Do you think if faced with the choice, Klopp would choose to keep Firminho over Salah?
Eden Hazard | "It's time to enjoy life drinking beers"
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
A better question would be would he replace Firmino with a poacher type who would guarantee some stat padding? And the answer is an outright no.
You only need to look at us this season to see it's not that simple and that we should have stuck with Kai Havertz even if he doesn't score as much as Lukaku.
This is a silly way of looking at things. You're just looking at the end product without considering all the factors that go into generating the end product. Man City dominate every metric on the field and as a result usually end up with more goals than most teams come end of the season despite not having one single striker or prolific wide forward scorer in their roster.
Regarding Hazard, it is very possible to be instrumental in your team's ability to create chances and score goals without having insane G/A stats. The eye test is not sufficient but it provides confirmation, and any advanced statistical analysis that goes beyond G/A would show that Hazard was that important and great for Chelsea during his tenure in the PL.
Being able to unlock a tight defense through dribbling or making the key pass, or having such an ability that your presence on the pitch opens up space for teammates to be more productive... We don't have the stats yet (publicly) to demonstrate this quality but I'd wager they would heavily favor players like Hazard, Iniesta, Silva...
Firmino is getting replaced by Jota who is more potent in front of goal
Here is the proof https://www.skysports.com/football/...d-to-real-madrid-assessing-his-chelsea-legacy
Nope they aren't bad players, but they aren't at Hazard level. Hard to get assists for a player like Willian who has never been a big goal scorer. You would be lucky if you got 6 Premier League goals from Willian, Willian was never prolific in Ukraine either.
Hazard only played with Mata one season, Remy was always injured and didn't play much, Giroud played well with Hazard. Batshuayi isn't very good. Costa has already been spoken about, he would only play for half a season.
They aren't worse than those Bayern players but those players play in an easier league, and would still usually be the best team in the league, not a great comparison.
Willian: 18 CL goals, 16 CL assists - 0 penalties
Hazard: 9 CL goals, 14 CL assists - including 5 penalties
If only Hazard had not been dragged down by Willian.
Hazard: 9 CL goals, 14 CL assists - including 5 penalties
If only Hazard had not been dragged down by Willian.
Is it possible that Jose just replaced the 32yr old Hasselbaink who was finished (as he went to Middlesboro after), kept the 26yr Gudjonsen and added another 26yr old Drogba who happened to be one of the best strikers in Europe at that time
Willian scored more than 6 league goals twice in 7 seasons. Never reached double figures. Wonderful goalscorer that guy.
What a stupid post.
Hazard will probalby have as many Liga titles as Cristiano by may
If Man City dominance of every metric will translate to wins, they would be unbeaten in the league since they dominate these metrics every game but they dont win every game
If you are doing something right, there will be a stat to show it. We can see passes stats for the players who do it as well as the dribble and takeon stats
I always find dribbling overrated, As it needlessly complicates what a pass can do. Below is what the CIES dribble index have or the EPL top dribblers and from the players on the list we can see that very few of them play for top clubs
PLAYER RANKING BY DRIBBLE INDEX - PREMIER LEAGUE
| Player | Club | Successful dribbles per 100 minutes | %Success Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.Adama Traore | Wolves | 11.24 | 79% |
| 2.Allan Saint-Maximin | Newcastle | 7.02 | 61% |
| 3.Lucas Moura | Tottenham | 4.51 | 58% |
| 4.Moussa Djenepo | Southampton | 4.13 | 42% |
| 5.Valentino Livramento | Southampton | 4.05 | 73% |
| 6.Raphinha Belloli | Leeds | 3.94 | 51% |
| 7.Wilfried Zaha | Crystal Palace | 3.72 | 50% |
| 8.Mason Greenwood | Manchester United | 3.36 | 59% |
| 9.Michail Antonio | West Ham | 3.12 | 57% |
| 10.Dwight McNeil | Burnley | 3.07 | 53% |
| Source: CIES |
Only as rotation/cover. When Firmino has been fit (as he's been of late) Jota was back competing for the wing positions.
This is not correct
Since January, The Firmino started games around the times of AFCON when Salah and Mane were off(plus Burnley). Jota has started more games just recovered from an ankle injury and still started the last match before the break vs Arsenal(which Firmino came in as a sub)
In the CL Jota started both games vs Inter, Firmino didnt start any of those
I don't know how much premium one can put on EFL or FA cup games since coaches rotate heavily for those too but Jota has started more of those than Firmino
What is it about odds that is confusing to you? Nothing you do can guarantee victory, but there are certain things you can do to make yourself favorites and give you the best chance of winning a game. Top teams do this very well, not just City.
Yes. A lot of stats are proprietary and are hidden from the public. Most stats available to the public are very basic and don't directly correlate to value provided on the pitch. That someone completed a lot of passes doesn't necessarily mean much if all those passes were sideways. Same for dribbling and take on stats.
If you know nothing about basketball this will mean nothing to you, but a player can be so good that their very presence on the court puts so much attention on them from the opposition that their teammates have more space to hurt the opposition. Stats have struggled to quantify this effect until recently, but that effect is there. Similar to what an effective dribbler can do in football.
There are certain situations where a pass won't suffice especially when you are facing a packed defense. But if you can take your marker out with a dribble that forces the defense to cover, which allows for another player to get free...
Why am I explaining this to this depth on a Thursday morning? I hate the idea of the eye test being superior but go watch some videos of Iniesta or Hazard or Silva doing what they do best and then come back and say "I find dribbling overrated". Aesthetics aside, it's one of the skillsets that can make the difference when a team is facing a challenging opponent.
The Arsenal game was the first time he played CF in the league since Chelsea away.
Granted he did in the cup final and vs Inter, but in the latter he was poor and Firmino's introduction changed the tie in the first leg.
If both are fit for a UCL final I'll be amazed if the Brazilian doesn't start.
Or against City for example, Klopp has already noted how important Firmino has been to his side at his best, the poster above must look at football as some computer game, both Pep and Klopp are managers who find in players who aren’t necessarily the most prolific but have a great understanding of the game, movement, how to utilise spaces, protecting the ball, and of course work rate.
Scoring more than the opponent guarantees you victory, not dribbling more, not passing more. Scoring more does
.
There are stats for forward passes which differentiates them from sideways passes.
Your presence in a field/court doesn't mean much, its the quality you bring to the field, We have seen Messi (the best player ever) recently get on the field and stroll around. It did not win his team games. If Messi does not do those actions that make him great and just walks around his presence alone will not make his team win
The list of top dribblers in the EPL and the team they play in doesn't agree. If you get a list of top dribblers in the EPL, how many of them play for the top teams regularly? Is it that Liverpool City, Chelsea cannot see these dribbles and sign these players
When Liverpool played City earlier in the season Jota was the player who started and Firmino came in as a sub. Maybe Klopp actually look and values someone who is more potent in front of goal
Their first goal at OT (sorry
) is a prime example of what he brings.He drifted into the centre of the pitch which allowed Salah and Keita to bomb past him and he played them in.
Now imagine Lukaku is playing in that position and where he would be in that build-up.
Their first goal at OT (sorry
He drifted into the centre of the pitch which allowed Salah and Keita to bomb past him and he played them in.
Now imagine Lukaku is playing in that position and where he would be in that build-up.
He must be acting obtuse, there's no other way
No shit. The question then is, what can I do to make my team better at scoring goals? Being able to dribble through tough defenses and create space is a way of doing that.
Publicly, not to the level of detail needed to accurately determine the value of a pass. Not every forward pass is equal. There are stats to measure this, but then again most of them are not available to the public
Wrong. The presence of a fully effective Messi on the field means that you have to adjust your defense to mitigate the damage he may cause if such adjustments aren't made. Another basketball analogy: the DEEEEEfense scheme changes as soon as Steph Curry steps on the court, even if he has missed the last few shots. I'm old enough to remember when in 06/07, Ronaldo was doubled on the wing by the winger/fullback due to him ripping a single marker apart on the dribble. This in turn gave us more space in the middle. If you disagree with this then consider this me waving the white flag
You're ranking top dribblers by dribble volume. I can't take any analysis serious that ranks Adama Traore as a top dribbler (going off his stint in the PL). Salah is a top dribbler (look at goal against City). Bernardo Silva is a top dribbler. Sterling on form is a top dribbler. They all have important roles in their teams today.
But again, if you rate attackers solely by G/A stats then here's me waving the white flag, because we just see the game different
Every coach have different tactics for doing this. Some do intricate passes, some do long balls, some do counter attacks, some focus on set pieces. Being able to dribble is one way and if it doesnt result in goals its useless
A fully effective Messi is the Messi that brings the expected quality of a GOAT not the Messi that just walks around the field. Being present on the field on its own does not win games doing what you are expected to do is. Its why Portugal took off an injured Ronaldo in the Euro final because his presence alone without being able to do what he is expected wont win them games.
If a dribbler is taking on players and ripping shots, laying assists like 06/07 Ronaldo was then the opponent need to plan for him, If he was doing the Denilson 1998 thing where he just dribbles to entertain himself, France wont bother to double up on him, Thuram would simply wait for him to be done and dispossess him. Or like the type of Quaresma/Adama dribbles
I did not do the ranking, the CIES did, an example of a body who do the detailed stats that you asked for. I have shown you a rating of top dribblers compiled by the CIES with Adama, Maximin, Djenepo, Moura on top, can you show me one that ranks Salah, Sterling Bernado tops?
Last edited:
Rashford managed 11 and 11 in the league which is close to Hazards best
World cup performacnes were overrated and ultimately Belgium will be disappointed to not atleast get to the final. Aren't they ranked number 1 in the world? They have zero final apps
I don't dismiss the eye test but scoring a goal is the single most important action in a football match. much like basketball, getting buckets is the rule so players who can cause goals at high volume and a variety of ways are most valuable.
Ok nice and how many games did each one play. Hazard played 245 league gamesso 2.4 chances per game. Suarez created 97 in one season.
Nah. Basketball individuals have a far greater impact on a teams ability to win matches than football as they have smaller route to the goal and less opposition players. Its far easier to take over a game. Its why Lebron can take a crap team to the finals but Messi would not do that playing for Stoke. Many teams just get one man to mark him e.g. dmc or something. Don't have to change your whole defence. He ain't Curry.
The world class Hazard couldn't possibly have been expected to perform in the CL because look at the state of his teammates. Its not right!
Yes but scoring doesn't happen in a vacuum. Passing and dribbling are merely options to optimally get the side in a better position to score. To use an extreme example, Xavi and Iniesta weren't particularly prolific goalscorers. I don't think either ever hit double digits in league goals during their time at Barcelona, at any point they could have been swapped out with midfielders who would have scored more, but this would have absolutely been at detriment to the side as a whole. Their ability to retain the ball and progress it was instrumental in controlling the game, both defensively and offensively, it enabled the side to consistently create chances while also starving the opposition of the ball.
The poster you replied to was stressing the importance of dribbling, and I think you've gone to the wrong conclusion based on that picture with the most dribbles stat. Make no mistake that the top sides understand the importance of this facet of the game, since Guardiola took over at City no other side matches them for dribbles per game in this time period. The reason they don't show up in your picture is because they're spread over the whole side, whereas the likes of Traore back at Wolves or ASM at Newcastle were fairly unique amongst their respective squads in regards to their ability to carry the ball.
It's also a more viable option for those clubs than it would be City, top sides will more often use their collective technical excellence to bring the ball forward, and will often have less space to exploit. Whereas if you're a side without the collective dominance of City, having an individual who can consistently bypass the press and exploit the space is something you'll call on more. As I said though, that's talking about individuals, as no team makes as many dribbles as City.
To bring this back to Hazard, this is part of what makes his performances in both league title wins so impressive. Unlike the other league winners in recent history where the responsibility of carrying the ball was spread around a bunch of players, Chelsea didn't really have much to call on in this department. They consistently looked to Hazard to start attacks, and not just with his obvious dribbling ability but also with his passing in a manner that is quite different to a lot of the players he often gets compared to, who tend to be more prototypical goalscoring inside forwards.
I've picked a few current players who often get compared to Hazard (often in terms of productivity), but I feel that this ignores what their responsibilities on the pitch for their respective clubs were. These stats don't mean anything in terms of who's the better player, but I do think it's insightful in assessing the roles they played
Son 25
Salah 30
Mane 33
Sterling 33
Mahrez 33
These are the average passes per 90, and for the sake of simplicity I've gone with only league data and from their current clubs.
Hazard 48
This is a pretty big disparity. And it doesn't just show up in how many passes these players make during a game, he also comfortably tops the group in both key passes and in the amount of dribbles he makes. Notably, he does have the least shots per game. There's a couple obvious reasons for this, and I think the main one is down to the makeup of the sides these players all featured for, and the managerial approach (and the player roles obvs). As I mentioned earlier about the dribbling stat, if you have a squad full of players who can perform this function you'll rely less on the individual, and the same goes in a passing sense. Whereas in the Chelsea league wins a massive amount of responsibility was on Hazard to initiate and create attacks, you had Fabregas in the Mourinho season who shouldered a lot of the burden in a passing sense (I think he dropped off in the second part of the season, but my memory is hazy so maybe a Chelsea supporter could confirm or deny that), but Hazard still offered a massive amount in a passing creative sense, and in terms of pure ball carrying I can't really think of anyone outside of him, Willian maybe? But even then I would say to nowhere near the same importance. In the Conte league win I think the passing burden was even more pronounced, and again in terms of initiating and creating through carrying the ball only Willian and I guess Pedro come to mind, but Willian was in and out of the side and in terms of what they contributed it was still a massive step down from Hazard.
This post has gone on longer than I'd envisioned, but I guess the crux of it is that Hazard gets pigeonholed into comparisons with players who are very different to, and have different roles, than Hazard. By assessing him solely through the prism of pure productivity I feel you miss what exactly it was he contributed. He's a hard player to pin down when it comes to comparisons, and pretty dissimilar on the pitch to the players outlined above, and I think the comparisons fall apart when you compare what they did on the pitch. I think as the years go on this will get worse, and he'll be reduced just to his goal tally.
Their first goal at OT (sorry
He drifted into the centre of the pitch which allowed Salah and Keita to bomb past him and he played them in.
Now imagine Lukaku is playing in that position and where he would be in that build-up.
That first half performance is a really good example of what he brings to the side, as iirc he didn't directly contribute a goal or an assist, yet was fundamentally important in a way that won't be reflected in a simple goal/assist tally.
Willian is a great dribbler though, as are a huge portion of brazilian wingers.
Some people diminishing effective dribbling, and praising limited poachers who require services... hilarious.
Willian scored more champions league goals than David Silva, so do you think Willian is better than David Silva?.
You see what i mentioned above about how you minimise everything Hazard does well to suit your agenda.
You asked for proof, i gave it too you for you to try and turn it around. What was the point in asking for proof then?.[/QUOTE]
Summed it up perfectly.
Also alongside Traore say 3 years ago Hazard Neymar Messi were statistically the best dribblers in the world, and also 3 of probably 6 of the best players in the world. Who are the best players of all time? Most lists would include Maradona R9 Pele Cruyff George Best Messi Di Stefano somewhere in any top 10, with Beckenbauer and CR7 being the other names constantly mentioned, the first group of players are probably the best dribblers of all time and incidentally make the sum of the greatest players to play the sport.
Even the second two( Franz and Cristiano) have been great dribblers at points in their career, no logical way you can say dribbling is overrated.
The way you guys are trying to sneak this parity between Neymar and Hazard is so shameless. Neymar is a better footballer who’s had a better career. It’s not “they were both great and are bothered declining and beyond that it’s apples and oranges”.
Even in their supposed declines Neymar is levels above Hazard
If this were true, Diego Maradona would not be thought of by a large proportion of the world as the greatest player ever, because he scored in his career about a third or a quarter of the totals managed by the most prolific scorers in history.
In a 433 which is what most top teams have been playing for the past 15yrs or a variation of it in 4231
The midfield 3 are not expected to score in bucketloads. They are to control possession
How many goals does Casemiro-modric-kroos, Fabinho-Henderson-Wijnaldum/Thiago
Kante Jorginho Kovacic etc have? They are not judged by their goals but anyone of the top 3 will be expected to deliver goals and assists. Hazard doesn't do enough of this to be considered as one of those top class and besides the injury that difference is why he struggled in Madrid.
A top team does not need an attacker who hugs the ball look to draw fouls and doesn't score enough.
His type of football was why Chelsea was not doing well in Europe in his time. It's the type of thing Zaha does for Crystal Palace where he just dribbles around and expect everything to go through him. If you are playing top opposition they will figure that out easily
[/QUOTE]
Silva doesn't play wing forward. He basically plays CM for City. Did you know that Silva registered 17 assists in Citys title winning campaign?
Well Liverpool and City are top teams and both have had players in the front three who’s main contribution to the team wasn’t scoring goals.
And also Eden Hazard at his best was stll
One of the most creative players in the world, he wasn’t just getting fouled ala Grealish he would provide you with chances after chances comparable with any player in the league and even Europe outside of Messi and possibly Neymar.
Your entire post is spot on, but this point especially is more important.
Probably one of the reasons Klopp was cool with Coutinho leaving.
This idea that Hazard was just an aimless dribbler who often ran into traffic and blind alleys is another one for the revisionist scrap book in this thread.
I agree since you slid Neymar in there.
in 257 apps for Napoli he managed 115 goals (pretty great) and 59 assists. So yeah he was pretty damn productive 174 goal contributions in 257apps is legendary. 34 goals and 13 assists in 90 odd international games = 47 goal contributions. Again pretty good. People think these guys just dribbled and pass but no they impacted the game at the highest way possible by generating goals.
Hazard is very similar to that kind of rate.
68 goal contributions in 116 games for Belgium - 33 goals and 35 assists.
202 goal contributions in 354 games for Chelsea 110 goals and 92 assists.
Bit of an odd comparison though. Football was very different in Maradona's day.
in those old days a forward contributing a goal every 2 games was top brass.