Shane Long

[St_Tel49]

And why would we? Our problem is supposedly a lack of depth and people are advocating selling one of the few players who provides a potential game-changing option.

 

Agreed. It is a good job that this forum doesn't run the club.

[Saint Charlie]

Remember its sell to replace with someone else that the Manager trusts and who will actually provide competition and improve the team. Long is always going to be peripheral because he isn't good enough.

 

Not just sell and lose an option in the squad.

 

Thats not the point of this, its saying we can have a better player than Long, who as proven by some of the responses about how hard it will be to shift him, isn't a top half quality player although is about the most dispenable player we have who is worth £5m+.

Edited 7 December, 2015 by Saint Charlie

[derry]

Maybe we should keep Long and look for a lung bursting midfielder that will give us a runner from midfield and wants to score goals. I'm sick and tired of our limited backwards and sideways midfielders that float around. The only time Davis made a break this season he scored. We haven't seen it since. Mostly its admire the pass and see what happens with the outnumbered forwards.

[whelk]

Yeah, that what I meant. He has 2.5 years left now, so no reason not to get at least £6m unless:

 

a.) nobody wants him enough

b.) he is ****e,

c.) he is on top much money

d.) all the above

 

Move him on and reinvest in a better player to improve the team.

 

1 you are a tiresome attention seeking bore

2 you list 4 points when a sentence will suffice

3 you are boring and tiresome

4 piano

[Saint Charlie]

1 you are a tiresome attention seeking bore

2 you list 4 points when a sentence will suffice

3 you are boring and tiresome

4 piano

 

[emoji38]

1. Its an internet forum

 

2. If people didn't have opinions it wouldn't really work

 

3. None of the thread is attention seeking

 

4. n/a

Edited 7 December, 2015 by Saint Charlie

[whelk]

In your world we'd only have a squad of 11 players then. Bravo.

 

And you advocate just using Jay Rodriguez. Who will be out injured (again) for a period of time and will need to get back to fitness before being a) available, and b) of any tangible use. Wonderful.

 

Agree quite amusing how the usual buffoons want to rid us of such an option.

[Wade Garrett]

Most of them have bigger incomes than we do.

 

We have the 4th lowest wage bill, and I would wager nowhere near the 4th lowest attendance. Also we are one of the only clubs that generally profit from transfer windows.

[CB Fry]

Long would get 6-7m and be a good signing for a Bournemouth, Villa, Sunderland, Norwich. He could play each week as a striker for these teams and they won't have much choice in January.

 

But we won't cut our losses like that will we.

Isn't that precisely the level of player we should have on the bench as a mid-table/top eight contender?

 

What exactly am I missing here?

[Whitey Grandad]

We have the 4th lowest wage bill, and I would wager nowhere near the 4th lowest attendance. Also we are one of the only clubs that generally profit from transfer windows.

 

The majority of the income is not from gate receipts, I thought. And don't forget that we have had rapid promotions over recent years so we have had to buy a Premier League team from nothing.

[david in sweden]

I don't see the need to replace a substitute who rarely makes any impact.

Rodriguez will come back and even half fit could replicate that.

Otherwise I'd rather Seager get the spot on the bench.

 

 

well....Last season Shane Long scored 7 times , incl. scoring 2 (v Leicester) as oncoming sub.

 

This season, Long has started only 3 games but been sub. 8 times and has scored 3 times in those games.

 

He has scored 5 (so far) in all comps. Considering that Pelle has 9, Mane 7 and Long and Tadic have scored 5 each ....I hardly think you can say he makes no impact.

Long's goals /game time is very impressive .....compared with the others who have made many more appearances, and only slightly better goal tally.

 

Everyone wants to see a 100% fit JayRod back, but no-one can guarantee he'll recapture his scoring form of 2 years ago.

[Wade Garrett]

The majority of the income is not from gate receipts, I thought. And don't forget that we have had rapid promotions over recent years so we have had to buy a Premier League team from nothing.

 

True, but there is probably a correlation between the attendance league table and income league table.

[Tom28]

That's just not the case. He pressurises defences, and creates space for the main attack. That's what he was bought for and that's what he does.

 

Just ignore Saint Charlie. He/she is a bellend.

[Whitey Grandad]

True, but there is probably a correlation between the attendance league table and income league table.

 

Oh, absolutely.

[Give it to Ron]

Isn't that precisely the level of player we should have on the bench as a mid-table/top eight contender?

 

What exactly am I missing here?

 

Exactly our squad is short on proven Premiership players yet here we have a post selling one of the most experienced!!! Bonkers

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Verbal Kint]

Agree quite amusing how the usual buffoons want to rid us of such an option.

 

But we don't use him as an option do we? He's been here for almost 18 months now and you can probably count on one hand the number of games he's started up front. We've spent a small fortune in a transfer fee and given a massive wage to a player and then not played him in his proper position. For 50k a week we could have 2 players from abroad or the lower leagues.

 

If Long started 10-15 games a season as our centre forward, being rotated with Pelle depending on tactics etc, I could understand it. But he doesn't. He's a bench player who comes on for 10 minutes at the end and when he does he's played out of position. Just think how much better that money could be spent

[Whitey Grandad]

But we don't use him as an option do we? He's been here for almost 18 months now and you can probably count on one hand the number of games he's started up front. We've spent a small fortune in a transfer fee and given a massive wage to a player and then not played him in his proper position. For 50k a week we could have 2 players from abroad or the lower leagues.

 

If Long started 10-15 games a season as our centre forward, being rotated with Pelle depending on tactics etc, I could understand it. But he doesn't. He's a bench player who comes on for 10 minutes at the end and when he does he's played out of position. Just think how much better that money could be spent

 

You're taking some time to get used to this upper Premier League/challenging in Europe business, aren't you?

[CB Fry]

But we don't use him as an option do we? He's been here for almost 18 months now and you can probably count on one hand the number of games he's started up front. We've spent a small fortune in a transfer fee and given a massive wage to a player and then not played him in his proper position. For 50k a week we could have 2 players from abroad or the lower leagues.

 

If Long started 10-15 games a season as our centre forward, being rotated with Pelle depending on tactics etc, I could understand it. But he doesn't. He's a bench player who comes on for 10 minutes at the end and when he does he's played out of position. Just think how much better that money could be spent

Two players from abroad or the lower leagues sounds like the kind of "quantity over quality" stuff that people have been complaining about us doing this weekend as before.

 

Sell Shane Long and replace him with cheap squad filler we can then grumble about because we've just bought too much cheap squad filler.

[Verbal Kint]

Two players from abroad or the lower leagues sounds like the kind of "quantity over quality" stuff that people have been complaining about us doing this weekend as before.

 

Sell Shane Long and replace him with cheap squad filler we can then grumble about because we've just bought too much cheap squad filler.

 

Not cheap squad filler, more "younger talented players that don't demand very big wages". Clasie was reported as signing a contract for half of that amount with us, young players in the Championship earn even less than that. We can buy some of the best players in foreign leagues and pay them significantly less than we pay Long.

 

We have been told we are limited in what we can do with our squad by FFP as we can only raise our wage bill by so much every season, and yet 3 of our biggest earners over the last couple of seasons have been Osvaldo, Gaston and Long, with none of them having much opportunity to contribute on the pitch. It's a colossal waste of money

[CB Fry]

Not cheap squad filler, more "younger talented players that don't demand very big wages". Clasie was reported as signing a contract for half of that amount with us, young players in the Championship earn even less than that. We can buy some of the best players in foreign leagues and pay them significantly less than we pay Long.

 

We have been told we are limited in what we can do with our squad by FFP as we can only raise our wage bill by so much every season, and yet 3 of our biggest earners over the last couple of seasons have been Osvaldo, Gaston and Long, with none of them having much opportunity to contribute on the pitch. It's a colossal waste of money

We signed Cedric for half a Shlong and all I can see is people pi ssing and moaning about how we've bought cheap.

 

We buy two players for six million to cover Shane Longs contribution then we're looking at, at best, two players playing 15 games a season, or one covering all of Shane's game time and the other not playing at all. Both of those, as far as I can see, would have people on here wailing about buying too many, too cheap, and also moaning about how these cheap signings are blocking the pathway for our brilliant youngsters.

[scotty]

Just ignore Saint Charlie. He/she is a bellend.

 

That's good advice, which I've now taken.

[Saint Charlie]

Amazes me how people get so intolerant & personal on a Forum when someone has a different opinion to them.

 

If I'm a bellend because I think we can do better than Shane Long then fair enough I guess.

 

Hope you have a nice, agreeable day tomorrow! ☺

[Roger]

I would sell him tomorrow a very poor signing imo. Doesn't chase back either and no skill. Whoever said he knows where goal is, he's never scored more than 8 even in championship.

[CB Fry]

I would sell him tomorrow a very poor signing imo. Doesn't chase back either and no skill. Whoever said he knows where goal is, he's never scored more than 8 even in championship.

Except when he scored 25.

[Verbal Kint]

We signed Cedric for half a Shlong and all I can see is people pi ssing and moaning about how we've bought cheap.

 

We buy two players for six million to cover Shane Longs contribution then we're looking at, at best, two players playing 15 games a season, or one covering all of Shane's game time and the other not playing at all. Both of those, as far as I can see, would have people on here wailing about buying too many, too cheap, and also moaning about how these cheap signings are blocking the pathway for our brilliant youngsters.

 

Cedric is a good signing. Not the finished product but loads of potential to work with. We needed to buy two right backs, and most people are complaining about the signing of Martina not the signing of Cedric.

 

I'm not saying we need two players to cover Shane Long. I'm saying we could have found a striker out there offering us just as much as Long does for a fraction of the cost (both in fee and wages) and still have had room to get another right back in, or another attacking midfielder etc etc.

long and Gaston: more than 100k a week being spent on two players giving us absolutely nothing, either because they aren't good enough or because the manager won't use them. It's a shocking waste of money, but at least when we bought Gaston it was with the intention of him being a main player for us

[Saint_clark]

I would sell him tomorrow a very poor signing imo. Doesn't chase back either and no skill. Whoever said he knows where goal is, he's never scored more than 8 even in championship.

 

Never chases back [emoji23]

[Donatello]

We have the 4th lowest wage bill, and I would wager nowhere near the 4th lowest attendance. Also we are one of the only clubs that generally profit from transfer windows.

 

Where have you read this? From what I've read, this simply isn't true.

[Saint Charlie]

Never chases back [emoji23]

Erik Pieters will confirm that!

[Saint86]

So. I was a bit bored and thought I'd look up the two players (Tadic vs Long) respective stats in the premier league with Saints.

 

Long 14/15 - 5 goals and 6 assists. (1545 minutes)

Long 15/16 - 2 Goals and 0 assists. (366 minutes)

Long Total - 7 goals and 6 assists. (1911 minutes)

 

Tadic 14/15 - 4 goals and 9 assists. (2056 minutes)

Tadic 15/16 - 4 goals and 3 assists. (1058 minutes)

Tadic Total - 8 goals and 12 assists (3115 minutes)

 

If you take assists as worth the same as goals then:

 

Long has 7+6 = 13 and 1911/13 = 147 minutes per goal contribution.

Tadic has 8+12 = 20 and 3115/20 = 155.75 minutes per goal contribution.

 

So surprisingly, Long actually contributes more efficiently as an attacking outlet. Especially as he has a higher goals per minute ratio than tadic when both play as wingers, and tadic has a couple of penalties that could arguably be removed from his total with regards to contribution.

 

I find the above amusing since some put Tadic on a completely different level to Slong in regards to his importance to the team and contribution... when actually there is very little in it and the little man probably deserves a bit more respect and acknowledgement of what he offers.

[Batman]

So. I was a bit bored and thought I'd look up the two players (Tadic vs Long) respective stats in the premier league with Saints.

 

Long 14/15 - 5 goals and 6 assists. (1545 minutes)

Long 15/16 - 2 Goals and 0 assists. (366 minutes)

Long Total - 7 goals and 6 assists. (1911 minutes)

 

Tadic 14/15 - 4 goals and 9 assists. (2056 minutes)

Tadic 15/16 - 4 goals and 3 assists. (1058 minutes)

Tadic Total - 8 goals and 12 assists (3115 minutes)

 

If you take assists as worth the same as goals then:

 

Long has 7+6 = 13 and 1911/13 = 147 minutes per goal contribution.

Tadic has 8+12 = 20 and 3115/20 = 155.75 minutes per goal contribution.

 

So surprisingly, Long actually contributes more efficiently as an attacking outlet. Especially as he has a higher goals per minute ratio than tadic when both play as wingers, and tadic has a couple of penalties that could arguably be removed from his total with regards to contribution.

 

I find the above amusing since some put Tadic on a completely different level to Slong in regards to his importance to the team and contribution... when actually there is very little in it and the little man probably deserves a bit more respect and acknowledgement of what he offers.

 

I wonder how gaston ramirez will hold up to those stats. and he is seen as a waste of space

[doddisalegend]

So. I was a bit bored and thought I'd look up the two players (Tadic vs Long) respective stats in the premier league with Saints.

 

Long 14/15 - 5 goals and 6 assists. (1545 minutes)

Long 15/16 - 2 Goals and 0 assists. (366 minutes)

Long Total - 7 goals and 6 assists. (1911 minutes)

 

Tadic 14/15 - 4 goals and 9 assists. (2056 minutes)

Tadic 15/16 - 4 goals and 3 assists. (1058 minutes)

Tadic Total - 8 goals and 12 assists (3115 minutes)

 

If you take assists as worth the same as goals then:

 

Long has 7+6 = 13 and 1911/13 = 147 minutes per goal contribution.

Tadic has 8+12 = 20 and 3115/20 = 155.75 minutes per goal contribution.

 

So surprisingly, Long actually contributes more efficiently as an attacking outlet. Especially as he has a higher goals per minute ratio than tadic when both play as wingers, and tadic has a couple of penalties that could arguably be removed from his total with regards to contribution.

 

I find the above amusing since some put Tadic on a completely different level to Slong in regards to his importance to the team and contribution... when actually there is very little in it and the little man probably deserves a bit more respect and acknowledgement of what he offers.

 

So what you're saying is........we should sell Tadic in January to re-invest in someone better:D

[doddisalegend]

I wonder how gaston ramirez will hold up to those stats. and he is seen as a waste of space

 

Gaston 6 goals in 46 league appearances don't know about his assists

[stevegrant]

We have the 4th lowest wage bill, and I would wager nowhere near the 4th lowest attendance. Also we are one of the only clubs that generally profit from transfer windows.

Well you're categorically wrong on the wage bill part for a start.

 

And again, you seem to be under the misconception that transfer fees are the only cost involved in signing a player.

[Saint86]

So what you're saying is........we should sell Tadic in January to re-invest in someone better:D

 

Maybe so... since long has been deemed as the benchmark at which point we should sell players at half their purchase cost!!

[stevegrant]

Gaston 6 goals in 46 league appearances don't know about his assists

transfermarkt.co.uk is a good resource for that sort of thing.

 

12/13: 20 league starts, 6 sub appearances (total 1673 minutes) - 3 goals, 3 assists

13/14: 3 league starts, 15 sub appearances (total 507 minutes) - 1 goal, 3 assists

14/15: 0 league starts, 1 sub appearance (total 24 minutes) - 0 goals, 0 assists

15/16: 0 league starts, 1 sub appearance (total 10 minutes) - 0 goals, 1 assist

 

Total: 23 starts, 23 sub (total 2214 minutes) - 4 goals, 7 assists. 201.27 minutes per goal contribution.

 

Edit: adding cup games:

 

12/13: No appearances

13/14: 4 starts, 0 sub (total 316 minutes) - 2 goals, 1 assist

14/15: 0 starts, 1 sub (total 1 minute) - 0 goals, 0 assists

15/16: 1 start, 1 sub (total 92 minutes) - 0 goals, 0 assists

 

Total: 28 starts, 25 sub (total 2623 minutes) - 6 goals, 8 assists. 187.36 minutes per goal contribution.

[doddisalegend]

Maybe so... since long has been deemed as the benchmark at which point we should sell players at half their purchase cost!!

 

I'm getting quite excited actually the thought of the club selling every player the forum doesn't consider good enough and replacing them with better one will make for a very exciting Jan transfer window....

[doddisalegend]

transfermarkt.co.uk is a good resource for that sort of thing.

 

12/13: 20 league starts, 6 sub appearances (total 1673 minutes) - 3 goals, 3 assists

13/14: 3 league starts, 15 sub appearances (total 507 minutes) - 1 goal, 3 assists

14/15: 0 league starts, 1 sub appearance (total 24 minutes) - 0 goals, 0 assists

15/16: 0 league starts, 1 sub appearance (total 10 minutes) - 0 goals, 1 assist

 

Total: 23 starts, 23 sub (total 2214 minutes) - 4 goals, 7 assists. 201.27 minutes per goal contribution.

 

So a lot worse than Tadic or Shane Long ....who'd have believed that:lol:

[Maggie May]

Selling him in January with Euro 2016 on the horizon would be ludicrous.

[Window Cleaner]

Selling him in January with Euro 2016 on the horizon would be ludicrous.

 

We'll get a UEFA hand out for him as well and he probably wouldn't want to move anyway;

There are other players we could sell for more and who probably do want to move.

In any case the manager has ruled out any sales so it's all very academic really.

[The9]

So. I was a bit bored and thought I'd look up the two players (Tadic vs Long) respective stats in the premier league with Saints.

 

Long 14/15 - 5 goals and 6 assists. (1545 minutes)

Long 15/16 - 2 Goals and 0 assists. (366 minutes)

Long Total - 7 goals and 6 assists. (1911 minutes)

 

Tadic 14/15 - 4 goals and 9 assists. (2056 minutes)

Tadic 15/16 - 4 goals and 3 assists. (1058 minutes)

Tadic Total - 8 goals and 12 assists (3115 minutes)

 

If you take assists as worth the same as goals then:

 

Long has 7+6 = 13 and 1911/13 = 147 minutes per goal contribution.

Tadic has 8+12 = 20 and 3115/20 = 155.75 minutes per goal contribution.

 

The problems I have with this assessment are:

1) Goals and assists are not of equal value

2) Assists are of equal value to key passes (which are missed chances which are no fault of the person who created the chance).

 

Needs to compare like with like, one of them might be creating shedloads more chances but someone is missing them, which is no reflection on the creator's ability.

[derry]

So what are JWP's , Davis's and Wanyama's figure especially as Davis usually lines up between Mane and Tadic behind Pelle.

[Saint86]

So, everytime someone slags off long we post the above stats yeah

[Spoonman]

Nonsense thread. Long has been relatively decent in terms of the limited chances he's been given.

Difficult for a striker to make a massive impact when he starts once in a blue moon and routinely gets the last 10/15 mins.

[doddisalegend]

So, everytime someone slags off long we post the above stats yeah

 

Probably should highlight the Gaston stats to next time someone starts the "Why don't we play super Gaston he's better than Long" moan to....

[verlaine1979]

So what are JWP's , Davis's and Wanyama's figure especially as Davis usually lines up between Mane and Tadic behind Pelle.

 

Davis has made or scored 17 goals playing 8308 minutes, equalling a contribution every 488.7 minutes. Over the same period JWP has made or scored 13 (mostly made, natch) in 4365 minutes of football, equalling a contribution every 335.8 minutes. For comparison, over the same four seasons, Shelvey's average is a contribution every 268 minutes (and a lot more goals scored) and I don't think anyone would claim that he's a particularly coveted attacking midfielder.

[scotty]

Davis has made or scored 17 goals playing 8308 minutes, equalling a contribution every 488.7 minutes. Over the same period JWP has made or scored 13 (mostly made, natch) in 4365 minutes of football, equalling a contribution every 335.8 minutes. For comparison, over the same four seasons, Shelvey's average is a contribution every 268 minutes (and a lot more goals scored) and I don't think anyone would claim that he's a particularly coveted attacking midfielder.

 

This is one of those pointless discussions which assumes that the only stats worth considering are goals and direct assists. For example, how would shelveys stats compare to davis in terms of prevention of attacking threat by the opposition? Stopping an attack is just as important as starting/assisting /finishing one.

[derry]

This is one of those pointless discussions which assumes that the only stats worth considering are goals and direct assists. For example, how would shelveys stats compare to davis in terms of prevention of attacking threat by the opposition? Stopping an attack is just as important as starting/assisting /finishing one.

 

Glad you brought that up, when Swansea beat us here last season Davis twice let Shelvey go, first time he hit the far post, second time he scored. Davis just gave up both times. Against Everton he let Miralles go for the Lukaku winner and numerous times he was the nearest man to the shooter and turned his back or ducked under the ball.

[verlaine1979]

Glad you brought that up, when Swansea beat us here last season Davis twice let Shelvey go, first time he hit the far post, second time he scored. Davis just gave up both times. Against Everton he let Miralles go for the Lukaku winner and numerous times he was the nearest man to the shooter and turned his back or ducked under the ball.

 

Yup, leaving aside the question of whether you really want your central creative player's most visible skill to be defensive harrying, there were plenty of instances last season (particularly from December on) when SD was a positive liability both in surrendering possession and marking the opposition.

[Wade Garrett]

Well you're categorically wrong on the wage bill part for a start.

 

And again, you seem to be under the misconception that transfer fees are the only cost involved in signing a player.

 

Well that was where we were on the wage bill league table I saw. To be fair, that may have been last season.

 

I do understand that we have to pay players wages, but thanks for pointing it out to me again.

[CB Fry]

Well that was where we were on the wage bill league table I saw. To be fair, that may have been last season.

 

I do understand that we have to pay players wages, but thanks for pointing it out to me again.

The last table was published in about April, for the season before, the Pochettino season, our second season up.

[Chez]

He is our Jonno quick of the premiership.

 

Bang average player that we over paid for massively. Risky business criticising him on here though as there is bound to be someone that saw him score a screamer at Ipswich, which he seems to do just often enough to prevent fans noticing how average he is.

 

As with all players you don't rate, the question is will the man at the helm replace with better. He won't be sold, so irrelevant, but I'd be more than welcome to offers. There is talent out there.