Agreed, their press is now much more compact and that also means they usually win the ball back deeper than before and really suits an athletic forward line. Again, I'm not saying Messi is on a zimmer frame I personally just think he wouldn't be No1 pick for that system. A lot of time has passed since that season where he scored 73 goals and for me Haaland or Kane would make them stronger overall.
Just to condense your post, you are saying:
- You watch a lot of Messi & here are some stats.
- Robben/Ribery example plus Ibra, CR7 (not putting others as completely different positions and better to focus on attacking players)
- Here's a video of how he could work for City + that's how you think he would fit in. (I'm going to ignore the Messi>KDB comment for the sake of efficiency in this reply)
A lot of people on the caf watch a lot of football - it's great you do as well - but what you have presented here doesn't in any way disprove my point, that I believe City would be better signing a striker like Haaland or Kane. You have gone to great lengths and I appreciate the time you have put in here but his dribbling stats, xG, key passes etc. are exactly what you'd expect given that team is built around him. The question about Messi at this age is not about his offensive output, it is a question about how detrimental his accommodation is to the wider team?
Whenever someone tries to argue for Messi still being the GOAT, they always only focus on the offensive stats and ignore/aren't aware of how much Barcelona currently sacrifice to allow him to maintain his output. If he's smashing in 70+ goals a season all is dandy but his recent stats from this season paint a different picture.
- Messi has not scored a single CL goal from open play. A single goal. In a system that is built around him and where he has complete attacking free reign. Haaland has 6 from open play for reference.
- Across all competitions without Messi, Barcelona have only conceded a single goal from open play (Eibar - which was an awful individual error). Let's assess these stats in more details:
La Liga | With Messi | Without Messi |
Goals Scored (av per game) | 50 (2) | 3 (1.5) |
Goals Conceded (av per game) | 21 (0.84) | 1 (0.5) |
Average Points | 1.84 | 2 |
The above hints at how much better defensively Barcelona are without him but the obvious retort here is the sample size is way too small, which is true, so let's look at the combined cups as well so it's more fair:
CL/CdR/SC | With Messi | Without Messi |
Goals Scored (av per game) | 22 (2.44) | 10 (2.5) |
Goals Conceded (av per game) | 15 (1.66) | 1 (0.25) |
Average Points | 15 (1.66) | 10 (2.5) |
Combined this gives us a decent amount of games across different comps and different levels of opposition. What you can see, very clearly, is Barcelona are much better defensively without Messi although this probably isn't a surprise to most football fans who watch them, even irregularly. What is surprising is they are actually better offensively for goals scored as well...combining all comps it is 2.16 goals p/g without versus 2.11 goals p/g with Messi.
On Robben/Ribery and older player examples - I'm not one of the caf posters who thinks anyone past 30 is essentially retired but there are very few examples of 34 year old coming to the PL and being successful. I understand Messi is better than any who have made that transition previously but he's hardly known for his fitness. Ibra is a fitness nutter and his game is completely different to Messi's so I don't see why you'd compare them (he also wasn't
that successful if you think Martial scored more than him last season), CR7 is the same and made the wise move of going to Serie A. Ribery and Robben were great players but there's no way a top PL would be in for them when they were mid thirties, Ribery is now always injured and hardly setting the Serie A alight with Fiorentina and that's a slower league that tends to suit older players. Look at Cavani, he is 34 and also a fitness freak but he's struggling to score loads of goals - City are obviously better at creating chances than United but the PL is a hard league physically and whilst I am sure Messi would do well, I doubt he'd be as good as other signings could be. That's my whole point.
I like Tifo football, it's a good channel with some good information but, again, I don't see how any of that is relevant to my point which is I think City would be better signing a select few other players.
As an aside please let me know if any of the above data is incorrect, I have a big spreadsheet I use for betting and double checked this with WhoScored/Transfermarkt so am hopeful to have avoided human error.