I think Mata is a top player. But his last few years have been a bit gutting for him surely. Chelseas player of the year, a dream signing for anyone. Mourinho, in effect didn't fancy Mata, off to United, and still under scrunity. He doesn't seem to have done much wrong since being arguably the best player in the league
8
Season Average Rating
- Appearances
- 35
- Goals
- 10
- Assists
- 4
- Yellow cards
- 2
- Status
We have no movement upfront so it's difficult to pass forward in this system our only option is passing down the wings, if we have runners from midfield and the wings he would have more options to pass forward. He's a good finisher and has the knack of being in the right place at the right time, i wouldn't put it past him to get atleast 15 goals in a full season behind the striker, not to mention he was also a prolific assister at Chelsea.
It's not really him that slows it down per se, it's the lack of movement around him. He's not going to quickly pass it straight to nobody or into a space that nobody is moving into.
Well, with RVP out for 2/3 weeks, I see absolutely no reason why Mata shouldn't start the next game.
I wouldn't put it past LVG to find one though...
I wouldn't put it past LVG to find one though...
People always talk about having the team built around him, but he's not an easy player to build around.
Despite being great technically and lacking pace and strength, he's still better when the game is stretched than when the game is slower, more congested and possession based. You then have to factor in the fact that he can still go missing and offers nothing defensively, so isn't even a sure thing in the stretched games.
I think he'd have to join a weaker team/club to be the key player, to be honest. He's great in front of goal, so if he's happy to be a relatively versatile rotation option here then that'll be great.
His attributes just don't match up in a way that creates a truly great player, in my opinion.
Despite being great technically and lacking pace and strength, he's still better when the game is stretched than when the game is slower, more congested and possession based. You then have to factor in the fact that he can still go missing and offers nothing defensively, so isn't even a sure thing in the stretched games.
I think he'd have to join a weaker team/club to be the key player, to be honest. He's great in front of goal, so if he's happy to be a relatively versatile rotation option here then that'll be great.
His attributes just don't match up in a way that creates a truly great player, in my opinion.
Well, dont know what has that do with it. I hope Mata will start but maybe we'll see ADM in his position again.
Mata needs pace and movement around him to be effective. With RVP out I would like to see him behind Rooney with Di Maria and one of Valencia/Young either side, with Herrera and Carrick/Blind behind him. Though I fear we will see 2 up top with Falcao & Rooney.
Well you'd play Mata in an advanced role playing off Rooney as the lone striker. ADM and Young as advanced wingers and Herrera and Blind deep - or you shove Fellaini up top and have Mata behind the two of them. Either way, RVP out leaves a hole in an advanced position, which Mata should fill - and a system worked out accordingly.
He’s not worth building the team around him. He will flourish with great wingers stretching the play and a fast striker with great movement. That of course comes with no/little defensive contribution so it requires two strong box-to-box players behind him. As I said, too difficult and not worth it.
The Chelsea team that won CL with him also finished 6th in Premier League.
I suppose this argument is often used (also by me) because he’s not really a number 10 in Silva mould, a player who pulls the strings in midfield and “makes things happen”. He’s final third player, his passing and vision is good but he can only be effective when the movement from other players provides him options. He’s very direct.
I agree with the rest of your post. He’s not very adaptable, unfortunately.
When a player is as productive as Mata and as consistent as he is, it totally worth it to build a team around him. It's players like Di Maria you don't build your team around because they inconsistent.
To be fair in his second, and most prolific, season at the club they finished 3rd. That was in a team where Torres and Ba were the only senior strikers and where Lampard - Ramires was the most common midfield partnership. Hazard and Oscar had good seasons but they were nowhere near as good or productive as they later became. Ultimately it was a very weak team which Mata almost single-handedly dragged to a top-4 league finish, and one which had very little of what you describe above. Defenders aside, you could build a way better team than that Chelsea team out of our current squad.
edit - just realised than @Speak has made a lot of the same points. But I think you sort of undermine yourself with your last point in your reply to him. You say Mata relies on the movement and quality of others to provide him options (and earn him assists), but it's been demonstrated that his teammates during his best season were far from helpful in that department. Which begs the question, if he managed to get 30+ assists (and 20 goals) in a season out of that lot, what could he do if we consistently played him a #10 alongside some of the players we have at our disposal?
I'd go with that system, problem is I dont see LVG going that way.
Yeah, I see what you're saying, and I think we're saying the same thing in different ways.
Yeah, he's a final third player. A second striker, in fact. What I don't agree with is that pace around him will make a huge difference... unless the system changes drastically. If the system is possession-based and slow, he'll always struggle, because he can't hold the ball under pressure and still has a tendency to get forward too much.
But the problem is also (as Mourinho will probably testify) that even if you play in a faster, more direct system, he can't put a shift in. So, either way, you're sacrificing something whenever you play Mata. Which is why you can't build around him.
I'd rather build my team around a player who's shown he can flourish and create chances even when he's not playing particularly well rather than a player who offers nowhere near the same dynamism or creativity.
I think a lot of people are starting to see the limitations in Mata's game that made Mourinho part with him, what I find odd is the fact he played a lot of his career with Valencia on the right side, i.e. not operating through the middle, yet it doesn't seem an option for him here.
That's what Mata does, he provides assists and goals even when he is not at his best. The only reason people refuses to admit that is because he is not running like an headless chicken.
Rooney does this also, and offers more of a physical presence and defensive layer, particularly in away games. I don't really see why Mata should be the long term #10.
Unless we move towards a more direct system (as in - moving the ball back to front quickly, not dwelling on the ball...) he wont replicate that form, in my opinion. I agree that Ba, Hazard and Oscar were hardly pace/movement merchants. But I'd argue that Mata was as good as he was because Chelsea were so poor, and not in spite of them being so poor. He had a freedom to ghost in and out of games, to get forward as much as he liked (the strikers weren't scoring) and to do less defensive work.
Villas Boas' team had awful balance, and clearly the roles weren't strict enough. You then had Di Matteo, who basically played gung ho football.
Someone like Mata will always put up good numbers because he's got that striker's knack. But once the team is asked to play in a stricter fashion his limitations are revealed. He can't defend and can go missing, so a top level countering system is out of the question. And he's not a Silva-esque dictator, so top level slow possession game is out of the question.
Last edited:
Because he is younger and as productive offensively, I understand the defensive worries but that's why football is a collective sport, we need to become a team again and creates a group who compliment each others qualities and erase each others weaknesses.
Rooney also has his weaknesses, he will try to be everywhere and 50% of the time, he will be nowhere, when Mata is always dangerous offensively, yes you need someone able to cover him defensively, but you don't need someone to cover for him offensively which you will need with Rooney.
No really. Inconsistent Di Maria has been much more creative and influential than Mata despite LVG playing him all over the pitch and admitting he doesn't even know where to play him. Di Maria makes things happen whereas Mata is content to go with the flow.
He worked fine in a faster, direct system in his first two seasons at Chelsea, he was their best player both years in a team that excelled on the counter. His problem in his last season was that Mourinho is an inherently cautious manager who was intent on making an already solid defensive unit even more so rather than going out to play attacking football. A more positive manager would have kept him where he was and improved the team around him. For what it's worth, I think a Chelsea team with
-----------Costa-----
Hazard----Mata----Willian
------Matic----Fabregas----
would run away with the league, they'd probably concede more often that Mourinho's Chelsea but they'd easily make up for that going forwards.
Incidentally, the change in tone surrounding Mourinho (and his treatment of Mata) before and after the summer transfer window has been very interesting. Beforehand he was taking a fair bit of stick because Chelsea were looking bereft of creativity having marginalised and sold their most creative player. I often wonder how it would have turned out if PSG hadn't splurged on Luiz and FFP had prevented Mourinho from bringing in Costa and Fabregas to bolster their attack. For one I expect Mata would be far more appreciated on here, the 'Mourinho knows best' factor is always pretty prevalent whenever his name is mentioned.
I agree to an extent with most of your first paragraph except for the bolded. Quite the opposite, the rest of the team was poor and Mata was the only person who was consistently making something happen. Suggesting he drifted in and out of games just isn't accurate, he was central to basically all their attacking play.
I see your point about his game suffering in a possession-based team, but I think the same would be true for a lot of great players. Like I said above I disagree with your idea that he's unsuited to counter-attack based style of play, he's proven himself very adept at that. Mourinho's insistence on high work rate from his #10 is a personal preference rather than a key tenet of that approach.
Not sure what you're talking about here. Chelsea only scored 4 fewer goals last season as compared to the 2012-2013 season and scored 6 more compared to the season before that. Needless to add I'm sure, that their defensive record was miles better. To summarize, no real difference on the attacking front while being a lot better at the back. Even from a creative stand point they looked fine until the last couple of months and that was down to some of their players going missing. Oscar was saving himself for the WC and disappeared for the run in which was an issue. Chelsea weren't any worse without Mata, they were better. Whether they would have done just as well with Mata in the team is purely conjecture.
He's not going to dictate the game like a Silva or Iniesta do. That's just not his game. He's also not going to be of much use defensively which on it's own is not an issue because we didn't sign him for 37m to put a defensive shift in. What he needs to is to come up with those defense splitting passes on a more regular basis. Question is, can he do that? He has 33 assists from open play in 130 odd games for Chelsea. Not bad but not entirely convincing for someone who had a team built around him and not all of those assists would be defense splitting passes. Either way he's shown little to no creativity with us which is why he finds himself on the bench. The current excuse is that there's no movement in front of him which doesn't make sense because Di Maria has no problems is playing those clever passes through to our strikers.
So, the question (as with Kagawa) is why should we build a team around someone who's shown very little in the way of actual creativity for us? Why should we build a team around someone who tends to go missing very often?
Actually, what does building the team around Mata even mean? Buy an entire new team to play around him to try and get the best out of him? If a player is coming with that sort of baggage then he's not really worth all the effort.
Very little actually, he was on the left for the vast majority of his Valencia career. He played on the right a handful of times
Mata's game has changed a lot since he came to England. For Valencia he was very good making runs off the ball into goalscoring positions a bit like Griezmann does now. He also had decent pace. He'd get played through, take the ball down with his good first touch and thats where his goals would come from.
At Chelsea and United he seems to have half the speed and comes to the ball a lot wanting to be the player to put the pass through, rather than the one receiving it.
When you refer to 4 fewer goals I assume you mean the league right? In all competitions they scored 47 less, although admittedly they had 12 fewer games to do it in. In 2012/3 they scored an average of 2.13 goals a game compared to 1.75 in 2012/3. With that in mind I think it's pretty fair to say that they were significantly worse offensively last season then they were the one before. To put it into some context, that's almost exactly the same decrease as when Moyes replaced Fergie (from 2.11 goals a game (114 in 54 games) to 1.70 (94 goals in 54 games)).
I'm not sure how you can say he's not creative. In 2012/3 he scored or assisted 55 goals in 64 games. He scored or assisted 28 in 54 games in his first season in English football. the 2013/4 season was a blip because he rarely got more than bit parts under Mourinho, but even then when he got regular game time for us he assisted/scored 10 in 15 games. He showed more in those 15 games under Moyes and Giggs than Kagawa did in a whole year under Fergie, so it's a strange comparison. He's showed plenty of creativity at United, his stats when he's playing as a #10 here have been very good, it's only been the 10 games where LvG dicked around with playing him in centre-midfield where he's struggled.
On your last point, building a team around Mata is something we could comfortably do it with the squad we have now, perhaps adding a strong box-to-box midfielder and a goal-scoring wide player in the summer (which is something most of us wanted anyway). For now a front 4 of
----------------------Rooney----------------------
Di Maria---------------Mata----------------Januzaj
with Carrick/Blind behind (partnered with Fellaini or Herrera depending on the situation) would be a great start.
I agree with a lot in this post even though people are deliberately trying to confuse playing the best team with building a team around Mata. Playing Mata in the hole behind Rooney would solve a lot of the issues this side is having, we would play our least shit forward in his favoured position, we would partner Herrera with Blind at the base of midfield and have genuine width in the side but without totally disregarding central penetration.
He's got no future here and most fans are in denial about that because he cost 37 million quid. He's an incredible little player but he's a bit of a Giovinco in that he is just too lightweight and slow paced for the very top despite being able to do things with a ball that no one else can. Small players are often the best like Messi and Maradona etc but Mata is lacking too much in pace and power to ever come close to fitting into that category
I disagree with pretty much everything you've said here. He can make the top, he was Chelseas best player 2 seasons ago. I simply think that we've used him very poorly, our team lacks pace and movement and a player like Mata thrives in a team that offers this. He'd be superb at a team like Liverpool/Tottenham who actually plays intelligent good football. We're not seeing the best in him because as a team we've been awful for two seasons now. He's simply too good for us at the moment in that he's a player that thrives when a team is playing well. When shit is going wrong then he's a shadow.
He will be good at Barca. Lovely guy but that isn't enough.
How dare he not be as good as Messi and Maradona
Building a team around Mata?His performance isn't anywhere near deserving that.A typical hyping up players that not playing.
In '12-13 Chelsea played a load of teams in the Europa League while all their games the following season were in the champions league. They also had one of the worst teams in the competition in Norddsjelland in their group and who only ended up 2 goals shy of the worst goals against record in the history of the CL. Same with the FA cup and the league cup. A lot depends on the draw you get and the teams you face. I mean Chelsea gorged themselves to 5 goals against a defensive pairing of Scott Wooton and Michael Keane when they played us.
You can't really compare their scoring records from different competitions, especially when one of them is a 2nd tier event. The league comparison either seems the fairest way to look at things even if it's not perfect.
I pointed out why I said that however you completely ignored that part of the post for some reason. I also don't understand why your including his goals when we're discussing his creative influence.
For a start, only looking at assists is not the best way to judge creativity although it does provide a good indication. The assists stat includes set pieces and 5 yard passes where all the work is done by the person receiving the ball. Mata has 33 assists from open play in 135 games at Chelsea. That's a much better indicator of how much he creates than lumping in all his set pieces and goals scored.
Di Maria is miles out in front as far as creativity goes so I won't even bring him up. Let's look at Rooney. From deeper positions, he has more assists from open play, more chances created, more key passes per game and more through balls played per game. But, really, you don't even need stats to know Mata has struggled to create. It's been quite obvious on the pitch. His passes are more often than not safe passes. More than 50% of his passes this season have gone backwards which says a lot.
But why do that? What has Mata done for us to trust him in that role? Herrera scores goals, assists goals and offers a lot more defensively. On the basis of this season I'd much rather have him in there than Mata.
We don't need to build the team around anyone - currently, with who is horribly out of form and how we're a bit crap, it currently makes sense to play people who are actually good at football... Mata is such a person, and shoving him in behind Rooney can literally be no worse than playing RVP or Falcao. It would also mean we can try something new (with wingers) as well as give Di Maria a little more freedom.
I understand your point about playing in the Europa league but even if you ignore those games their record is still way better than the next season.
I've never argued shifting Di Maria out for Mata so not sure why you've brought that up. Putting one player in his proper position doesn't necessitate marginalizing another. I'm also unsure as to why you're bringing up Rooney's record from deeper positions, I'm talking about Mata's record as a #10, not stuck in midfield like he has been for chunks of this season.
On the assists from open play issue, I have it him down for I think 37, but going on your stats - 33 in 135 is 0.24 assists a game from open play. Including set pieces his record is 55 in 135 which is 0.40 assists a game. For comparison -
Rooney - 143 in 646 (entire career stats according to his website) = 0.22 a game including set pieces.
Giggs - 162 in 632 Premier League games = 0.26 a game including set pieces.
Van Persie - 38 in 196 since 2009 = 0.19 a game from open play.
Messi - 111 in 299 games since 2009 = 0.37 a game including set pieces
Suarez - 35 in 143 since 2009 = 0.24 a game.
With that in mind, you seem to have a pretty unrealistic concept of how many assists a creative player should be getting, from open play or otherwise. Either way Mata is up there when it comes to productivity from open play. Even then the whole thing about 'defence-splitting passes' being a marker of creativity is entirely subjective, creativity is about what you create, surely. I find it especially strange questioning Mata's record for Chelsea whilst citing Herrera as being more creative. I've followed Herrera since his time at Athletic and I like him as a player but he's never been particularly productive or creative. His record last season where he played exclusively as a #10 in a good Athletic team was 4 open play assists in 33 games (0.12), even including this season he's only assisted 19 goals from open play in his last 174 games (0.11 a game). Mata's record even disregarding his contribution from set pieces is superior to every member of our squad barring Di Maria. I mentioned goals as well because the fact that he gets as many assists as he does whilst also being a prolific goalscorer is part of what makes him such a good player.
As I've said before, Mata's done plenty to prove himself to us as a #10. In the games where's he's actually played there he's been very productive and consistently been one of our best players. As #10 he's assisted 7 from open play in 21 starts in his United career (0.33) whilst also scoring 8 goals, which is a fantastic return. His problem this season isn't that he's been bad, it's that he's played less than half his minutes this season in his natural position.
Last edited:
Mata's technical ability and productivity, even when he's not playing well, are two big reasons as to why we should not even consider selling him. But building a team around him because his stats are good would be the wrong move, as Chelsea found out. For a team to be built around a #10, they have to share responsibilities, and show that they can defend, press, transition well, act as a link between the midfield attack, and create chances.
The difference between Mata of the past two seasons and the Mata of 12/13, is that he has less freedom to do what he wants. In 12/13, he didn't have to bother with the defensive side of the game, and that resulted in lackadaisical pressing. (The GIF below is the perfect example of the free role Mata was given.) If a player needs a team to be built around him to be effective, then that's a huge limitation. Even ignoring the defensive side of his game, which has undoubtedly improved, there are a few elements of his game which do not do not fit the cohesive style Van Gaal is looking to play, IMO.
His positioning is probably the worst part of his game for me. He always likes to position himself away from congested areas - his favourite position being wide right - but it doesn't balance the side and it leads to a missing link. In the QPR game, for example, we seen that. He drifts away from space, while little pressure comes from the opposing team, and he's able to open his body up and deliver a great ball to Falcao. That's when he's at his best, but how many times have we seen him central? How many times have we seen him create chances for us with great passes?
I would understand building a team around Mata if there is any evidence to suggest that it would be the best route for the team. However, in a side that looks for balance, he's not the type of player that should have a divine right to start every game. FWIW, I like Mata and think he's a good squad option to have, but I simply don't understand building a team around him, especially when you consider that he's done nothing - for us and Chelsea - to warrant that. He's simply not a good enough player for the level of competitiveness we're looking for.
He should be the one that takes RVPs place in the team, but we all know it's gonna be Falcao.
@MoneyMay
Where I disagree with almost everyone is with the "why build the team around Mata" or the" Mata is a liability" or the "If you need to build a team for him then he is not that good".
The answer is very simple, Mata when played in a team who correspond to his qualities, gives you at least 15 assists and 15 goals, there is not a lot of players who do that, he also can play week in week out.
The defensive problems are not real problems for me, you have at least two solutions, you either sign an industrious striker ala Mandzukic, Lewandowski, Diego Costa and/or you sign a defensive midfielder who will play like a "water carrier", all that while considering Mata like a second striker.
The real problem I think is that some people wants to see an interchanging team where all the players defend and all the players attack. Personally I'm fine with a specialized team where 4 players attack all the time, six players cover them and the fullbacks support alternatively the attacks.
I also don't think that a good team is a team where 11 players can defend.
Where I disagree with almost everyone is with the "why build the team around Mata" or the" Mata is a liability" or the "If you need to build a team for him then he is not that good".
The answer is very simple, Mata when played in a team who correspond to his qualities, gives you at least 15 assists and 15 goals, there is not a lot of players who do that, he also can play week in week out.
The defensive problems are not real problems for me, you have at least two solutions, you either sign an industrious striker ala Mandzukic, Lewandowski, Diego Costa and/or you sign a defensive midfielder who will play like a "water carrier", all that while considering Mata like a second striker.
The real problem I think is that some people wants to see an interchanging team where all the players defend and all the players attack. Personally I'm fine with a specialized team where 4 players attack all the time, six players cover them and the fullbacks support alternatively the attacks.
I also don't think that a good team is a team where 11 players can defend.
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.
@akash02 Can't force the issue if your strikers are stood with their back to goal, 4 defenders behind them, screaming for the ball. Mata has never been the type of player to take people on and score screamers. He needs people making runs for him to play them in.
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.
- Status