Has Hazard peaked?

Harmonica wrote:

Art Morte wrote:What's the problem? You can't put it all down to the whole team performing worse.

Of course you can. When team has so deep problems, it will affect individual performance also, not only performances derived from team performances.

Hazard is top 3rd dribbler in Premier League 15-16, 9 behind Mahrez. It's the only statistic that doesn't depend on team mates or team performance that much.

Dribbling is only a meaningful statistic if you can use it (dribbling) to score goals and create chances. Hazard has one goal and three assists this season, so obviously his dribbling has gone to waste most of the time and isn't a direct indication of how good he's been.

Art Morte wrote:

Harmonica wrote:

Art Morte wrote:What's the problem? You can't put it all down to the whole team performing worse.

Of course you can. When team has so deep problems, it will affect individual performance also, not only performances derived from team performances.

Hazard is top 3rd dribbler in Premier League 15-16, 9 behind Mahrez. It's the only statistic that doesn't depend on team mates or team performance that much.

Dribbling is only a meaningful statistic if you can use it (dribbling) to score goals and create chances. Hazard has one goal and three assists this season, so obviously his dribbling has gone to waste most of the time and isn't a direct indication of how good he's been.

Scoring depends how good positions your team puts you, and assists how good your team mates are in finishing. Just last game Hazard created a perfect opportunity for Pedro/Azpi to score and they didn't.

Dribbling a player however always advances game, no matter what your position is on the field. It's always positive.

I mean did Pedro magically become 3 times worse goal scorer in moving Barcelona to Chelsea?

Shots per goals (goals)

6 (7) 12-13
5 (15) 13-14
6 (6) 14-15
18 (2) 15-16

Harmonica wrote:
Dribbling a player however always advances game, no matter what your position is on the field. It's always positive.

I would strongly disagree with that.

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Harmonica wrote:
Dribbling a player however always advances game, no matter what your position is on the field. It's always positive.

I would strongly disagree with that.

Not an argument.

Harmonica wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Harmonica wrote:
Dribbling a player however always advances game, no matter what your position is on the field. It's always positive.

I would strongly disagree with that.

Not an argument.

I'm making it one.

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Harmonica wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:

I would strongly disagree with that.

Not an argument.

I'm making it one.

Well you can say 10 = 9 all you want, but it's still not an argument.

Collblanc wrote:

Harmonica wrote:Well yes.

Hazard/Iniesta/Rafinha - Busquets/Mascherano - Rakitic/Roberto

who will defend?

DMzard (:

B-Mac wrote:

Collblanc wrote:

Harmonica wrote:Well yes.

Hazard/Iniesta/Rafinha - Busquets/Mascherano - Rakitic/Roberto

who will defend?

DMzard (:

As a fellow fantasista , I completely agree with Harmonica.

Sergi Roberto------Others-----------
----------Pogba------Iniesta----------
------------------Hazard--------------
Messi-------Suarez------------Neymar

RealGunner wrote:As a fellow fantasista , I completely agree with Harmonica.

Danilo------Others-----------
----------Kroos------Modric----------
-----------------Bale--------------
James-------Benzema------------Cristiano

U mad RG ?

I am a fan of Bale-Ronaldo upfront in a narrow 4-4-2

--James---Isco---Modric---Benzema
---------Bale------Ronaldo-----------

RealGunner wrote:I am a fan of Bale-Ronaldo upfront in a narrow 4-4-2

--James---Benzema---Modric---Isco
---------Bale------Ronaldo-----------

Fixed

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Harmonica wrote:
Dribbling a player however always advances game, no matter what your position is on the field. It's always positive.

I would strongly disagree with that.

Anyone that actually plays knows this though (I'm agreeing with your disagreement).

On my team there's a guy that is a great dribbler, the problem is that he often ends up holding onto the ball and dribbling players when he doesn't need to giving the other teams defence time to mark up, get deeper or catch onto runs or open players that would have been available had he just made a first time pass or taken one touch then passed.

Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.

As much as I love watching some good tricks, or movement on the ball, dribbling can be one of the most overrated aspects of a footballer especially in todays day and age where there are so many good athletes and structured systems.

Curtinho wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Harmonica wrote:
Dribbling a player however always advances game, no matter what your position is on the field. It's always positive.

I would strongly disagree with that.

Anyone that actually plays knows this though (I'm agreeing with your disagreement).

On my team there's a guy that is a great dribbler, the problem is that he often ends up holding onto the ball and dribbling players when he doesn't need to giving the other teams defence time to mark up, get deeper or catch onto runs or open players that would have been available had he just made a first time pass or taken one touch then passed.

Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.

As much as I love watching some good tricks, or movement on the ball, dribbling can be one of the most overrated aspects of a footballer especially in todays day and age where there are so many good athletes and structured systems.

Football players are not famous for their logic.

What happens after the you beat player with a dribble is irrelevant. When you beat a player, you always advance game with a player, and there's always one less opponent between the ball and the goal. That's just mathematical fact. What happens after that depends on multiple things, not only your individual quality.

Harmonica wrote:

Curtinho wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:


I would strongly disagree with that.

Anyone that actually plays knows this though (I'm agreeing with your disagreement).

On my team there's a guy that is a great dribbler, the problem is that he often ends up holding onto the ball and dribbling players when he doesn't need to giving the other teams defence time to mark up, get deeper or catch onto runs or open players that would have been available had he just made a first time pass or taken one touch then passed.

Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.

As much as I love watching some good tricks, or movement on the ball, dribbling can be one of the most overrated aspects of a footballer especially in todays day and age where there are so many good athletes and structured systems.

Football players are not famous for their logic.

What happens after the you beat player with a dribble is irrelevant. When you beat a player, you always advance game with a player, and there's always one less opponent between the ball and the goal. That's just mathematical fact. What happens after that depends on multiple things, not only your individual quality.

Unless you are dribling towards your goal or horizontally.

Or as a teammate I usde to have, he dribled then waited for the player to catch up and drible him again.

Harmonica wrote:

Curtinho wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:


I would strongly disagree with that.

Anyone that actually plays knows this though (I'm agreeing with your disagreement).

On my team there's a guy that is a great dribbler, the problem is that he often ends up holding onto the ball and dribbling players when he doesn't need to giving the other teams defence time to mark up, get deeper or catch onto runs or open players that would have been available had he just made a first time pass or taken one touch then passed.

Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.

As much as I love watching some good tricks, or movement on the ball, dribbling can be one of the most overrated aspects of a footballer especially in todays day and age where there are so many good athletes and structured systems.

Football players are not famous for their logic.

What happens after the you beat player with a dribble is irrelevant. When you beat a player, you always advance game with a player, and there's always one less opponent between the ball and the goal. That's just mathematical fact. What happens after that depends on multiple things, not only your individual quality.

Well, mathematically speaking you can drible an opponent sideways or oriented through your own goal so that doesn't decrease the opponent number between you and the opponent's goal.

Also, mathematically speaking you can choose to drible, and maybe by dribling instead of passing, you slow down the pace of a counter-attack, and more than 1 opponent regains field and regroups because of that dribling, and you passed only 1 player by dribbling.

So yeah, mathematically speaking... You're wrong.

free_cat wrote:

Harmonica wrote:

Curtinho wrote:

Anyone that actually plays knows this though (I'm agreeing with your disagreement).

On my team there's a guy that is a great dribbler, the problem is that he often ends up holding onto the ball and dribbling players when he doesn't need to giving the other teams defence time to mark up, get deeper or catch onto runs or open players that would have been available had he just made a first time pass or taken one touch then passed.

Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.

As much as I love watching some good tricks, or movement on the ball, dribbling can be one of the most overrated aspects of a footballer especially in todays day and age where there are so many good athletes and structured systems.

Football players are not famous for their logic.

What happens after the you beat player with a dribble is irrelevant. When you beat a player, you always advance game with a player, and there's always one less opponent between the ball and the goal. That's just mathematical fact. What happens after that depends on multiple things, not only your individual quality.

Unless you are dribling towards your goal or horizontally.

Or as a teammate I use to have, you then wait for the player to catch up and drible him again.

It isn't counted as dribble in this situation (OPTA).

Ion Creanga wrote:

Harmonica wrote:

Curtinho wrote:

Anyone that actually plays knows this though (I'm agreeing with your disagreement).

On my team there's a guy that is a great dribbler, the problem is that he often ends up holding onto the ball and dribbling players when he doesn't need to giving the other teams defence time to mark up, get deeper or catch onto runs or open players that would have been available had he just made a first time pass or taken one touch then passed.

Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.

As much as I love watching some good tricks, or movement on the ball, dribbling can be one of the most overrated aspects of a footballer especially in todays day and age where there are so many good athletes and structured systems.

Football players are not famous for their logic.

What happens after the you beat player with a dribble is irrelevant. When you beat a player, you always advance game with a player, and there's always one less opponent between the ball and the goal. That's just mathematical fact. What happens after that depends on multiple things, not only your individual quality.

Well, mathematically speaking you can drible an opponent sideways or oriented through your own goal so that doesn't decrease the opponent number between you and the opponent's goal.

Also, mathematically speaking you can choose to drible, and maybe by dribling instead of passing, you slow down the pace of a counter-attack, and more than 1 opponent regains field and regroups because of that dribling, and you passed only 1 player by dribbling.

So yeah, mathematically speaking... You're wrong.

You can't because that isn't counted as dribble by today's standards (OPTA).

Harmonica wrote:

Curtinho wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:


I would strongly disagree with that.

Anyone that actually plays knows this though (I'm agreeing with your disagreement).

On my team there's a guy that is a great dribbler, the problem is that he often ends up holding onto the ball and dribbling players when he doesn't need to giving the other teams defence time to mark up, get deeper or catch onto runs or open players that would have been available had he just made a first time pass or taken one touch then passed.

Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.

As much as I love watching some good tricks, or movement on the ball, dribbling can be one of the most overrated aspects of a footballer especially in todays day and age where there are so many good athletes and structured systems.

Football players are not famous for their logic.

What happens after the you beat player with a dribble is irrelevant. When you beat a player, you always advance game with a player, and there's always one less opponent between the ball and the goal. That's just mathematical fact. What happens after that depends on multiple things, not only your individual quality.

Dribbling doesn't always advance play. If you are in a culdesac and you dribble backwards you don't advance play at all. Dribbling is useful if you have an end product. Key passes stat is irrelevant. Busquets had a key pass in that goal that Messi scored vs Real Madrid in semis in 2011

I do think Hazard plays better as a #10 but the way Chelseas attack is structured, he will never be better than he is. He needs better players around him.

What about the counter-attacking scenario? I don't see why that shouldn't count as a dirbbling.

jibers wrote:

Harmonica wrote:

Curtinho wrote:

Anyone that actually plays knows this though (I'm agreeing with your disagreement).

On my team there's a guy that is a great dribbler, the problem is that he often ends up holding onto the ball and dribbling players when he doesn't need to giving the other teams defence time to mark up, get deeper or catch onto runs or open players that would have been available had he just made a first time pass or taken one touch then passed.

Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.

As much as I love watching some good tricks, or movement on the ball, dribbling can be one of the most overrated aspects of a footballer especially in todays day and age where there are so many good athletes and structured systems.

Football players are not famous for their logic.

What happens after the you beat player with a dribble is irrelevant. When you beat a player, you always advance game with a player, and there's always one less opponent between the ball and the goal. That's just mathematical fact. What happens after that depends on multiple things, not only your individual quality.

Dribbling doesn't always advance play. If you are in a culdesac and you dribble backwards you don't advance play at all. Dribbling is useful if you have an end product. Key passes stat is irrelevant. Busquets had a key pass in that goal that Messi scored vs Real Madrid in semis in 2011

I do think Hazard plays better as a #10 but the way Chelseas attack is structured, he will never be better than he is. He needs better players around him.

Three times da charm?

It does by today's standards, because dribble isn't a dribble if it's not on attacking direction (OPTA).

Curtinho wrote:
Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.
.

Exactly. Of course, taken without context, beating a man is better than not beating a man, 10>9.
But you describe exactly why sometimes dribbles do NOT advance your team's position, and I have the feeling Hazard is a specialist in such dribbling that have a detrimental aspect to it.

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Curtinho wrote:
Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.
.

Exactly. Of course, taken without context, beating a man is better than not beating a man, 10>9.
But you describe exactly why sometimes dribbles do NOT advance your team's position, and I have the feeling Hazard is a specialist in such dribbling that have a detrimental aspect to it.

omg 4th time da charm?

A dribble isn't a dribble in todays standards (Opta), if it isn't on attacking direction.

Casual fans thought they found da loophole and gangbanged in at the same time.

Harmonica wrote:

Hapless_Hans wrote:

Curtinho wrote:
Dribbling can be great in the right circumstances, but if you're just dribbling because you can it often disrupts the flow of a counter-attack, or if you have good movement among other players on your team it makes runs go to waste, and often enough gives the opposition time to set up properly to defend.
.

Exactly. Of course, taken without context, beating a man is better than not beating a man, 10>9.
But you describe exactly why sometimes dribbles do NOT advance your team's position, and I have the feeling Hazard is a specialist in such dribbling that have a detrimental aspect to it.

omg 4th time da charm?

A dribble isn't a dribble in todays standards (Opta), if it isn't on attacking direction.

Casual fans thought they found da loophole and gangbanged in at the same time.

Curtinho was talking about the whole situation. How is the attack unfolding? How are your teammates moving? How is the opponent moving?
There's always situations where there's a better decision to be made than to dribble.

Harmonica wrote:

jibers wrote:

Harmonica wrote:
Football players are not famous for their logic.

What happens after the you beat player with a dribble is irrelevant. When you beat a player, you always advance game with a player, and there's always one less opponent between the ball and the goal. That's just mathematical fact. What happens after that depends on multiple things, not only your individual quality.

Dribbling doesn't always advance play. If you are in a culdesac and you dribble backwards you don't advance play at all. Dribbling is useful if you have an end product. Key passes stat is irrelevant. Busquets had a key pass in that goal that Messi scored vs Real Madrid in semis in 2011

I do think Hazard plays better as a #10 but the way Chelseas attack is structured, he will never be better than he is. He needs better players around him.

Three times da charm?

It does by today's standards, because dribble isn't a dribble if it's not on attacking direction (OPTA).

I don't give a damn about OPTA

If you beat a man when teammates are in a better position that is poor decision making. Hazard dribbles into corners a lot of the time. Meaningless. Still forward. Iniesta dribbles into corners and then can turn out, sideways which is more effective than Hazard and is not forward...