[Blue always red]

Again, if this was indeed the case then how does it explain Di Maria threading all those through balls to our strikers? RVP has excellent movement more often than not and Di Maria picks him out regularly.

In which games? I'm struggling to think of many in recent times. Likewise, Mata has also played our strikers in a number of times, but again not as much as what players of that calibre should be.

 

[jeff_goldblum]

Disagree. I pointed out why looking at the league is the fairest way to judge the impact of Mata's absence or lack of impact. Regardless, Chelsea finished 3rd just like they did in the season before except they were title challengers were for the vast majority of the season and would have probably won if key players hadn't lost form at the end.

Also, that's a very skewed way of looking stats. You've basically taken two of Mata's most productive seasons and then compared it against the entire careers of everyone else. Doesn't really make sense. According to Chelsea forums, Mata has a total of 52 assists for them. 33 from open play, 19 from set pieces. Source - http://forum.talkchelsea.net/topic/14112-8-oscar/page-212

Also, Total career stats

Rooney - 141 Assists from 543 games (Everton and United) - 0.26 assists/game
Ryan Giggs - 309 assists from 963 games - 0.32 assists/game
Juan Mata - 88 assists from 344 games (Valencia, Chelsea and United) - 0.25 assists/game.

That's a much fairer look at the stats. More to the point, Mata has barely looked like creating anything for us this season. For a #10 his passing is too much on the safe side for my liking and I'd like to see him force the issue a lot more.

As for Herrera, like I said I'm judging him mainly based on what I'm seeing at United and I like the look of him. He's been more productive than Mata, offers more defensively and imo brings more balance to the team. Mata's problem is mainly that he doesn't create enough. And when he's not creating he offers next to nothing. Another issue with him that moneymay touched upon is that his positioning as a #10 is too high, In the Liverpool game his average position is level with our strikers for instance.

You brought up the Chelsea stats actually, not me. You stated that Mata's open play assist stats for Chelsea were evidence that he doesn't create enough from open play, and I proved that actually his open play figures during those seasons are very strong. If I use your figures and cut it down to just those two seasons (initially I counted the bit-parts he got under Mourinho which diluted his stats) it comes out as 0.28 assists from open play a game and 0.44 in total.

More to the point, those stats are the most pertinent to this debate because the two full seasons he played at Chelsea are the only two seasons where he consistently was played as a #10. Basically the stats suggest that if you play him as a #10 he'll make score or provide an assist in 7 out of every 10 games. The comparisons to other players weren't to prove that he was better than them, simply to make the point that claiming that

I don't have anything against Herrera, I only mentioned him because you were happy to play down Mata's productivity and creativity using stats that are way way superior to Herrera's. Herrera will certainly provide a lot more work-rate from the #10 position than Mata but if previous seasons are anything to go on he'll also contribute far less offensively. I can certainly see why you might prefer him as a #10, but the one thing you can't point at Mata is that he 'doesn't create enough'. As I've proven, played consistently as a #10 he creates loads as well as bringing an admirable goal return.

 

[Nighteyes]

I don't have anything against Herrera, I only mentioned him because you were happy to play down Mata's productivity and creativity using stats that are way way superior to Herrera's. Herrera will certainly provide a lot more work-rate from the #10 position than Mata but if previous seasons are anything to go on he'll also contribute far less offensively. I can certainly see why you might prefer him as a #10, but the one thing you can't point at Mata is that he 'doesn't create enough'. As I've proven, played consistently as a #10 he creates loads as well as bringing an admirable goal return.

Actually, I can, because he's struggled with that part of the game here regardless of what he did at Chelsea. He's built up to be some kind of super creative force when the reality on the pitch is completely different. How many defense splitting passes has he actually played in his time here? The kind you'd expect your main creative player to come up with?

 

[JPRouve]

Actually, I can, because he's struggled with that part of the game here regardless of what he did at Chelsea. He's built up to be some kind of super creative force when the reality on the pitch is completely different. How many defense splitting passes has he actually played in his time here? The kind you'd expect your main creative player to come up with?

According to Squawka he created 29 chances, Di Maria 42, Rooney 33, Oscar 30, David Silva 48, Nasri 50, Hazard 71, Fabregas 67.
He played deeper than most of this players or played with less active teammates.

As for the through balls like Jean-Michel Larqué says, it is the player who makes( or don't) the run who has the power, Mata can't force through balls.

 

[Bwuk]

Annoys me to no end he isn't a guaranteed starter. Best #10 we have by a distance. In a 4-2-3-1 he'd be able to utilise Di Maria's pace and would link up well with him.

Yet we persist on playing him as an attacking midfielder in a diamond rather than the second striker #10 role he made his name as. And that's when he gets a game.

 

[Wednesday at Stoke]

I was watching the Juventus game and wondered how good they'd be with him at the tip of their midfield diamond. He'd have all the freedom with a dynamic midfield behind him.

Morata Tevez
Mata
Pogba Vidal
Pirlo
Evra Bonucci Chiellini Lichsteiner

Switch Pirlo for Marchisio if you need more mobility and that'd be a class attack.​

 

[Nighteyes]

As for the through balls like Jean-Michel Larqué says, it is the player who makes( or don't) the run who has the power, Mata can't force through balls.

I suppose, despite evidence to the contrary, it's easier to pretend our strikers don't make runs and put all the blame on them rather than accepting Mata's faults.

 

[JPRouve]

I suppose, despite evidence to the contrary, it's easier to pretend our strikers don't make runs and put all the blame on them rather than accepting Mata's faults.

But you do the same, you put all the blame on Mata but Rooney or Di Maria numbers aren't very good too and the strikers numbers aren't very good too. We tried different roles and positions for Mata, Rooney and Di Maria but nothing changed, I suspect that it's due to the only thing we didn't really tried to change, the strikers.

 

[Nighteyes]

But you do the same, you put all the blame on Mata but Rooney or Di Maria numbers aren't very good too and the strikers numbers aren't very good too. We tried different roles and positions for Mata, Rooney and Di Maria but nothing changed, I suspect that it's due to the only thing we didn't really tried to change, the strikers.

I'm not putting all the blame on him not am I saying Di Maria and Rooney have been great (Although Di Maria would have a lot more assists if RVP could finish). In fact, it's hard to blame Mata for our performances if he's not been playing as has been the case lately. I just don't think he's the solution either judging by what we've seen from him so far and nor is there a good case for building our team around him.

 

[Adebesi]

I wouldnt "build the team around him" but he would definitely be getting in my strongest XI.

 

[RedorDead21]

I was watching the Juventus game and wondered how good they'd be with him at the tip of their midfield diamond. He'd have all the freedom with a dynamic midfield behind him.

Morata Tevez
Mata
Pogba Vidal
Pirlo
Evra Bonucci Chiellini Lichsteiner

Switch Pirlo for Marchisio if you need more mobility and that'd be a class attack.​

I'd swap our team for theirs......

 

[JPRouve]

I'm not putting all the blame on him not am I saying Di Maria and Rooney have been great (Although Di Maria would have a lot more assists if RVP could finish). In fact, it's hard to blame Mata for our performances if he's not been playing as has been the case lately. I just don't think he's the solution either judging by what we've seen from him so far and nor is there a good case for building our team around him.

The thing with Mata is that, he is productive but simple player, you don't really need to build a team for him, but you still need to create a team with him in mind, if yo want him to produce correctly, he also needs the same type of team than Di Maria (if you play Di Maria on a wing). A team with fast transition, width and a lot of runs.

Basically I think that creating a team for Di Maria, Mata or even Herrera, will result in the same purchases, an efficient and industrious striker, a winger and a solid box to box.

 

[Nighteyes]

The thing with Mata is that, he is productive but simple player, you don't really need to build a team for him, but you still need to create a team with him in mind, if yo want him to produce correctly, he also needs the same type of team than Di Maria (if you play Di Maria on a wing). A team with fast transition, width and a lot of runs.

Basically I think that creating a team for Di Maria, Mata or even Herrera, will result in the same purchases, an efficient and industrious striker, a winger and a solid box to box.

That's where I disagree. We don't need a player who keeps it simple more often than not. That's pretty much why I prefer pretty much everyone of our attacking options over Mata. They won't get you a 90% passing rate but what they will do is force the play a lot more.

 

[JPRouve]

That's where I disagree. We don't need a player who keeps it simple more often than not. That's pretty much why I prefer pretty much everyone of our attacking options over Mata. They won't get you a 90% passing rate but what they will do is force the play a lot more.

I haven't said that he keeps it simple, I said that he is simple to accommodate. Mata is an assister/goalscorer, that's want you from him, that's what you should except from him.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you prefer a typical playmaker ?

 

[Nighteyes]

I haven't said that he keeps it simple, I said that he is simple to accommodate. Mata is an assister/goalscorer, that's want you from him, that's what you should except from him.

Maybe I'm wrong, but you prefer a typical playmaker ?

My bad but he does keep it simple or at least he has at United which is disappointing.

Definitely. But the likes of Silva's don't grow on trees so in absence of such a player I'd prefer someone who's more proactive than Mata.

 

[JPRouve]

My bad but he does keep it simple or at least he has at United which is disappointing.

Definitely. But the likes of Silva's don't grow on trees so in absence of such a player I'd prefer someone who's more proactive than Mata.

Now, I understand your "problem" it's not Mata but the type of player that he is.
David Silva wouldn't be able to do his magic in our team, he needs movement around him, and we lack movement.

The interesting thing is that teams press us a lot more because they know that no one is going to run behind them, which give less space and time for players like Mata, Di Maria and Rooney.

 

[Adebesi]

The thing with Mata is that, he is productive but simple player, you don't really need to build a team for him, but you still need to create a team with him in mind, if yo want him to produce correctly, he also needs the same type of team than Di Maria (if you play Di Maria on a wing). A team with fast transition, width and a lot of runs.

Basically I think that creating a team for Di Maria, Mata or even Herrera, will result in the same purchases, an efficient and industrious striker, a winger and a solid box to box.

I agree with you anyway - and my shopping list would be the same as yours, plus the defense which means another CB and a RB. Five players is quite a lot, if I was to sacrifice one of those it may actually be the striker, I would play Rooney up top on his own and keep RVP as backup, we also have Wilson, I assume Chicharito is definitely off and three is not a huge amount. Its not a great situation and I would definitely prefer to get another striker but I think the need in the other positions is greater, especially if we finally confine the two-striker strategy to the dustbin.

Im also not quite ready to accept that RVP is completely past it, I think with the right team behind him he can actually provide decent competition for Rooney.

 

[Speak]

Now, I understand your "problem" it's not Mata but the type of player that he is.
David Silva wouldn't be able to do his magic in our team, he needs movement around him, and we lack movement.

The interesting thing is that teams press us a lot more because they know that no one is going to run behind them, which give less space and time for players like Mata, Di Maria and Rooney.

Silva's the type of player who elevates his team-mates. I don't think he'd struggle at United. He might not look as good without Toure (in particular), but he'd still do the business.

We definitely wouldn't be sat here wondering why he goes missing or doesn't take initiative.

 

[Nighteyes]

We definitely wouldn't be sat here wondering why he goes missing or doesn't take initiative.

Fully agreed.

 

[jeff_goldblum]

Actually, I can, because he's struggled with that part of the game here regardless of what he did at Chelsea. He's built up to be some kind of super creative force when the reality on the pitch is completely different. How many defense splitting passes has he actually played in his time here? The kind you'd expect your main creative player to come up with?

I've already demonstrated that when he's played as #10 he's been very creative, both this season and last. His lack of productivity when he's been shoehorned into midfield, as he has been for the majority of his games this season, doesn't change that.

Like, @JPRouve says above, it's pretty clear from your replies to me and to others that your issue with Mata is how he plays the #10/second striker role. That's fair enough, but if that's your angle there's no hide for this whole pretense of him not being creative enough as a #10. That's just categorically untrue, as borne at by all the stats, including the ones you yourself brought up.

 

[Nighteyes]

I've already demonstrated that when he's played as #10 he's been very creative, both this season and last. His lack of productivity when he's been shoehorned into midfield, as he has been for the majority of his games this season, doesn't change that.

Like, @JPRouve says above, it's pretty clear from your replies to me and to others that your issue with Mata is how he plays the #10/second striker role. That's fair enough, but if that's your angle there's no hide for this whole pretense of him not being creative enough as a #10. That's just categorically untrue, as borne at by all the stats, including the ones you yourself brought up.

Err..no. I meant what I typed. Mata has not been anywhere near creative enough for us. More than that, more often than not he barely even tries to create. I also said right at the start that assists is not a precise way to judge how creative a player is and you predictably ignored that. If you think Mata's creative play has been good for us then you have very low standards. All it takes is a quick look through his assists for United to know he's not been anything special.

It's not even the assists. How many times do we see someone like Silva play a clever ball through which ends up in a goal? You don't get any of that with Mata either.

 

[Player Red]

Err..no. I meant what I typed. Mata has not been anywhere near creative enough for us. More than that, more often than not he barely even tries to create. I also said right at the start that assists is not a precise way to judge how creative a player is and you predictably ignored that. If you think Mata's creative play has been good for us then you have very low standards. All it takes is a quick look through his assists for United to know he's not been anything special.

It's not even the assists. How many times do we see someone like Silva play a clever ball through which ends up in a goal? You don't get any of that with Mata either.

I think the point they are making is you can't base his productivity on his time here so far because we have not been very productive compared to his past but I would argue that given the situation at Utd his assist and goal figures aren't too bad.

Play Mata at #10 with a mobile striker (Rooney/Wilson) ahead on him and two wingers either side then we would see a lot more chances created.

 

[JPRouve]

Err..no. I meant what I typed. Mata has not been anywhere near creative enough for us. More than that, more often than not he barely even tries to create. I also said right at the start that assists is not a precise way to judge how creative a player is and you predictably ignored that. If you think Mata's creative play has been good for us then you have very low standards. All it takes is a quick look through his assists for United to know he's not been anything special.

It's not even the assists. How many times do we see someone like Silva play a clever ball through which ends up in a goal? You don't get any of that with Mata either.

I responded to the key passes question, 48 for Silva and 29 for Mata. And I'm telling you the main differences are Aguero, Nasri and 10 games playing CM in a 3-5-2.

 

[Nighteyes]

I think the point they are making is you can't base his productivity on his time here so far because we have not been very productive compared to his past but I would argue that given the situation at Utd his assist and goal figures aren't too bad.

Play Mata at #10 with a mobile striker (Rooney/Wilson) ahead on him and two wingers either side then we would see a lot more chances created.

I don't think that's a valid point though. We brought him to create more chances. That's why we signed him. You can't tell me see no difference between the way Di Maria and Mata pass the ball? One is constantly looking to create and as a result has created plenty of chances despite the perceived lack of movement up top. The other goes with the flow and does very little.

I responded to the key passes question, 48 for Silva and 29 for Mata. And I'm telling you the main differences are Aguero, Nasri and 10 games playing CM in a 3-5-2.

Ok then.

Key passes are a shit stat though not Mata has great stats there.

 

[JPRouve]

I don't think that's a valid point though. We brought him to create more chances. That's why we signed him. You can't tell me see no difference between the way Di Maria and Mata pass the ball? One is constantly looking to create and as a result has created plenty of chances despite the perceived lack of movement up top. The other goes with the flow and does very little.



Ok then.

Key passes are a shit stat though not Mata has great stats there.

I don't think that we bought him with a clear idea in mind, he is very similar to Rooney, and like other said when we bought him, he was a luxury purchase.

 

[Adebesi]

I don't think that we bought him with a clear idea in mind

You could be talking about any signing we have made in the last 2 years.

 

[Nighteyes]

I don't think that we bought him with a clear idea in mind, he is very similar to Rooney, and like other said when we bought him, he was a luxury purchase.

That I can agree with.

Still, I suppose Rooney up top and Mata in behind is worth a go.

 

[JPRouve]

You could be talking about any signing we have made in the last 2 years.

Maybe, but Mata was more surprising because we really didn't need him, unless we had in mind to play Rooney elsewhere.

 

[Cassidy]

You could be talking about any signing we have made in the last 2 years.

Not at all, this one was particularly perplexing.
Rojo, Blind, Herrera, Shaw were all obvious in terms of what we were bringing them in to do.
Even to an extent Di Maria - pacey attacking midfield player who brings excitement and creates

The only one which perplexed me this summer was Falcao, and of course Fellaini was a bit baffling too (although we needed midfielders)

 

[Adebesi]

Maybe, but Mata was more surprising because we really didn't need him, unless we had in mind to play Rooney elsewhere.

Looking back now I can see how wrong I was but I was convinced at the time it was a great signing, I was completely sold on the idea of Juanji Matawa, the double act sent from heaven. What a pillock I was.

 

[Adebesi]

Not at all, this one was particularly perplexing.
Rojo, Blind, Herrera, Shaw were all obvious in terms of what we were bringing them in to do.
Even to an extent Di Maria - pacey attacking midfield player who brings excitement and creates

The only one which perplexed me this summer was Falcao, and of course Fellaini was a bit baffling too (although we needed midfielders)

Youre right I was exaggerating. Rojo, Blind, Di Maria and Shaw were obvious. Herrera I thought was obvious but in retrospect isnt it a similar situation, he can play deeper if necessary but his preferred position is the same one we have Mata and Rooney already competing for, he is one of the glut of number 10s Van Gaal referred to at the start of the season.

 

[legball]

Mata has been decent for us, but that's about it. I think he's out most sellable asset somewhat and if a decent offer comes in this summer, I'll have no problem with selling him. For one, I prefer my attackers to be able to carry the ball [Silva] and make things happen on their own sometimes.

 

[Cassidy]

Youre right I was exaggerating. Rojo, Blind, Di Maria and Shaw were obvious. Herrera I thought was obvious but in retrospect isnt it a similar situation, he can play deeper if necessary but his preferred position is the same one we have Mata and Rooney already competing for, he is one of the glut of number 10s Van Gaal referred to at the start of the season.

I don't think the club brought in Herrera as a no10, remember we had been tracking him for a while. Its what LVG now thinks of him that has complicated things in that respect (in terms of his classification). I don't think no10 is his preferred position either, he only started playing there last season for Athletic, he was playing deeper before then regularly.

EDIT: Anyway don't want to derail the thread. Mata struck me as a panic buy to appease the fans, and it worked for a while.

 

[Adebesi]

Di Maria is a different case, not perplexing at all at the time but in retrospect a bit perplexing because it has become increasingly obvious Van Gaal has no idea how to use him. And that was what I was getting at, agreeing with the comment we bought players with no clear idea in mind. Maybe we bought him with a clear idea but the idea turned out to be a bad one. Or maybe Van Gaal just assumed he was more like Robben than he actually was.

 

[JPRouve]

Looking back now I can see how wrong I was but I was convinced at the time it was a great signing, I was completely sold on the idea of Juanji Matawa, the double act sent from heaven. What a pillock I was.

You weren't a pillock, Mata is a great player but while most young continental coaches would use a compact line of three made of Di Maria-Mata-Herrera we signed two coaches who don't like this kind of offensive systems. The problem would be Rafael health and the lack of striker who use all the width of the field, unless Rooney is able to do it.

 

[Massive Spanner]

Di Maria is a different case, not perplexing at all at the time but in retrospect a bit perplexing because it has become increasingly obvious Van Gaal has no idea how to use him. And that was what I was getting at, agreeing with the comment we bought players with no clear idea in mind. Maybe we bought him with a clear idea but the idea turned out to be a bad one. Or maybe Van Gaal just assumed he was more like Robben than he actually was.

The warning signs were there in the summer when he listed him as being a great winger we need despite the fact that he'd played the entire season in midfield for Real and was never really a great winger.

 

[Cassidy]

You weren't a pillock, Mata is a great player but while most young continental coaches would use a compact line of three made of Di Maria-Mata-Herrera we signed two coaches who don't like this kind of offensive systems. The problem would be Rafael health and the lack of striker who use all the width of the field, unless Rooney is able to do it.

That 3 behind a lone striker with pace... one can only dream.

 

[Adebesi]

I don't think the club brought in Herrera as a no10, remember we had been tracking him for a while. Its what LVG now thinks of him that has complicated things in that respect (in terms of his classification). I don't think no10 is his preferred position either, he only started playing there last season for Athletic, he was playing deeper before then regularly.

No Im sure we didnt buy him to be a number 10, that would be mental. Im sure we bought him to be the centre of our midfield, I guess its hard to assess him there because of the way Van Gaal has used him, but it leaves the impression that he would be more comfortable playing off a striker.

 

[Adebesi]

The warning signs were there in the summer when he listed him as being a great winger we need despite the fact that he'd played the entire season in midfield for Real and was never really a great winger.

Looking back it does seem like Van Gaal had actually not bothered to look at a single football match not directly related to his job as Holland boss. I rubbished any suggestion that was even possible last summer.

 

[JPRouve]

Mata has been decent for us, but that's about it. I think he's out most sellable asset somewhat and if a decent offer comes in this summer, I'll have no problem with selling him. For one, I prefer my attackers to be able to carry the ball [Silva] and make things happen on their own sometimes.

What do you mean by "things on their own", because I don't think he does, in recent years the only players who did that, are Neymar, Messi, Ronaldinho, Suarez(with Liverpool) and Hazard, the others are almost totally dependent on their teammates runs or services.