Long - Time to go.

[Schards#2]

Over the past two seasons, Federici has scored 100% of our home goals against Cardiff with a strike rate of 0.5 goals per game. Over the course of a season this would equate to 23 goals.

If he doesn't start up front on Wednesday, it will be an outrage, the stats don't lie.

[Wimb]

Over the past two seasons, Federici has scored 100% of our home goals against Cardiff with a strike rate of 0.5 goals per game. Over the course of a season this would equate to 23 goals.

If he doesn't start up front on Wednesday, it will be an outrage, the stats don't lie.

[Snowball]

The comparison with Doyle's awful run of not scoring doesn't really help things does it? Does one players poor form justify anothers?

Or Torres?

My point is that you do NOT judge a player on any single run of form, whether a purple patch or a drought.

This is a young player who still scores better than 1 in 3 and 25% of his goals have been against Premiership opposition.

The point is that cmonurz is being selective, trying to make Long look worse than he is. Looking at the two most recent seasons, the three most recent, the four most recent (plus the little bit of this season) Long's form as a goal-scorer is not at all bad. Comparing him to 5.5 Million Kitson or 6.5M Doyle or 7M Gylfi is not exactly fair, is it? Nevertheless he has 32 in 93 games (including pens) 24 in 92 games excluding pens.

Another example of the deliberate skewing of the data is to say either that he isn't deadly (he was deadlier than Doyle and second only to Kitson) or that he gets his goals from a yard out (in fact just 2 yards closer in than Gylfi excluding free-kicks) or that he doesn't score in open play. I think 28/32 = 87.5% is a pretty good average. Both Doyle and Kitson and SHunt had plenty of penalties to their name. Gylfi had EIGHT PENALTIES (ONE MISSED) and thus 7 of his 22 (a third, basically) plus another three dead-balls (10/22 = 45% of Gylfi's goals were from dead balls!!)

Doyle was, in my opinion, being flogged by Coppell at the time because we didn't have adequate cover for him. He looked so jaded and off form and was crying out for a rest it wasn't a surprise he wasn't scoring. I think he may have been struggling with an injury at the time too but we needed to play him because nothing else was working (should've given Cox a game!).

I agree that Doyle was played too much. But that made Hunt (60 minutes a game) and Long (on as a sub most games) look worse than they might have. But Hoop, IMAGINE THIS, imagine me using such fuzzy excuses for Long as you do there for Doyle. There'd be uproar! You are very probably right, but it's considered "not good form" to suggest that Shane has a tough time of it playing alone against two CBs and being battered every game.

More to the point the whole team was struggling to create or score chances at that time weren't they? That's what cost us promotion, so it wasn't just Doyle being a bit crap that caused that barren spell.

And apart from Burnley (where Long played, scored, made 2 goals) and Doncaster (where he was off for 3 of the goals scored while we played 442) hasn't the bitch THIS SEASON been we were not scoring goals, not making chances?

Of course it wasn't Doyle's fault. I loved the man! I am merely pointing out how selective stats can distort his contribution to the club, whereas

080 Starts (83) 093.83 Games 32 Goals A Goal Every 2.932 Games A goal every 4.47 shots Long
145 Starts (17) 147.83 Games 55 Goals A Goal Every 2.688 Games A goal every 4.89 shots Doyle


DOES NOT LIE. A perfectly fair, direct comparison across ALL their games

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

Odd that other managers are happy to pay £5m+ for the likes of Kitson and Doyle yet no one is keen to offer a brass farthing for Long.

Don't these managers with a lifetime of expirience in the professional game understand stats?

To be fair neither Kitson or Doyle have been scoring much where they are now.

[Snowball]

In a post on its own, just for clarity

080 Starts (83) 093.83 Games 32 Goals A Goal Every 2.932 Games A goal every 4.47 shots Long

145 Starts (17) 147.83 Games 55 Goals A Goal Every 2.688 Games A goal every 4.89 shots Doyle


A perfectly fair, direct comparison across ALL their games


Long is still improving. He has never had 4 goals so early in a season (2 from open play).
Barring injury he's on for 9 or 10 goals (excluding the FA Cup) this season. If he plays
better after Xmas as he has done every year, he might be nearer 15. That would be
44 goals from 125 games, closing in on Doyle's totals.

Or simply multiply Shane's goals by 147.83/93.83 to equalise the number of games. That's 50.4 Goals.


That is, if Long DOESN'T improve, if he plays at the average he has done so including being a raw 18-year old kid
he will be on 50 or 51 goals when he has played as much as Doyle.

However, if he plays at the level of the last two seasons and this season combined, he will BETTER Doyle's goal total.


No that doesn't make him a better player than Kevin. It just makes him a lot better than his detractors say he is.

[cmonurz]

'Looking at the last two seasons, Long's form as a goalscorer is not that bad'



I mean, I'll flog a dead donkey, but this is a carcass. How can I argue a point with someone who genuinely believes the statement above?

I'll repeat ad nauseum because I'm right.

You gabble on about looking at 'complete seasons', I post some stats up that run from the beginning of last season, and you have issue with that too. The fact is that no, over the last season and a bit Long hasn't shown himself to be a consistent goalscorer. It's relevant to say 'excluding that purple patch...' because a striker is next to useless if he scores all his goals in a 4 game window around Xmas. And that's what Long's stats show.

From the start of last season, he went 15 games without a goal from open play. Then he hit 4 in 4, and since then he has 2 goals from open play in 26 games. I don't think it's unreasonable to look at that and wonder if Shane Long is ever really going to be a '20 goal a season' striker at this level. I doubt it myself.

There's nothing selective about taking over a year's worth of stats as you well know Snowball, and as you have asked me to do previously.

And I still haven't had an apology for being called immeasurably stupid, a moron, and a twat, for holding a different opinion to Snowball. I don't expect to get one either, after all, I did dare criticise his stats.

And Snowball, the problem with your stat above in comparison to Doyle is your arbitrary allocation of minutes for a sub appearance.

[Wycombe Royal]

My point is that you do NOT judge a player on any single run of form, whether a purple patch or a drought.

No you don't and both Doyle and Long's English careers have been the same length. I'll leave you to show the stats as to who has the better record............

I'll give you a clue - he is playing in the Premiership.

[Snowball]

Odd that other managers are happy to pay £5m+ for the likes of Kitson and Doyle yet no one is keen to offer a brass farthing for Long.

Don't these managers with a lifetime of expirience in the professional game understand stats?

To be fair neither Kitson or Doyle have been scoring much where they are now.

This season Doyle has yet to score in the Premiership (10 Starts) and has only scored versus Notts County (2) in the cup

Domestic Games 2009-10-11

2009-10

34 (03) = 34.5 Games 9 Goals Doyle (Premiership)
24 (12) = 26.0 Games 9 Goals LONG (Championship, 3 Goals v Premiership Teams)

2010-11

11 (03) = 11.5 Games 2 Goals Doyle
14 (00) = 14.0 Games 3 Goals LONG

45 (06) = 46 Games 11 Goals Doyle (9 Goals v Prem opposition, 2 Goals v League 2 Opposition)
35 (12) = 37 Games 12 Goals LONG (3 Goals v Prem opposition, 9 goals v Championship opposition)

9 goals v Premiership opponents in 44 games Doyle = 1 goal every 8.88 games
3 goals v Premiership opponents in 04 games LONG = 1 goal every 1.33 games (about 700% better)

Of COURSE it was just 4 games for Long, but they are his stats and pretty impressive they are!

And before people start saying that Kevin has it tougher, he also has Premiership players helping him score!

[Hoop Blah]

This post was made by Snowball who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

He talks more sense this way...

[Snowball]

My point is that you do NOT judge a player on any single run of form, whether a purple patch or a drought.

No you don't and both Doyle and Long's English careers have been the same length. I'll leave you to show the stats as to who has the better record............

I'll give you a clue - he is playing in the Premiership.

It's hardly "when they joined". Gyfli was at the club, HOW long exactly?

It's GAMES played and the comparison is straightforward.

093.83 Games 32 Goals Long
147.83 Games 55 Goals Doyle

[cmonurz]

Well no, the comparison isn't straight-forward is it. Because that's not how many games they've played, for a start, it's your arbitrary measure of minutes for a sub appearance.

[Wycombe Royal]

My point is that you do NOT judge a player on any single run of form, whether a purple patch or a drought.

No you don't and both Doyle and Long's English careers have been the same length. I'll leave you to show the stats as to who has the better record............

I'll give you a clue - he is playing in the Premiership.

It's hardly "when they joined". Gyfli was at the club, HOW long exactly?

It's GAMES played and the comparison is straightforward.

093.83 Games 32 Goals Long
147.83 Games 55 Goals Doyle

Seeing as you want to coninue with your endless stats - show us the percentage of matches played in the Premiership....

[Snowball]

You gabble on about looking at 'complete seasons', I post some stats up that run from the beginning of last season, and you have issue with that too. The fact is that no, over the last season and a bit Long hasn't shown himself to be a consistent goalscorer. It's relevant to say 'excluding that purple patch...' because a striker is next to useless if he scores all his goals in a 4 game window around Xmas. And that's what Long's stats show.

Rubbish

[Snowball]

I don't care how many he has scored against Premiership opposition we aren't in the Premiership. The simple fact is he is struggling this season, and this season is all that matters. One great goal against QPR does not change that, he needs to score regularly over the next FEW matches.

No. He needs to score a certain amount of goals in the season, and win a certain amount of points in that season, commensurate with the manager's requirements.

Contrary to popular opinion, the player's job is to do what THE MANAGER asks, not the fans.


I do not think he is struggling this season. The manager does not think he is struggling this season

[Wycombe Royal]

I don't care how many he has scored against Premiership opposition we aren't in the Premiership. The simple fact is he is struggling this season, and this season is all that matters. One great goal against QPR does not change that, he needs to score regularly over the next FEW matches.

No. He needs to score a certain amount of goals in the season, and win a certain amount of points in that season, commensurate with the manager's requirements.

Contrary to popular opinion, the player's job is to do what THE MANAGER asks, not the fans.


I do not think he is struggling this season. The manager does not think he is struggling this season

A player does not win points, the team does.

[Snowball]

Well no, the comparison isn't straight-forward is it. Because that's not how many games they've played, for a start, it's your arbitrary measure of minutes for a sub appearance.

I actually tested that rule of thumb and showed it comes out with a couple of per cent either way.

This form of stat favours Doyle because he started and often played the whole 90 minutes
whereas Hunt, for example, usually played 60-65.

First, players started do not always play 90 (but we presume they do)

Second, it's quite easy to look at a player's sub appearances and total their minutes.

Church, for example, has twice come on as sub in the 89th minute.

[cmonurz]

You gabble on about looking at 'complete seasons', I post some stats up that run from the beginning of last season, and you have issue with that too. The fact is that no, over the last season and a bit Long hasn't shown himself to be a consistent goalscorer. It's relevant to say 'excluding that purple patch...' because a striker is next to useless if he scores all his goals in a 4 game window around Xmas. And that's what Long's stats show.

Rubbish

Not rubbish at all. You want season-long stats, you got them. Back to the start of last season, all but 2 of Long's goals in open play have come in one 4-game spurt around Xmas 2009. That's not a consistent goalscorer.

The point you seem to consistently miss is that I don't have to be selective to 'make Long look bad' - the reason you run down so many blind alleys on our Shane is because you are trying to statistically show that a poor goalscorer is in fact a regular goalscorer. It would make 100 times more sense if you were just making post after post emphasising Long's other credentials like his work-rate, pace etc, but for some reason you want to try to prove the one thing you can't.

He doesn't regularly score goals from open play, and he never has.

I don't 'want' to make Long look bad at all - I don't rate him as a goalscorer, but if he can do what he did against QPR, maybe once every 2 games, or twice every 5, then I'll be more than happy to have him in the side proving me wrong.

[Wax Jacket]

but if he can do what he did against QPR, maybe once every 2 games, or twice every 5, then I'll be more than happy to have him in the side proving me wrong.

big if

[Snowball]

Seeing as you want to continue with your endless stats - show us the percentage of matches played in the Premiership....

56.6% of Doyle's games for Reading were in the Championship 65% of his goals (36 Championship goals v 19 Premiership)
73.3% of Long's games for Reading have been in the Championship 78% of his goals. 25 Championship goals v 7 Premiership


Seems that Long finds it almost the same scoring in the Premiership, whereas Doyle, by comparison, struggled.

[Snowball]

The point you seem to consistently miss is that I don't have to be selective to 'make Long look bad' - the reason you run down so many blind alleys on our Shane is because you are trying to statistically show that a poor goalscorer is in fact a regular goalscorer. It would make 100 times more sense if you were just making post after post emphasising Long's other credentials like his work-rate, pace etc, but for some reason you want to try to prove the one thing you can't.

He doesn't regularly score goals from open play, and he never has.

I don't 'want' to make Long look bad at all - I don't rate him as a goalscorer, but if he can do what he did against QPR, maybe once every 2 games, or twice every 5, then I'll be more than happy to have him in the side proving me wrong.

Doyle has had some horrible barren spells (longer than Long's worst). Lots of strikers get dry spells
And they are STARTING.

21
09-08-07-06-06-06-05-05-05-05