[El Jefe]

I don't ever recall Lampard sitting in front of his back 4 and clipping perfectly weighted through balls on a plate for his attackers.

Lampard arguably did it more than Bruno. Before Mourinho joined Chelsea, he was very much a 442 central midfielder and had a blinder of a season playing CM in 03/04.

Plus Let's not pretend like it's a normal occurrence for Bruno to do what he's done over the last two games.

Calling him a poor man's Lampard seems harsh but its really difficult for me to argue that it's not accurate.

 

[Gabriel Djemba-Bebe]

Lampard arguably did it more than Bruno. Before Mourinho joined Chelsea, he was very much a 442 central midfielder and had a blinder of a season playing CM in 03/04.

Plus Let's not pretend like it's a normal occurrence for Bruno to do what he's done over the last two games.

Calling him a poor man's Lampard seems harsh but its really difficult for me to argue that it's not accurate.

That's because he's rarely been played in that position. You're saying this like it's a couple of freak performances. If Bruno sits deep from now until the end of the season then I'm confident he'll keep on dropping excellent performances.

My memory of Lampard under Ranieri is a little hazy but I'll take your word for it. I assumed that if he had a great passing range then he would've displayed it more often in the latter years of his career like most quality midfielders tend to do.

 

[RedSky]

I don't ever recall Lampard sitting in front of his back 4 and clipping perfectly weighted through balls on a plate for his attackers.

Lampard never had creativity in his game. He was an effective goal scorer and could run around but that was about it.

 

[zaafi]

That's because he's rarely been played in that position. You're saying this like it's a couple of freak performances. If Bruno sits deep from now until the end of the season then I'm confident he'll keep on dropping excellent performances.

My memory of Lampard under Ranieri is a little hazy but I'll take your word for it. I assumed that if he had a great passing range then he would've displayed it more often in the latter years of his career like most quality midfielders tend to do.

They are freak performances. He has never previously controlled the game while creating a ton of chances. He has, of course, created a ton of chances but the difference is huge doing it while simultaneously controlling the tempo of the game.
I believe he has the ability to do it, which is why I'm not looking forward to putting him as the number 10 again where he is freed from his deeper midfield shackles and free to do whatever he wants. Maybe there is a player in him that would be better as the deeper lying but also with the freedom to go forward, which I think we, as a team, would be better off with.

 

[Skills]

Lampard never had creativity in his game. He was an effective goal scorer and could run around but that was about it.

Top 5 all time for PL assists.

 

[El Jefe]

Lampard never had creativity in his game. He was an effective goal scorer and could run around but that was about it.

delete this while you still have time.

 

[AdNani]

Lampard never had creativity in his game. He was an effective goal scorer and could run around but that was about it.

Jesus wept. Lampard was an absolute world class #10

 

[UnofficialDevil]

Lampard never had creativity in his game. He was an effective goal scorer and could run around but that was about it.

Come on man.. yeah he played for Chelsea but he was world class.

 

[AdNani]

Be interesting to see if Bruno continues to play deeper when Eriksen returns properly, Might work with Eriksen playing at 10

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Top 5 all time for PL assists.

delete this while you still have time.

Jesus wept. Lampard was an absolute world class #10

Did any of you gimps watch him play? He wasn’t a number 10 and his assists record was mainly down to taking set pieces for a team that was stacked with aerially dominant players (as well as playing a huge number of games). He was an excellent central midfielder, who was superb at scoring goals but never the most creative. Players like Fabregas or Giggs were much more creative than Lampard. Bruno’s eye for a pass is also clearly a level above.

 

[RedSky]

Come on man.. yeah he played for Chelsea but he was world class.

I didnt say he wasn't, he was very effective as a goal scorer. But he wasn't a creative hub, that was not his strength.

 

[El Jefe]

Did any of you gimps watch him play? He wasn’t a number 10 and his assists record was mainly down to taking set pieces for a team that was stacked with aerially dominant players (as well as playing a huge number of games). He was an excellent central midfield, who was superb at scoring goals but never the most creative. Players like Fabregas or Giggs were much more creative than Lampard. Bruno’s eye for a pass is also clearly a level above.

Good old Pogue doubling down on a terrible take.

You are completely wrong, he was one of the best final passers of his generation and had so many open play assists that its just a ridiculous thing to say. Lampard's limitation was that he couldn't dictate a game as well as some of the other great passers but he had incredible passing range and ability to open up defences.

Bruno is clearly a level below.

 

[tenpoless]

McTominy can sit in the top 20 player for assist if he had peak Drogba playing ahead of him for a decade.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Good old Pogue doubling down on a terrible take.

You are completely wrong, he was one of the best final passers of his generation and had so many open play assists that its just a ridiculous thing to say. Lampard's limitation was that he couldn't dictate a game as well as some of the other great passers but he had incredible passing range and ability to open up defences.

Bruno is clearly a level below.

Prove it.

Show me some stats on his chance creation and assists from open play?

The equivalent to this:

 

[RedSky]

Good old Pogue doubling down on a terrible take.

You are completely wrong, he was one of the best final passers of his generation and had so many open play assists that its just a ridiculous thing to say. Lampard's limitation was that he couldn't dictate a game as well as some of the other great passers but he had incredible passing range and ability to open up defences.

Bruno is clearly a level below.

It's not a terrible take is it though? Look at the numbers.

Bruno has a G+A every 0.63 per game.
Lampard has a G+A every 0.46 per game.

Even if you exclude penalties scored you still get:

Bruno has a G+A every 0.50 per game.
Lampard has a G+A every 0.41 per game.

Yes Lampard has higher Assist numbers total, but he played over 600 PL games for Chelsea. Bruno has played 115 PL games. So what's more impressive? Lampards 102 assists in 609 games or Brunos 31 in 115. I'd also argue that the League is significantly harder than in the 00's and Brunos been playing in a significantly weaker team than Lampard had at Chelsea. To say it's a terrible take is laughable, Brunos an excellent player for us. The amount of hate he gets on here is absurd.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

All I can find for Frank Lampard is a total number of assists, which includes set-piece and open play combined.

102 assists in 600+ appearances. One assist every six games. The equivalent for Fabregas is 1 in 3. For Fernandes it's just under 1 in 4. Giggs more or less the same as Bruno.

"Clearly a level below"

Now that really is a terrible take.

EDIT: I see @RedSky beat me to it!

 

[RedSky]

All I can find for Frank Lampard is a total number of assists, which includes set-piece and open play combined.

102 assists in 600+ appearances. One assist every six games. The equivalent for Fabregas is 1 in 3. For Fernandes it's just under 1 in 4. Giggs more or less the same as Bruno.

EDIT: I see @RedSky beat me to it!

#TeamBruno

 

[Lyng]

Surely people are not claiming Bruno is a better player than Lampard was??

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Surely people are not claiming Bruno is a better player than Lampard was??

Read the thread. Nobody is claiming that.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

#TeamBruno

#FeckFatFwank

 

[Lyng]

Read the thread. Nobody is claiming that.

Then what exactly are you guys trying to say?
Lampard was extremely good at creating chances. He could actually take on people and dribble and then pass it on, which was one of the main ways he made his assists. Bruno is a fantastic passer, but cannot really take a man on.

 

[Stacks]

Is that really his strength? His shooting was very impressive when he was joined but that seems like a purple patch now.

nah I still believe in his shooting. He has a great strike and has proven it enough in his time here. I fancy him edge of the box over anyone in our squad. McTominay too

I don't ever recall Lampard sitting in front of his back 4 and clipping perfectly weighted through balls on a plate for his attackers.

He can do it. Has played CM plenty of times and his passing was solid

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Then what exactly are you guys trying to say?
Lampard was extremely good at creating chances. He could actually take on people and dribble and then pass it on, which was one of the main ways he made his assists. Bruno is a fantastic passer, but cannot really take a man on.

Lampard was never a great dribbler. Certainly not noticeably better than Bruno. He had excellent vision, was an accurate, consistent passer and had one of the best long range shots in PL history, as well as a similar knack to Scholes for well timed runs into the box. Hence he scored a load of goals.

The debate here is about whether he was an extremely creative passer or not. Based on him assisting less frequently than Giggs/Fabregas/Bruno and how many goals Chelsea scored from set-pieces (taken by Lampard) it’s fair to conclude that his creative passing probably wasn’t at the same level as the other players mentioned. Which is apparently “a terrible take” as Lampard was “a level above”.

 

[Skills]

Lampard was never a great dribbler. Certainly not noticeably better than Bruno. He had excellent vision, was an accurate, consistent passer and had one of the best long range shots in PL history, as well as a similar knack to Scholes for well timed runs into the box. Hence he scored a load of goals.

The debate here is about whether he was an extremely creative passer or not. Based on him assisting less frequently than Giggs/Fabregas/Bruno and how many goals Chelsea scored from set-pieces (taken by Lampard) it’s fair to conclude that his creative passing probably wasn’t at the same level as the other players mentioned. Which is apparently “a terrible take” as Lampard was “a level above”.

Between 04/05 and 09/10 Lampard got 68 assists in 208 games. That's when he was a creative force.

That's a 1 in 3 ratio.

Now he wasn't anywhere near as imaginative as a Fabregas/Giggs/Ozil who are almost geniuses. But I don't think Fernandes is in that class as well.

 

[El Jefe]

It's not a terrible take is it though? Look at the numbers.

Bruno has a G+A every 0.63 per game.
Lampard has a G+A every 0.46 per game.

Even if you exclude penalties scored you still get:

Bruno has a G+A every 0.50 per game.
Lampard has a G+A every 0.41 per game.

Yes Lampard has higher Assist numbers total, but he played over 600 PL games for Chelsea. Bruno has played 115 PL games. So what's more impressive? Lampards 102 assists in 609 games or Brunos 31 in 115. I'd also argue that the League is significantly harder than in the 00's and Brunos been playing in a significantly weaker team than Lampard had at Chelsea. To say it's a terrible take is laughable, Brunos an excellent player for us. The amount of hate he gets on here is absurd.

All I can find for Frank Lampard is a total number of assists, which includes set-piece and open play combined.

102 assists in 600+ appearances. One assist every six games. The equivalent for Fabregas is 1 in 3. For Fernandes it's just under 1 in 4. Giggs more or less the same as Bruno.

"Clearly a level below"

Now that really is a terrible take.

EDIT: I see @RedSky beat me to it!

And herein lies the problem with spreadsheet watchers.

Lampard is a victim of longevity when it comes to per game stats. Between his games at West Ham and last 3 PL seasons where he was clearly past his peak he had over to 250 games. Comparing this all to Bruno's peak years is obviously favourable to Bruno. Lampard's assist per game during his peak would look very different.

First off the terrible take was saying or agreeing with a poster who said Lampard was not a creative player and reducing the bulk of his creativity to set pieces. No two ways about it that is a ridiculous opinion.

Lampard could make all the passes Bruno could with the added bonus of not needing as many tries as Bruno would. Like the earlier poster said, Bruno is a poor man's Lampard in all aspects of the game except pressing.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Between 04/05 and 09/10 Lampard got 68 assists in 208 games. That's when he was a creative force.

That's a 1 in 3 ratio.

Now he wasn't anywhere near as imaginative as a Fabregas/Giggs/Ozil who are almost geniuses. But I don't think Fernandes is in that class as well.

Which coincided with him playing for one of the all time most dominant PL teams. The fact that Bruno is anywhere near that sort of productivity playing for this Manchester United team is actually remarkable

 

[Stacks]

All I can find for Frank Lampard is a total number of assists, which includes set-piece and open play combined.

102 assists in 600+ appearances. One assist every six games. The equivalent for Fabregas is 1 in 3. For Fernandes it's just under 1 in 4. Giggs more or less the same as Bruno.

"Clearly a level below"

Now that really is a terrible take.

EDIT: I see @RedSky beat me to it!

#TeamBruno

Lampard was never a great dribbler. Certainly not noticeably better than Bruno. He had excellent vision, was an accurate, consistent passer and had one of the best long range shots in PL history, as well as a similar knack to Scholes for well timed runs into the box. Hence he scored a load of goals.

The debate here is about whether he was an extremely creative passer or not. Based on him assisting less frequently than Giggs/Fabregas/Bruno and how many goals Chelsea scored from set-pieces (taken by Lampard) it’s fair to conclude that his creative passing probably wasn’t at the same level as the other players mentioned. Which is apparently “a terrible take” as Lampard was “a level above”.

Transfermarkt has Lampard playing 648 games for Chelsea with 211 goals and 145 assists(closer to 1 in 4). I believe he consistently maintained a higher completion % than Bruno, he knows when to play the pass rather than force/spam which appears one of Bruno's challenges.

 

[RedSky]

And herein lies the problem with spreadsheet watchers.

Lampard is a victim of longevity when it comes to per game stats. Between his games at West Ham and last 3 PL seasons where he was clearly past his peak he had over to 250 games. Comparing this all to Bruno's peak years is obviously favourable to Bruno. Lampard's assist per game during his peak would look very different.

First off the terrible take was saying or agreeing with a poster who said Lampard was not a creative player and reducing the bulk of his creativity to set pieces. No two ways about it that is a ridiculous opinion.

Lampard could make all the passes Bruno could with the added bonus of not needing as many tries as Bruno would. Like the earlier poster said, Bruno is a poor man's Lampard in all aspects of the game except pressing.

It's got nothing to do with spreadsheets, it's about understanding ratios. You're the one trying to dismiss large chunks of data and picking and choosing when he should be judged, which is a weird take to have. I remember the countless discussions of Lampard v Gerrard England nonsense.

Transfermarkt has Lampard playing 648 games for Chelsea with 211 goals and 145 assists(closer to 1 in 4). I believe he consistently maintained a higher completion % than Bruno, he knows when to play the pass rather than force/spam which appears one of Bruno's challenges.

We're talking about PL stats. I took the stats from the Premier League site. I would trust the Premier League site more than Transfermarkt in this case. Weird you'd check Lampards stats but not Brunos.

 

[zaafi]

What? Are people suggesting Bruno is more creative than Lampard? He was such a good goal scorer that people forget about his other attributes

 

[El Jefe]

It's got nothing to do with spreadsheets, it's about understanding ratios. You're the one trying to dismiss large chunks of data and picking and choosing when he should be judged, which is a weird take to have. I remember the countless discussions of Lampard v Gerrard England nonsense.

Ahh so it makes perfect sense in your opionion to use 19 seasons of Lampard's averages against 3.5 years of Bruno?

Bruno has been in his peak ever since he joined us and you want to compare a peak vs a whole career?

What? Are people suggesting Bruno is more creative than Lampard? He was such a good goal scorer that people forget about his other attributes

Crazy isn't it.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Prove it.

Show me some stats on his chance creation and assists from open play?

The equivalent to this:

Still waiting for a response to this from the Lampard stans…

 

[RedSky]

Ahh so it makes perfect sense in your opionion to use 19 seasons of Lampard's averages against 3.5 years of Bruno?

Bruno has been in his peak ever since he joined us and you want to compare a peak vs a whole career?

Yes, Feel free to select the seasons of the appropriate age for each player to compare. But then you have to compare the success of each club in that period, the strength of the league, the quality of the squad etc etc.

If we're ignoring stats and instead using the memory check of a player in their prime 15 years ago. Then feel free, but looking at through your previous posts it's clear that you don't like Bruno and critise him on a consistent basis. So instead of looking at the stats and actually being pleasantly surprised by Bruno's quality you're instead turning it around and doubling down to continue your hate on the player which has been relentless. In fact I'm finding it hard to find a single positive comment in the 43 you have in here.

 

[Lyng]

Lampard was never a great dribbler. Certainly not noticeably better than Bruno. He had excellent vision, was an accurate, consistent passer and had one of the best long range shots in PL history, as well as a similar knack to Scholes for well timed runs into the box. Hence he scored a load of goals.

The debate here is about whether he was an extremely creative passer or not. Based on him assisting less frequently than Giggs/Fabregas/Bruno and how many goals Chelsea scored from set-pieces (taken by Lampard) it’s fair to conclude that his creative passing probably wasn’t at the same level as the other players mentioned. Which is apparently “a terrible take” as Lampard was “a level above”.

A much much better dribbler than Bruno. Its not even close. Bruno doesnt dribble at all really.

Lampard was a very good passer. If you look at FBref you sadly cannot get progressive passing stats etc for Lampard, but his g+a-p per 90 in his best season was considerably higher than Brunos in Brunos best season for us. Most of his seasons with Chelsea he did better than Brunos seasons so far with us on that.

 

[Marwood]

He is a very good player but imo he would look out of place in any hypothetical world 11. His weaknesses are too pronounced. His main strengths are shooting, finishing, spamming through balls and pressing. That's simply not a world class player in any era imo. Has glaring weaknesses which include very important and somewhat simple aspects of football. He is kinda a poor mans Lampard and many here didn't even class Lamps as world class

I'm not seeing that at all.

If any current United player is a poor mans Lampard its McTominay or Sabitzer.

 

[zaafi]

Still waiting for a response to this from the Lampard stans…

No one is saying Bruno doesn't create chances, but that stat also shows he's played far more minutes than many players on this list, and isn't that far ahead.

 

[UnofficialDevil]

And herein lies the problem with spreadsheet watchers.

Lampard is a victim of longevity when it comes to per game stats. Between his games at West Ham and last 3 PL seasons where he was clearly past his peak he had over to 250 games. Comparing this all to Bruno's peak years is obviously favourable to Bruno. Lampard's assist per game during his peak would look very different.

First off the terrible take was saying or agreeing with a poster who said Lampard was not a creative player and reducing the bulk of his creativity to set pieces. No two ways about it that is a ridiculous opinion.

Lampard could make all the passes Bruno could with the added bonus of not needing as many tries as Bruno would. Like the earlier poster said, Bruno is a poor man's Lampard in all aspects of the game except pressing.

This basically. Well said.

 

[Posh Red]

Did any of you gimps watch him play? He wasn’t a number 10 and his assists record was mainly down to taking set pieces for a team that was stacked with aerially dominant players (as well as playing a huge number of games). He was an excellent central midfielder, who was superb at scoring goals but never the most creative. Players like Fabregas or Giggs were much more creative than Lampard. Bruno’s eye for a pass is also clearly a level above.

I don’t think they did, to be honest. Lampard’s passing game was never anything special, and wasn’t as good as Bruno’s at all.

 

[Posh Red]

Good old Pogue doubling down on a terrible take.

You are completely wrong, he was one of the best final passers of his generation and had so many open play assists that its just a ridiculous thing to say. Lampard's limitation was that he couldn't dictate a game as well as some of the other great passers but he had incredible passing range and ability to open up defences.

Bruno is clearly a level below.

This just isn’t true at all. His creative passing was never a big feature of his game. I feel like I’ve walked into an alternative reality

 

[zaafi]

I don’t think they did, to be honest. Lampard’s passing game was never anything special, and wasn’t as good as Bruno’s at all.

You don't think people watched Lampard but then follow up with that.

 

[El Jefe]

Yes, Feel free to select the seasons of the appropriate age for each player to compare. But then you have to compare the success of each club in that period, the strength of the league, the quality of the squad etc etc.

If we're ignoring stats and instead using the memory check of a player in their prime 15 years ago. Then feel free, but looking at through your previous posts it's clear that you don't like Bruno and critise him on a consistent basis. So instead of looking at the stats and actually being pleasantly surprised by Bruno's quality you're instead turning it around and doubling down to continue your hate on the player which has been relentless. In fact I'm finding it hard to find a single positive comment in the 43 you have in here.

It's been done already @Skills posted assists stats of 1 in 3 for Lampard between the age of 25-30. Bruno joined us at 25 so that is like for like.

Its no secret I'm not the biggest fan of Bruno as a player but I think I've tried to be a fair as I can from my comments, I've even referred to him as 'key pass king' which he is. I'm a strong critic but I've never been in the business of hating on players.

This particular part of the thread is less about Bruno and more about your wildly incorrect post which pretty much started this whole debate chain. You said Lampard wasn't a creative player and with the stats and eye test that couldn't be further from the truth.