Vincent Janssen

[Boltonspur]

Well this is still the Janssen thread, but looking at the team as a whole, you can argue that all that matters is the team scoring goals by any means, and winning points, and I wouldn't disagree with that.

However, that's perhaps a bit short sighted. It assumes we will continue to score goals and pick up points to the degree we want to, and it sees one of our players as collateral damage, or places the blame on him (perhaps erroneously). If Janssen actually is not the problem then hiring a new striker now or in the summer won't fix the root cause of the problem.

As a striker myself in my past, I can see that Janseen is not getting service, and I can see he now lacks self belief. Both are problems in my opinion, but any new striker is going to struggle likewise without adequate service even if their belief is good initially, so I see it as a problem that needs fixing.

In the same way that some players fuck off to "bigger & better things" & leave a club in the shit, other players end up as collateral damage. Some just don't settle or don't get the rub of the green (exhibit A- Roberto Soldado).

We have to find a way to rebuild if someone leaves us. In the same way, we have to cut our losses if a player doesn't get his shit together.

We play a certain way. We need a certain type of player. For me, either Janssen trains his heart out to fit in with the system or he has to find another club that suits his style better if he can't adapt. I don't see it that Spurs has a problem. We aren't going to stop scoring goals imo & we'd be having a different conversation about how the goals weren't being shared around the pitch- which is an equal problem, if not a more acute one. You are then over reliant on your strikers & are bang in trouble when they have an off day or are marked out of games.

 

[Boltonspur]

Yes, I did say we have a problem. And we do. This long range shooting vs. passing is a marginal gain that is the difference between us being in the middle of a 6-way dogfight to try and finish in the top 4 and being a title contender. It's literally the last big step we need to make. If we don't make it, we remain as we are. If we do, we become something much bigger.

But as Guido 🇺🇦 says, the stats don't tell you whether the pass is on. When teams play us, they try to restrict us to long range efforts- it's called parking the bus. Nobody wants to see Kane unmarked in the area. So they concentrate on the threat of Kane (or Janssen if Kane isn't playing)

Sharing the goals around the team is the only way. We play a very fluid style- look at where Ben Davies found himself yesterday at 70 minutes. The opposition will struggle to know where the threat comes from & therefore can't plan for it. If they know that we bang it across the goal for the big man to nod in, then we are very predictable & easily countered.

 

[Juicy Sushi]

Yet we've scored 6 more goals in the PL than this time last year.....not sure why you wont address that.

Is it not relevant to your point that we are scoring less?

No, as my point is not that we aren't scoring goals, it's that we aren't scoring as many goals as we could with smarter play.

We're having a good year. Solidly in the top 4 fight, winning matches. But, our style of attack could best be described as sloppy, and with some tightening up, could become much more effective, and take us from just being in the top 4 fight to being front-runners for the League.

 

[Juicy Sushi]

But as Guido 🇺🇦 says, the stats don't tell you whether the pass is on. When teams play us, they try to restrict us to long range efforts- it's called parking the bus. Nobody wants to see Kane unmarked in the area. So they concentrate on the threat of Kane (or Janssen if Kane isn't playing)

Sharing the goals around the team is the only way. We play a very fluid style- look at where Ben Davies found himself yesterday at 70 minutes. The opposition will struggle to know where the threat comes from & therefore can't plan for it. If they know that we bang it across the goal for the big man to nod in, then we are very predictable & easily countered.

We're also very predictable if they know we won't try and play a throughball and instead will prefer to shoot from range. Which is what we're doing right now. We've all seen moments when the pass has been on, and it hasn't been taken this year. And the results have shown it as well.

 

[Super Jan Fan]

In the same way that some players fuck off to "bigger & better things" & leave a club in the shit, other players end up as collateral damage. Some just don't settle or don't get the rub of the green (exhibit A- Roberto Soldado).

We have to find a way to rebuild if someone leaves us. In the same way, we have to cut our losses if a player doesn't get his shit together.

We play a certain way. We need a certain type of player. For me, either Janssen trains his heart out to fit in with the system or he has to find another club that suits his style better if he can't adapt. I don't see it that Spurs has a problem. We aren't going to stop scoring goals imo & we'd be having a different conversation about how the goals weren't being shared around the pitch- which is an equal problem, if not a more acute one. You are then over reliant on your strikers & are bang in trouble when they have an off day or are marked out of games.

I don't disagree, but of course, you rightly point out that it is not just our latest striker that has had problems scoring goals here when they have been successful elsewhere, but the one before that as well. Perhaps this suggests there is more to it than the individual. The system isn't much good to us if you have to be a world class like Kane in order to perform well in it.

Whether it is Janssen or a third attempt to sign the right striker, I think we could adapt our play a little bit without changing our overall philosophy to provide our strikers (or indeed any other player in a high conversation rate area) with better service. I'm not sure why we not attempt to do this.

 

[sammyspurs]

it's that we aren't scoring as many goals as we could with smarter play.

And there we can agree

But, our style of attack could best be described as sloppy, and with some tightening up, could become much more effective, and take us from just being in the top 4 fight to being front-runners for the League.

Agree in principle, but I dont think we are sloppy, I think we are a bit unadventurous in the final third, and would actually like to see MORE long range efforts.

When the through ball is not on, we go back. Why not shoot?

 

[Super Jan Fan]

We're also very predictable if they know we won't try and play a throughball and instead will prefer to shoot from range. Which is what we're doing right now. We've all seen moments when the pass has been on, and it hasn't been taken this year. And the results have shown it as well.

I don't see how anyone can disagree with this, teams that park the bus do so to stop you getting in their penalty area as they know long range shots are far less of a threat!

- Shots must be on target from distance which many are not.
- They must be where the goalkeeper cannot stop them, and the distance gives them an advantage as they have more time to react.
- They must be hit hard enough to be a threat.
- Shots have to get through a bunch of players that might block or deflect them off target.
- They increase the likelihood of the opposition losing possession.

In short, teams parking the bus don't really fear long range shots very much. They are far more scared of you getting in their box, which is why they set up to stop you doing that. It is relevant to say that sometimes a pass to a player in the box is not on and stats do not show when this is the case. Sometimes though our team make a mistake and shoot when they should pass. I've seen it in most games. You might shoot in the situation where there really are no good alternatives, shooting is sometimes the right thing to do. But the very best teams are good at breaking through the bus - they pass it through the open window and they score from inside the penalty area. We are better at this than we used to be, but room for improvement in my opinion.

 

[Juicy Sushi]

And there we can agree



Agree in principle, but I dont think we are sloppy, I think we are a bit unadventurous in the final third, and would actually like to see MORE long range efforts.

When the through ball is not on, we go back. Why not shoot?

Because it's a low % chance that when missed, gives the ball to the other team. We pass it back to so we can recycle it and try again to make a better chance.

This isn't something unique to Spurs. The best attacking teams all share the same basic characteristics. They shoot more than the others, and they shoot from closer. The best attacks to both things to the maximum possible. Biggest example of what effect trying to improve shot quality will have is Klopp's last season at Dortmund vs. Tuchel's first. Tuchel got the team to focus on creating better shooting locations by not shooting from range and focusing on passing it into the box more. The results were pretty damn devastating:
The Dortmund Attack and the Spurs Defense – MK Shot Maps
(Bonus, also shows how Pochettino made this jump defensively)

 

[sammyspurs]

Because it's a low % chance that when missed, gives the ball to the other team. We pass it back to so we can recycle it and try again to make a better chance.

I think we disagree on the benefits of shooting from outside the box.
The way I see it is, shoot from the edge of the18yard box when no forward pass is on (if there is a shot on of course)....chance to score, low percentage or not.

Or, pass it back and keep possession, end up on the halfway line, or Lloris. Zero chance of a goal in that attack.

Yes you can build again, and maybe get shut out again. You can finish the game with 70% posession and no attampts.

Not scoring from a long shot, is no worse than not scoring by going backwards.

Through balls are great, but to use your own argument against you, I could say, why play the through ball? The oppo might get the ball, so just go back and start over. Kane or Janssen will never get the ball anyway.

 

[Boltonspur]

We're also very predictable if they know we won't try and play a throughball and instead will prefer to shoot from range. Which is what we're doing right now. We've all seen moments when the pass has been on, and it hasn't been taken this year. And the results have shown it as well.

Our last 4 goals have come from balls played into the box. We have won both games comfortably & haven't conceded. Against villa you'd probably expect that, but we nullified the league leaders the game before. We mix it up. The goals are coming from different players. I don't have any problem with that, regardless of whether the stats say we aren't getting the ball to our strikers. When they aren't scoring themselves, the striker should act as a foil for others around him. Kane does that. Janssen doesn't - yet. But he does put himself about & soften up defenders. In terms of results, we have lost two games all season & been without key players for extended periods. We are still without Lamela who is another lock picker.
The stats may cause you concern, but I'm looking at the table & don't think it could look very much better.

 

[Boltonspur]

I think we disagree on the benefits of shooting from outside the box.
The way I see it is, shoot from the edge of the18yard box and when no forward pass is on (if there is a shot on of course)....chance to score, low percentage or not.

Or, pass it back and keep possession, end up on the halfway line, or Lloris. Zero chance of a goal in that attack.

Yes you can build again, and maybe get shut out again. You can finish the game with 70% posession and no attampts.

Not scoring from a long shot, is no worse than not scoring by going backwards.

Through balls are great, but to use your own argument against you, I could say, why play the through ball? The oppo might get the ball, so just go back and start over. Kane or Janssen will never get the ball anyway.

By this token, why would anyone ever have a shot from a direct free kick? Pass it into the box to the striker ffs...

 

[spursmalc]

I think we did have a scoring problem because Kane, Dele and Eriksen were off form. They now are on form and problem over. However we do not have enough goal scorers and when none of those 3 play we have a problem like the first hour yesterday. Janssen was unlucky not to have at least one of those 3 with him. Strikers have been slow to get going in the past including Chivers and Paul Stewart who both took a while. He clearly needs help to be told to take up better positions and I cannot see him starting other than to rest Kane. However we should not give up on him and he should get bench time and come on when we need goals and perhaps instead of asking Kane to drop back, let Janssen play the support role which may give him more space.

 

[Juicy Sushi]

I think we disagree on the benefits of shooting from outside the box.
The way I see it is, shoot from the edge of the18yard box and when no forward pass is on (if there is a shot on of course)....chance to score, low percentage or not.

Or, pass it back and keep possession, end up on the halfway line, or Lloris. Zero chance of a goal in that attack.

Yes you can build again, and maybe get shut out again. You can finish the game with 70% posession and no attampts.

Not scoring from a long shot, is no worse than not scoring by going backwards.

Through balls are great, but to use your own argument against you, I could say, why play the through ball? The oppo might get the ball, so just go back and start over. Kane or Janssen will never get the ball anyway.

Because when you do it creates a scoring chance with a much higher % of success. Here's a question for you. How many of our long range shots have actually been scored this year?
This article lays things out pretty starkly:
Shooting when inside the penalty area is probably a good thing
50% of our shots come from inside the box. But 97% of our goals do. The long shots are not helping.

 

[Juicy Sushi]

Our last 4 goals have come from balls played into the box. We have won both games comfortably & haven't conceded. Against villa you'd probably expect that, but we nullified the league leaders the game before. We mix it up. The goals are coming from different players. I don't have any problem with that, regardless of whether the stats say we aren't getting the ball to our strikers. When they aren't scoring themselves, the striker should act as a foil for others around him. Kane does that. Janssen doesn't - yet. But he does put himself about & soften up defenders. In terms of results, we have lost two games all season & been without key players for extended periods. We are still without Lamela who is another lock picker.
The stats may cause you concern, but I'm looking at the table & don't think it could look very much better.

We're in third. We could be in first. I think that would look better.

 

[SouthCoastSpur]

Can we have a stats thread.

 

[NorseYid]

Too much fuss about Vince. He will be fine.

Has plenty of physical attributes in is clearly a fullblood striker.

 

[sammyspurs]

Because when you do it creates a scoring chance with a much higher % of success. Here's a question for you. How many of our long range shots have actually been scored this year?
This article lays things out pretty starkly:
Shooting when inside the penalty area is probably a good thing
50% of our shots come from inside the box. But 97% of our goals do. The long shots are not helping.

But you are using one rule for long shots, and one rule for not shooting.

If they shoot long and it goes wide, chance is over. Goal kick, we can win back possession and go again.

If we pass back from the edge of the box, and end up a Lloris, chance gone, we go again.
Its not one long drawn out attack. The chance is gone. That attack ended, just like the first attack ended with the missed shot.

You also ignore the many, many risks we have taken going backwards when getting pickpocketed while arsing around among the back line and Lloris' diabolical distribution.

97% of our goals are scored inside the box. So what? How does that mean shooting long sometimes is negative? And if its our AMs scoring inside the box, so what? Is that also detrimental?

 

[Boltonspur]

We're in third. We could be in first. I think that would look better.

Agreed. But we are very well placed in spite of what the stats tell you. I think we are performing at a level well above what I have come to expect as a Spurs fan. With a young team & manager.

I'm going to leave it here, as we won't agree. I prefer to judge things on what I see on the pitch rather than pour over pie charts & graphs. Some people combine the two things to maximise their enjoyment. To each, their own.

 

[Juicy Sushi]

But you are using one rule for long shots, and one rule for not shooting.

If they shoot long and it goes wide, chance is over. Goal kick, we can win back possession and go again.

If we pass back from the edge of the box, and end up a Lloris, chance gone, we go again.
Its not one long drawn out attack. The chance is gone. That attack ended, just like the first attack ended with the missed shot.

You also ignore the many, many risks we have taken going backwards when getting pickpocketed while arsing around among the back line and Lloris' diabolical distribution.

97% of our goals are scored inside the box. So what? How does that mean shooting long sometimes is negative? And if its our AMs scoring inside the box, so what? Is that also detrimental?

I think you're missing the point. If it goes back to Lloris, we still have possession and the chance to attack. If we don't have the ball, we have to win it back, which is not guaranteed.

How many times have we been pick-pocketed? The number is actually quite few. Lloris isn't great with distribution, but is noticeably worse when trying to play it long. Passing to a CB to play it out of the back again is much less risky than lumping it forward.

The 97% of our goals coming from inside the box matters because it's a reminder that the long shots are not going in. But we take a lot of them. 50% of our shots are coming from range. That's the highest % among the good teams. Yet they're not going in. Maybe, since this ranged shooting isn't getting goals, we should take the hint and pass into the box more, since all our goals are happening there?

I don't care if its the AMs instead of the strikers shooting from inside the box, I care where we shoot from. But, it is our AMs going the bulk of the long range shooting. So...

 

[Guido 🇺🇦]

Yes, and it was on a third time as well, when he shot from range instead of playing the ball into the box for Dele to run onto when he was unmarked. A higher % chance foregone because we shot from range instead.

Come on mate you're really stretching it here.