News with views from the No1 Spurs website

Sunday, 16 April 2017

Stats show Spurs players don't trust Janssen


I had a look at the game time of Vincent Janssen for a previous article which showed he had only played 40 minutes of Premier League football in 4 months between November and March.

Article: Vincent Janssen: 40 Premier League minutes in 4 months - he may still have a future

I wrote he has only played 789 minutes of Premier League football, 3 minutes, 61 minutes, 29 minutes (1 assist), 73 minutes, 4 minutes, 1 minute, 8 minutes, 1 minute, 5 minutes, 3 games not in the squad, 13 minutes, 1 minute, 4 games out injured, 7 minutes, that takes us all the way back to West Ham on 19 November.

In another article, I quoted 19-year-old Belgian talent and Tottenham target Youri Tielemans (Anderlecht captain) who was asked why his game had improved so dramatically this season, to which he replied that his teammates trusted him more and therefore passed him the ball more often, which gave him more opportunity to impact the game.

I argued that that may be a contributing factor into why Vincent Janssen is struggling at Tottenham, perhaps his teammates don't yet have the trust in him and are not passing him the ball as much. He has had a few minutes in recent games, 60 against Watford and 72 against Burnley so I though analysing his number of touches might reveal something.

Against Watford he played 60 minutes and touched the ball 18 times, Harry Kane came on as a substitute and played 30 minutes, he to touched the ball 18 times. So if Janssen had played 90 minutes he would have touched the ball 27 times and if Kane had played the 90 minutes he would have touched the ball 54 times. That is a huge difference.

Against Burnley, Janssen played 72 minutes and touched the ball 38 times, Son Heung-min came on as his replacement, playing 18 minutes and touching the ball 12 times. If Janssen had played 90 minutes he would have touched the ball 47 times and if Son Hueng-min had played 90 minutes he would have touched the ball 60 times.

That rather backs up the theory his teammates don't pass him the ball as much, thus he has less opportunity than others, which simply compounds the problem.

More from THBN
Imperious doing what we have to do
Twitter impressed with Spurs pressing game
Signing Rose, Walker and Dele is impossible
Barkley wants Spurs move
London is calling the NFL
£30m for Gibson, I don't think so
Another new Spurs kit leak



  1. What an awful thing to say...stats are BS and everyone knows it, the lad needs support not beggars belief that this was written by a fan...appalling article in my opinion.

    1. The truth is awful to say? stats prove he is passed to less than Kane and Tielemans confirms players pass less to players they haven't yet learnt to trust in the same way as others. All pretty basic, simple and true.

  2. Congratulations you have pointed out that Janssen is not Harry Kane. Did you use all of your brain cells or just 1 or 2 ?

    1. Think his point is that if he doesn't get the ball He can't affect the ball which is very true

  3. Stats, especially in football, are gross indications at best and to take them literally is pure rubbish, Janssen has shown what he can do at last and here is some moron still trying to undermine him. Stick with the daytime job.

  4. Not even worth reading. Leave the guy alone, he's young and developing. He's a good fit with the other players, works hard and meets our needs for a back up striker with some good kids coming through too.

    1. Haven't touched him, the article is about teammates not passing to hi enough!

    2. Of course it's touched him. Not passing to him enough because he isn't trusted is the crux of the article.
      The writer's claim that VJ is not trusted is a supportive statement?
      Get a grip, Clive.
      In a reply further down you pompously state "I expect readers to think beyond actual words".
      What the hell does that mean?
      If words can't explain clearly, the writer has failed.
      Just like you've done with that little pearl of
      Elliott wisdom.

    3. Then I'm afraid for some it will be impossible for the writer not to fail.

      One quite famous geezer in the bible had something to say about that once. It included the words "pearls" & "swine". I expect you know what I'm referring to.

      OTOH if not then I don't see that as my problem ;-)


    4. The correct grammar is "to what I'm referring".

  5. It seems a number of people have read this article and completely missed what it's trying to say. Some even interpret it as being critical of either Janssen himself or those around him. That simply isn't there.

    What is being said is that VJ is battling to show what he can do from a position where lack of readiness and other factors have seen him thrown in at the deep-end somewhat. The Dutch league is a million miles away from the Premiership as far as pace and quality of defending goes.

    He's started to show that he can handle things but it's always difficult to come into a very high performing team like Spurs in a league that is the most competitive on the planet and just be brilliant. Very few could handle that from the start. Very few could even last ninety minutes in a Spurs side that uses so much energy in their game.

    Obviously, everyone in a side is known and trusted by their teammates to a certain level. That will vary depending on what they have learned from playing with them. To say that VJ is trusted less than HK or SHM is a statement of such simplicity and undeniabilty (if that's a word). Of course he is. Does that affect how many opportunities he has to show what he can do in a game? Yes. Clearly it does.

    OTOH It also means that as he continues to progress and convince his teammates that he can be trusted, week in and week out, then he'll earn their trust, which in turn means he has more and better opportunities to show what he can do.

    I see that as a very positive thing. Certainly it makes that initial uphill struggle even steeper, but once he's past the first stage, and he looks to be getting there, then everything gets much easier and he can show what he has to offer. If that isn't much then fine. He'll have had his chance. I personally believe he has a great deal to offer though. He plays a different game from HK. That gives us (& MP particularly) options and flexibility to change things in games where they aren't working. Sometimes even both together could be used to confound the opposition completely. It's harder to defend against two different types of strikers than two of the same type.

    I believe this is an important message that gives us all hope for the future, and particularly those that like VJ.


    1. I think Adrian, that the 'ifs' in Clive's post may be the bones of contention.
      Statistically they have no basis in what is a game of chance.
      Otherwise I think we're all on the same page in that we want VJ to do well and progress.

    2. I get you Hibberni.

      I see those 'ifs' as simply setting a yardstick. 'All else being equal ...' type thing. They aren't equal of course, but if they were we could now be looking at figures that show him (VJ) up in a better light. So, when you're all deciding if he's really pulling his weight, bear in mind there are factors that make what he's doing ATM seem less impressive than they are.

      That's my take on what was being said in the article.

    3. Adrian, you can write hundreds and hundreds of words to confuse the issue, but the fact remains this article is total rubbish, written by a massive ego which is underlined by his "No. 1 Spurs website" claim.
      A little humility would be welcomed - but doubtless not forthcoming.

    4. On the nose Adrian, on the nose. I expect readers to think beyond actual words, some are capable, some don't bother and miss the meaning of articles all together.

    5. The words are intended to communicate ideas Chazza. If you read them you'll see there are no unsupported statements of my opinion as facts such as "the fact remains this article is total rubbish". My opinion is that you fail to appreciate the real point of the article and you lash out because you aren't comfortable with what you believe is being said.

      It may be advisable to read it through again with an open mind as to what the writer was attempting to get across. I don't know if you have the humility to do that, as I, and I suspect many others, already have after some of the comments that have been posted, but not to show that humility would be a shame after your comment suggesting the author should do so.

      If, after that, you're still happy with your original interpretation then I'm sure we can just agree to disagree. Obviously I'll take note of any further comments, but I've read it over a couple of times now and I'm happy it was meant as support for VJ - just as a couple of others written around the same time were exactly that, but less open to misunderstanding.

      Personally, like I suspect many are here that have posted comments, I would love to see VJ prosper here at Spurs. I love his attitude. I followed the saga of the transfer and was irritated that the extra cost had a probability of hanging a millstone around his neck as we've seen so often before with highly priced transfers, but still feeling confident after seeing videos of him in action last year. I believe, as Clive states above, that he's had "less opportunity" than others in the team to show what he can do. With the increasing trust will come more opportunities and I think he'll take them with both hands and show what he can add to the team. That seems like a rosy future to me.


    6. The Sermon according to St. Adrian!
      Thankyou for putting me down as a dimwit, but you have made the false assumption that I cared not to read the piece carefully, and, as a VJ optimist, with an open mind. I did, in fact, read it twice and the false use of statistics is the fundamental mistake in the whole thing.
      Which is why I claimed it total rubbish.
      Comparing VJ's opening 60 minutes to Kane's 30 against a tiring opposition? VJ's 72 against Son's 18 and then claiming what both would have in touches over the full 90?
      So laughable I want to weep.
      If you can make ANY sense of that you should be in marketing. It's exactly that sort of bogus logic that failed the Ford Edsel.
      Google that. Unlike you I don't want to write 500 words for the sake of it.

    7. Again you seem to misunderstand. I wasn't putting you down as a dimwit. I was actually putting you down as a hypocrite.

      Having said that, at least your latest post gives some reasoning behind your assessment. I'm happy to disagree with it as I don't believe the effects you mention have much of a bearing on the crux of the matter. Nevertheless at least you say something discernable instead of just stating the author is wrong in a blanket way. I can respect that even if I'm not swayed by your point.

      Even if I were of course, that wouldn't explain how you interpret what has been said as an attack on VJ. It's an excuse for him. But I've said all that before to no avail so I'll save myself the extra 400 odd words and give you up as a bad job. I have a cloud and harp to keep warm over here.


  6. It's quite simple to understand if you play any competitive team sport before at any level... you trust certain team mates to read your intention when you seek an outlet to pass to, those that repeatedly read what you telegraph will more than often or not get the ball... if there is a system, then everyone who has the system running in their veins will get the ball when the situation calls for it, but if you're not part of the system or slow to adapt to the change in formation or positioning, you're not going to get the ball cos you're not in position to receive it... Poch plays a system... if VJ isn't in the system like the others yet, it is not surprising he doesn't get much of the ball...

  7. Can I point out the game gets "looser" as defenders tire

  8. Of course you can. It was a valid point made earlier too.

    What I fail to see is why that would have any effect on how many passes each player would receive. Do players pass more when they're tired? Do they pass more when the opposition are tired? I wouldn't like to say, but I doubt it makes a great deal of difference overall (but I could be off on that of course).

    Don't get me wrong. I understand it could be a factor. I doubt it would fully explain the disparity though. I'd EXPECT new players to receive fewer passes than those already established and trusted by their teammates. It fits the psychology of sport. It makes sense. It also means that the figures that show how well VJ is doing can be treated as an underestimation of his potential as we can assume that as he progresses he'll earn more of the trust of his teammates and produce better results.

    That makes sense to me and is hopeful for the future. What's not to like?


    1. Perhaps you haven't noticed that - all season - Spurs have dominated possession in the last 20 -30 minutes of their matches because of their fitness. It's not exactly a revelation - it's been widely written.
      And what does more possession mean?

  9. More passes. That's certainly worth considering. I have done. Possibly not expertly.

    My conclusion, as you can read in the post you replied to this time, is that it may make a difference but that I wouldn't expect that difference to explain the whole disparity.

    IE. It's a good point, but even taking that into consideration I believe there is still a trust factor illustrated in the figures. That's my view but I accept I may be wrong.

    Nevertheless, I prefer to see this as something that means we can be hopeful of more from VJ as he continues to develop and gets fully up to speed with the English game.


  10. This comment has been removed by the author.



Just Tottenham

Just Tottenham Blogs


Football Blog Network

Unordered List

Theme Support