Prime Hazard or Prime Salah?

Easily Salah.

Salah has a level of scaryness that he brings to Liverpool.
 
Salah for me. Far more consistent over the course of the season, and ultimately much more 'productive'.

Him and another pacy winger would also mean no one would dare push their defence up, cause they would tear it apart.

Also slightly biased, cause I love watching pacy wingers tear apart defenders. Some of those peak RM sides (in the first half of the last decade) countering was just porn for me.
 
RooneyLegend said:
Very difficult to say. Hazard at times would be dragging that Chelsea team around while Salah just keeps scoring. People forget that their were times when Chelsea's attack was basically give Hazard the ball near the half way line and hope for the best.
Click to expand...

I picked Salah, because I think his peak in this league has been higher than Hazard's and he's also been very very productive for his team, and he's kept that going that over multiple seasons. But I agree with your post entirely. I don't think there is a need to rewrite Hazard's history to downplay his brilliance and consistency to lift up Salah. Hazard was the best in the league during certain periods and seasons, but Salah is like a never ending avalanche of fire power and goals.

So yeah aesthetically speaking, nobody is above Hazard for me, but in most other metrics, Salah is just too dominant.
 
Prime Salah is his whole Liverpool career. Prime Hazard is 2 or 3 intermittent seasons.

It is an easy choice.
 
Hazard for me.
Hazard always gets treated unfairly on the Redcafe, be it Kagawa is better than him, or Griezmann and then Sanchez etc.
 
I think some of the circumstances Hazard had to face - defensive managers and narrow attacks - aren’t always recognised. At Chelsea he never enjoyed the play-stretching, high line and stacked attack that Salah has relished at Liverpool. That environment is going to erode your attacking output even before the fact he is more of a provider by nature so he is simply not the type of player to rack up the big headline numbers.

All of that said I’d still go for Salah. Mainly because he’s sustained an exceptionally high level of performance. For most of his time at Liverpool he’s been operating at a top 5 or so players in the world level. He’s a great goalscorer who scores great goals and regularly decides big games. His interpretation of the wide forward role is only matched by Cristiano in the Premier League era.
 
PickledRed said:
The data’s compelling on this.


Salah for Liverpool:
213 Apps
135 Goals
51 Assists
G/A: 186/213 = 87.32%

Hazard for Chelsea:
245 Apps
85 Goals
61 Assists
G/A: 146/245 = 59.59%

Salah has 27.73% higher rate of productivity.
Click to expand...
Solely based on stats Kevin Phillips would have been better than Dennis Bergkamp.

Not saying Salah doesn't have an argument here but I find the obsession with stat padding in this modern game depressing, it's also what has led to many people thinking one of Salah's strike partners isn't all that.
 
Salah just has an inevitability and consistency to his game that Hazard simply didn’t. Hazard did play in a crap Chelsea side or two, but I actually think that adorned his style of play a little.

Hazard did hit a double 15+ G/A season once, which about 4 players have done in the PL, but Salah has hit 20+ goals in every season bar one for Liverpool (and he got 19 in that one he didn’t!). He also has 28 goals in 45 CL matches since joining Liverpool.

Pretty batshit numbers.
 
Salah surely, the numbers don't lie.
 
11101 said:
Salah, quite comfortably. Aside from being significantly more effective he's also a much better team player. Hazard was a solo Roy of the Rovers type player at his best.
Click to expand...
What a weird take, considering that Hazard’s playmaking was one of his stringers features while Salah is often (and quite reasonably) gets called out for being overly selfish. A usual trait for a better goalscorer, but still — in fact if there was one thing that Hazard really lacked, it’s that selfishness that would’ve elevated him way further.
 
Dumbstar said:
This thread reminds me of Prime Ronaldo (number 9) v Prime Ronaldinho. Only ever one winner despite the admiration for both.
Click to expand...
Speaking of Ronaldinho he won a Balon Dor off the back of a season where he didn't even hit double figures in the league (and only just in all comps).

If he was around today and had that season people would just lazily look at the numbers and assume he's being inconsistent.
 
Dancfc said:
Speaking of Ronaldinho he won a Balon Dor off the back of a season where he didn't even hit double figures in the league (and only just in all comps).

If he was around today and had that season people would just lazily look at the numbers and assume he's being inconsistent.
Click to expand...
And they could be right depending on what yardstick they're using
 
harms said:
What a weird take, considering that Hazard’s playmaking was one of his stringers features while Salah is often (and quite reasonably) gets called out for being overly selfish. A usual trait for a better goalscorer, but still — in fact if there was one thing that Hazard really lacked, it’s that selfishness that would’ve elevated him way further.
Click to expand...
He would have actually been a lesser player if he was more greedy, would have lost a lot of what made him so special.

The ironic thing about people citing the stats to favour Salah is I bet not a single one would chose prime Lampard over Iniesta or Xavi.
 
Have to go with Hazard on this one - near impossible to nullify him as he could have such a big impact on the game without scoring or assisting. Honestly the only player I remember 'fearing' as much as Henry. Salah's goals are absolutely inevitable, but Hazard in top form was something else.
 
Dancfc said:
He would have actually been a lesser player if he was more greedy, would have lost a lot of what made him so special.

The ironic thing about people citing the stats to favour Salah is I bet not a single one would chose prime Lampard over Iniesta or Xavi.
Click to expand...
Maybe. I've kinda blended two things together that don't necessarily have to correspond to each other but I feel like they do in Hazard's case — his relative lack of efficiency (compared with players of similar or even lesser talent) in my mind was a projection of his general attitude towards the game where winning at all costs wasn't always the priority — playing well & having fun was.

He probably wouldn't be as fun to watch if he had focused more on efficiency & goalscoring — we've seen that with Cristiano, probably the most drastic example of such a transformation in history of the game.
 
Lewnited said:
Have to go with Hazard on this one - near impossible to nullify him as he could have such a big impact on the game without scoring or assisting. Honestly the only player I remember 'fearing' as much as Henry. Salah's goals are absolutely inevitable, but Hazard in top form was something else.
Click to expand...
Herrera did it easily
 
harms said:
Maybe. I've kinda blended two things together that don't necessarily have to correspond to each other but I feel like they do in Hazard's case — his relative lack of efficiency (compared with players of similar or even lesser talent) in my mind was a projection of his general attitude towards the game where winning at all costs wasn't always the priority — playing well & having fun was.

He probably wouldn't be as fun to watch if he had focused more on efficiency & goalscoring — we've seen that with Cristiano, probably the most drastic example of such a transformation in history of the game.
Click to expand...
What doesn't really get acknowledged a lot is there's many times 'Hazard's way' got us a goal where a more greedy player would have likely wasted the chance.

The best example off the top of my head would be Ramires' goal here against you guys, a Salah/Bale type would have without doubt took a low percentage shot at the point Hazard dummied it which would have almost certainly ended up in a block and chance gone.

 
When in good form, Hazard for me. Guy was an insane dribbler and very difficult to stop. I think Salah is the sort of player that wins you leagues though, due to his quality and consistency. Like young Ronaldo was.
 
If I had to pick a player I like more and enjoy watching more, it would be prime Hazard, but if I were building a team it would be prime Salah
 
harms said:
What a weird take, considering that Hazard’s playmaking was one of his stringers features while Salah is often (and quite reasonably) gets called out for being overly selfish. A usual trait for a better goalscorer, but still — in fact if there was one thing that Hazard really lacked, it’s that selfishness that would’ve elevated him way further.
Click to expand...

My criticism of Hazard was always that he would hold the ball too long and try to do too much himself. It was all about him. He was a good passer/creator but only when he had finished his dribbling and was ready to pass, he wouldnt sacrifice his own game to help the team and that's why he was sometimes marked completely out of games.
 
In an empirical way, prime Hazard at his best in a one off game was perhaps better than Salah. But over a season there's no contest. Salah's average level through a season is higher, and brings his best more frequently and reliably than prime Hazard too
 
Hazard never, ever reached the same level of productivity Salah has. There's no contest here.
 
el3mel said:
Hazard never, ever reached the same level of productivity Salah has. There's no contest here.
Click to expand...
On that basis Lampard and Gerrard were on another planet to Iniesta and Xavi.
 
Dancfc said:
He would have actually been a lesser player if he was more greedy, would have lost a lot of what made him so special.

The ironic thing about people citing the stats to favour Salah is I bet not a single one would chose prime Lampard over Iniesta or Xavi.
Click to expand...

First of all that wouldn’t be ironic Alanis Morissette.

I actually sympathise with the point you’re making, I do think there is a trend of putting too much weighting purely on productivity, especially when it comes to online discourse. I think it's obvious why, it simplifies football and makes it so easily quantifiable, and there's only so much football that can be watched, so quick googleable numbers can often form the bedrock for how a player is doing.

I think there's plenty of bad takes regarding Hazard in this thread, he wasn't inconsistent, generally he was a more consistent player than most. He was a team player, he usually played in pragmatic sides so had to initiate a lot of Chelsea's on the ball stuff from deep, he often held on to the ball solely to disrupt the opposition shape and allow other Chelsea players to find space. It's weird that he's often chastised so much for his lack of numbers in a way that David Silva isn't, despite the fact that for large parts of their PL careers they operated functionally similarly within their respective teams (albeit with stylistic differences). So a straight comparison between someone like Salah and Hazard based solely on their numbers return is pointless, their roles and positions within their teams are fundamentally different.

Having said all that the answer is Salah.
 
Cascarino said:
First of all that wouldn’t be ironic Alanis Morissette.

I actually sympathise with the point you’re making, I do think there is a trend of putting too much weighting purely on productivity, especially when it comes to online discourse. I think it's obvious why, it simplifies football and makes it so easily quantifiable, and there's only so much football that can be watched, so quick googleable numbers can often form the bedrock for how a player is doing.

I think there's plenty of bad takes regarding Hazard in this thread, he wasn't inconsistent, generally he was a more consistent player than most. He was a team player, he usually played in pragmatic sides so had to initiate a lot of Chelsea's on the ball stuff from deep, he often held on to the ball solely to disrupt the opposition shape and allow other Chelsea players to find space. It's weird that he's often chastised so much for his lack of numbers in a way that David Silva isn't, despite the fact that for large parts of their PL careers they operated functionally similarly within their respective teams (albeit with stylistic differences). So a straight comparison between someone like Salah and Hazard based solely on their numbers return is pointless, their roles and positions within their teams are fundamentally different.

Having said all that the answer is Salah.
Click to expand...
Don't get me wrong I fully understand why people would pick Salah and for what it's worth I'd probably say his superior record (performance wise) in the UCL latter stages gives him the edge.

I just find it really lazy when people point to numbers alone. David Silva is actually an excellent comparison, looking purely at numbers many left mids/midfielders are/were better when in reality they weren't fit to clean his boots.
 
Prime Hazard is better than anything Salah is showing now. Also Hazard did it for a procession of managers, most of them defensive minded. Salah only really burst into form for Klopps Liverpool. Both of them were in the same team for a bit weren't they ? There was no question who was the better player then.
 
ThatsGreat said:
Prime Hazard is better than anything Salah is showing now. Also Hazard did it for a procession of managers, most of them defensive minded. Salah only really burst into form for Klopps Liverpool. Both of them were in the same team for a bit weren't they ? There was no question who was the better player then.
Click to expand...
These are such bogus arguments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.