11 - so justified his inclusion. No conspiracy theory, just a couple of players who played the role well - a no 10 in VdV who created and scored and a striker who not only scored but also created. Isn't that ideal? I'd love that this season - if Dembele does a VdV and gets a hat full and creates a hat full, and Daffy or Dempsey or Ade get a hat full and create as well. That to me is working partnerships.
      We didn't use Pav, Crouch, Keane either in recent seasons - was that a conspiracy?
      As for Ade's record, totally agree. That is why I tend not to look at single seasons. I like to take wider samples for Daffy, VdV, Ade etc. I like to see the whole picture, not just take season's in isolation - as we all know how sometimes players can shine and then completely fade. I'm also happy to recognise that Daffy got 18-4 - Ade got 17-11. But again - look at that season Joe, Daffy got 5 against Wigan - the majority of his 18 were then scored in the first half of the season.
      I'm not using stats to explain the whole story, never have - and I will qualify the stat where I can. But instead of saying something that I can't back up, I will try to use an 'example' to show what I mean. All I seem to get in return is comments like 'Daffy will score lots' - which (if you dislike stats, then I'm amazed that you like unfounded projections) is not only hypothetical but doesn't even qualify 'lots'. I'll say again, Daffy may get 20+ goals, but he hasn't EVER in his whole career, no matter which manager he was playing under. I will also repeat, that Spurs (or Levy) sold him - so how come Spurs never saw this potential? Why didn't Fergie step in and buy him, why not Wenger, why not Hughes,Mancini or AVB at the Chavs? I don't think it's because he's a bad player, just that he is limited. Fergie went for Berba - why? Even with the style of football Woolwich play, they still go for strikers who offer more than Daffy - why? We saw Barca even play without a striker - how? Simply because the players they have lend more than their designated roles.
      To say it's all 'arry, is to me, simply ignoring Daffy's career completely.

    • You've got to face the facts, John. All the best strikers in the world are right selfish tw@ts as soon as they catch eye of the net.
      H

      • 1 Reply to Alan H
      • Ah, but Alan, what you state as a fact, is an opinion. I agree an element, a degree, of selfishness has to be there, but if all strikers exhibited the same traits. how do explain 17-11 for Ade?

        Daffy has been compared to VdV in as much as to which player should have been in the team - ok fine - then look at the 'facts' - do a comparison - see here:
        http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/basics/spielervergleich/basics_4192_3875.html
        If you add all the '1st division' stuff for VdV you get 116 goals and 50+ assists (ok in 'lesser' leagues). A midfielder. Daffy, the goal machine, has the same goals and a third of the assists. Which player would you prefer? Which lends more to a team? Does 'greed' then work?
        I've already shown that over their Spurs careers in total, that VdV had a better strike rate than Daffy. And he also 'assisted' others.

        See http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/basics/spielervergleich/basics_8198_3875.html

        Ronaldo is a different class, I would have classed him as selfish - all about his 'image' - but his game isn't one dimensional either. 47 assists and 80+ goals in the EPL - not exactly selfish.
        Try the same view of Rooney.
        Try it with Van Persie.
        Try it with Ade....
        Try it with Keane (and he got roundly slated here for not being exactly the best)...
        View Daffy alongside who you like (even Darren Bent compares favourably to him) and look at the assists. I'm not convinced so far that Daffy has been the goal machine that is so glibly spoken about. He MAY become one, but he hasn't been for 11 seasons. Like I've said for ages, we haven't had a proven top class striker at the Lane for ages.

        So typically it seems that there ARE strikers that score and help and those who just score. Which type do you prefer?

        Having said all that, I'd still have a greedy/selfish player in the team at the drop of a hat - if that player was a Greaves or that ilk (a Shearer even). Who, on EXCEPTION, got less than 20+ goals.
        But getting on average, 14 or 15 with Daffy? I'm not so sure it's a good trade off. Especially given Daffy's lack of presence. We play with two of the best 'British' wingers. What do wingers normally do? Provide crosses? Who to? Daffy? How many goals has Daffy ever scored from corners or from headers?

        Oh well, chacun a son gout.

    • I shall re-read my messages to see where I wrote ' it's all 'arry,'.

      I certainly did not mean to place all blame/reason for Daffy's stats at Harry's door. I stand by what I said with regards to the quality of the teams Defoe has played in and the amount of opportunities (or lack of) he has had.

      ' I like to see the whole picture, not just take season's in isolation - as we all know how sometimes players can shine and then completely fade.'- of course you do, because in this instance it suits you argument.

      Ade was given the vast majority of the opportunities last season, with good reason he did very well. And whilst I rate VDV highly, he was given vastly more opportunity than possibly he deserved , despite his impressive stats, at times he appeared to be a CB rather than a CF/AMC. There were occasions when, Defoe (and others) should have been given more starts and more time in the place of VDV, because at times he caused more problems than he solved.

      Stat-in 'ell, I think you are overlooking the reasons why some of those stats may be as they are, That is all. Stats are only ever part of the story (at most) they reflect what has passed, without any consideration for reason.

      Good luck to Defoe, hopefully he'll have the season of his career, remain fit, remain in favour and get a boat load of goals, he may well fade and be dropped, we have options available to us if that should happen, but I am intrigued to see which of the many options that AVB has, will be favoured.

      COYS!

    • '...I certainly did not mean to place all blame/reason for Daffy's stats at Harry's door. I stand by what I said with regards to the quality of the teams Defoe has played in and the amount of opportunities (or lack of) he has had....'

      Joe, if other managers then didn't give Daffy the 'opportunities' is that then more to do with Daffy and what the managers see in his abilities, rather than the manager being at fault? England have been crying out for a striker for ages - why didn't Daffy get opportunities? Isn't it simply that for Daffy to be used, you play to Daffy, rather than playing to the teams strengths? Fine if you can. But if you can't doesn't Daffy become a limiting factor? As for the quality of the teams that Daffy has played for - that's semi-ok - but again you'd also then have to ask, if he's been so good, and it's so obvious, why the big clubs didn't come into to snap him up. Where were the Utd's, Woolwich's, Chav's, Pool's,Citeh's, Bayern's, Ajax's. Why did he end up at Pompey?

      '...' I like to see the whole picture, not just take season's in isolation - as we all know how sometimes players can shine and then completely fade.'- of course you do, because in this instance it suits you argument....'

      OK - then give me the stats that suit your argument and we can discuss the merits of stats usage. Anytime I use an example that doesn't in your mind accurately reflect ALL the information, show me where I'm going wrong. I've no problem with that at all.
      And if you've got stats that back up your point at any stage - I'd be very interested.

      '.....Stat-in 'ell, I think you are overlooking the reasons why some of those stats may be as they are, That is all. Stats are only ever part of the story (at most) they reflect what has passed, without any consideration for reason. ....'

      Of course. I'm quite happy for you to then provide your opinion of why those stats occurred. IE if Daffy has been top class and hasn't been given the opportunities (at club and country), then why? I'd be more than interested in hearing the hows and whys. But until I hear your opinion, I will go along with mine - and that is the managers have so far seen the same limitations roughly as I do.

      '..Defoe (and others) should have been given more starts and more time in the place of VDV, because at times he caused more problems than he solved....'
      Yes, I was also one of those that doubted his place alongside Modric - and conflict it may cause. But for all the '...he drops too deep...' it's quit an good record for us isn't it? 24 goals and 16 assists from a midfielder over a couple of seasons? Who else have we had that has done that? What problems did he cause that outweighed his benefits?
      If by 'others' you mean Two Saints, wasn't he sold without even giving him a game this pre-season/season (not by 'arry I must add)? Maybe you should again ask why? Who was queuing to buy him? Apart from Mexico, when have you seen him play well?

      I sincerely think people forget that a manager of a club tends to see a player day-in, day-out. They take on board what their 'coaching team' thinks as well. They will have a far better opinion of their form, abilities and mind set than any of us. So what may appear as an odd choice, could be totally explained if any of us had witnessed the same stuff in training.

      I agree with your last sentiment. I want ALL Spurs players and managers to succeed. I may not have liked some managers and players, but I want them to do well irrespective - as to me, I want Spurs to do well. I have seen enough of my 'favourites' and 'villains' come and go to know its all transient. So I'll repeat again, I'd love Daffy to get 20+ goals.

    • "I think at times it's only too easy to get sucked into the 'fantasy football manager' bit and think you know better than the manager. That's the fans privilege, but not their responsibility.
      As you say, the manager (and the myriad coaching staff) sees the players all week and tries their formations and pairings. They will 'know' who fits the system and who doesn't, who works well with who and who doesn't. They will then base their squad on that knowledge, niggling injuries, fitness, form, who the opposition is etc. Their job is on the line based on those match day decisions, not like the amateur punters and critics who can bleat all they like (to friends, family and 'social' networking sites) about every aspect, without any consequence"

      If that is not the most condescending thing I have ever seen written on this board I don't know what is - you stuck up prat John.

    • '....What do you mean "I try to keep it on a seperate thread"? If I am not mistaken you are the most prolific poster on here and pretty much each time your posts are the same i.e. laden with boring statistics ("Statistics, statistics and lies"), links to other sites that are only loosly based on whatever it is you have a point on and always taking a slight issue with whatever somebody else has said - EVEN if they have pointed out it is just their opinion....'

      What I mean is, I started this thread to continue the 'arry/Daffy/Villa bit that seemed to pollute each thread. Maybe I am insane, but I think if you look at virtually all of SB's posts, even when talking about AVB and whoever, she has managed to get 'arry or Daffy or VdV into the post. So I thought I'd start this thread so she, and you if you so wish, can vent your spleens and I'll reply to those points here. That way I can continue to talk about AVB or Dembele - the current Spurs team - elsewhere whilst addressing the '...but 'arry lost it...', '..Daffy will score lots....', '....VdV is on a zimmer...' here. Make sense? No? Oh well.


      '...Not rudely or in any angry sort of way (which might be better as then we could argue against whatever it is you have taken issue with) but in a slow, slightly disagreeing way which, when someone responds to it, you drag out until whoever it is gets frustrated and bored - you win! Congratulations...'

      Again Sfer, IF, as you keep posting you find it so boring, don't reply. I honestly won't be offended. Couldn't I argue that you don't see my point of view just the same?

      '....SB, in her inimitable way, tried to engage with you, I tried but eventually gave up and I notice that Joe gave it a fairly good go too recently. But there is no point. You refuse to see somebody else's point of view. You must be a right pain in the Ar$e to live with John....'

      Is it me? Do you then see my point of view Sfer? I find it very strange that you seem to think you have a monopoly on being 'right'. You went to great lengths a while back to tell everyone how you had tried to reason with me as though it's a given that your opinion is all that matters.

      '....This board used to have a lot more posters who generally enjoyed poking fun and discussing topics of the day with a bit of Ar$e micky taking thrown in. Since you have come on here there are less posters, the laughs have dried up and because your posts are usually SO long and written with such boring stats and are always pointing out that IYO somebody else is wrong, people are not bothering to comment. Even Fab has given up FFS!!!...'

      Really? I state my opinion. I don't recall saying anyone else is wrong or that I'm right. But I will continue to state MY OPINION when anyone else states THEIR OPINION on a subject that I'm interested in. Does that make sense?


      I see your point of view and SB's, but I just don't agree. Isn't that the same as your standpoint with regard to me?

    • '....Ah, at last, you have revealed your true contempt for fans that don't rely on stats John.....'

      It's not contempt at all. And I think I've maintained the same stance since day 1. I (that's a capital) like to back up claims I make with facts if I can . To me, if you discuss something other than a preference, then try to use facts if you can. IE If I say 'arry was the best manager we've had since the 60's - I'd need to qualify 'best' (league positions, silverware, win percentage) - and then I'd try to show it. If I said I liked Christian Gross more than Wendy Ramos...that's just a preference. (Actually I wasn't keen on either).

      '...You have taken it upon yourself to take issue with any fan that has an opinion not based on fact (If you can call stats facts) and point out the error of thier ways.....'

      If anyone wants to say '... I like blah more than blah'... then that is up to them as it is subjective and a matter of taste. You don't like T'Hudd, I do. You didn't like 'arry, I did. Subjective. But when you say 'better' or use a comparative term, then surely you need to know what you're comparing? No?
      IE if you said that T'Hudd is crap at passing - and if there were figures on pass success rates and it showed T'Hudd was in the top 10% - then isn't sensible to say that? No?


      '....If somebody says out loud that they think Defoe is better than Adebyor it is up to John the Crusader to "prove" that is completely untrue....'

      Totally depends on how/what is said doesn't it? If someone says '... I think A is better than B....' it's different to stating '..A is better than B...'. But both may be false depending what 'better' means in their mind.
      At first I think I'd need to know in what way Daffy was better. Better at tackling, better record of scoring, better with his head, better...'better' means nothing unless it is qualified, ie unless you know what scale to apply.
      I'm no 'crusader', but I will ask what they mean. If they then qualified it and said Daffy scores more than Ade - then I may check to see if they're right - and if they're not, I'll show them the figures. What a sin eh. How mad am I.



      '....Exactly how high is that horse of yours John? (the use of stats to prove this is not required)....'

      It's odd how people react. I try - I don't always succeed - to address the point being made, not to attack the person. You and SB seem the opposite, you seem to want to attack the person rather than addressing the point. Again, that's your choice.

    • Sfer's missing Arry so cut him a bit of slack.
      Anyway, John---I've sent you a dozen long distance pens down to keep you going.
      H

    • View More Messages