Eden Hazard

[Luftstalag14]

He's scored 22, 14 and 17 goals in his last 3 seasons. How many wingers have better scoring records than that?

By the way, as brlliant Messi is, his dribbling ability has clearly declined since 2012. For me, on the basis of what I've seen this season Hazard is the better dribbler these days and the best in the World. I can understand why people would still prefer Messi but Hazard seems for agile than Leo this season.

According to Squawka, Hazard averages the most dribbles in Europe (5.3 p/g 69% success rate in the PL, 6.3 p/g (!!!) 65% in the CL). Messi averages 3.8 in La Liga (46% success rate), 6.3 in the CL (57% success rate).

I agree with what you said as I also think Hazard is more agile these days, but again these stats should be taken with a grain of salt since not all dribbles are made/born equal. Who is the better dribbler? It is all subjective.

 

[DrPepper]

Messi is (still) the best when it comes to dribbling in tight spaces while Hazard nowadays is probably better than Messi in attacking vertical depth. Stats can tell a lot but you still need to differentiate.

Hazard is Chelsea's first penalty taker so his goalscoring stats might be inflated a bit. But since he isn't playing as Chelsea's primary goalscorer like let's say Ronaldo for Real, those stats don't really matter as long as they aren't dangerously low.

About Hazard vs Götze, who is better depends on how you play. Götze suits a possession team like Bayern or Barca more because he is very good in tight spaces and a better playmaker than Hazard. Also he is a bit more versatile, he can play on the wing, as false nine, as attacking and central midfielder. Hazard probably could too, but I've really only seen him play as a winger or attacking midfielder. He suits a counter-attacking team like Chelsea or Madrid more rather than a possession based team. In terms of finishing ability I'd say they're equally good.

Defensively Götze the better workrate and is the better presser since he has played for the two best pressing teams of the last few years. Mourinho has also said that Hazard's defensive decisions aren't always good and that he still needs to learn how and when to press. But both certainly are fantastic players, even though Götze is a Judas.

 

[james baldwin]

Messi is (still) the best when it comes to dribbling in tight spaces while Hazard nowadays is probably better than Messi in attacking vertical depth. Stats can tell a lot but you still need to differentiate.

Hazard is Chelsea's first penalty taker so his goalscoring stats might be inflated a bit. But since he isn't playing as Chelsea's primary goalscorer like let's say Ronaldo for Real, those stats don't really matter as long as they aren't dangerously low.

About Hazard vs Götze, who is better depends on how you play. Götze suits a possession team like Bayern or Barca more because he is very good in tight spaces and a better playmaker than Hazard. Also he is a bit more versatile, he can play on the wing, as false nine, as attacking and central midfielder. Hazard probably could too, but I've really only seen him play as a winger or attacking midfielder. He suits a counter-attacking team like Chelsea or Madrid more rather than a possession based team. In terms of finishing ability I'd say they're equally good.

Defensively Götze the better workrate and is the better presser since he has played for the two best pressing teams of the last few years. Mourinho has also said that Hazard's defensive decisions aren't always good and that he still needs to learn how and when to press. But both certainly are fantastic players, even though Götze is a Judas.

(i) And what do you base that of, Gotze being a better playmaker? I don't see it. Hazard's playmaking skills are up there with the Nasri's and Silva's of this world.

(ii) Hazard played on occasion as a false nine in Lille, so he's played there before and he even did it in one game for Chelsea vs Juventus under Di Matteo. False nine is not something Mourinho believes in though. As for central midfield, I'm sure if Pep had him, he will try him there.

(iii) I think Hazard suits either a possession based team or a counter-attacking team. Besides, Real Madrid and Chelsea dominate possession vs around 80% of the teams they play against, so the term "counter-attacking team" isn't 100% correct.

As for Gotze in general, he still has a way to go before reaching the elite, world class level of a Neymar, Silva, Reus, Bale or Hazard. It's not a question of quality, but full application of his talents.

 

[doublehh03]

He's scored 22, 14 and 17 goals in his last 3 seasons. How many wingers have better scoring records than that?

By the way, as brlliant Messi is, his dribbling ability has clearly declined since 2012. For me, on the basis of what I've seen this season Hazard is the better dribbler these days and the best in the World. I can understand why people would still prefer Messi but Hazard seems for agile than Leo this season.

According to Squawka, Hazard averages the most dribbles in Europe (5.3 p/g 69% success rate in the PL, 6.3 p/g (!!!) 65% in the CL). Messi averages 3.8 in La Liga (46% success rate), 6.3 in the CL (57% success rate).

Watch Hazard. He's nowhere close to being marked like Messi.

He's coming into his own, but it's blasphemous to compare him to Messi. If Messi has the space/opening like Hazard does, well, that's never going to happen so I can't fathom how Messi would play being marked like 99% other players.

 

[red dragon2]

(i) And what do you base that of, Gotze being a better playmaker? I don't see it. Hazard's playmaking skills are up there with the Nasri's and Silva's of this world.

(ii) Hazard played on occasion as a false nine in Lille, so he's played there before and he even did it in one game for Chelsea vs Juventus under Di Matteo. False nine is not something Mourinho believes in though. As for central midfield, I'm sure if Pep had him, he will try him there.

(iii) I think Hazard suits either a possession based team or a counter-attacking team. Besides, Real Madrid and Chelsea dominate possession vs around 80% of the teams they play against, so the term "counter-attacking team" isn't 100% correct.

As for Gotze in general, he still has a way to go before reaching the elite, world class level of a Neymar, Silva, Reus, Bale or Hazard. It's not a question of quality, but full application of his talents.

lets see neymar produce consistent performances all season long in the league and europe before we say he's as good as reus etc

 

[james baldwin]

lets see neymar produce consistent performances all season long in the league and europe before we say he's as good as reus etc

Okay, fair enough.

 

[DrPepper]

(i) And what do you base that of, Gotze being a better playmaker? I don't see it. Hazard's playmaking skills are up there with the Nasri's and Silva's of this world.

(ii) Hazard played on occasion as a false nine in Lille, so he's played there before and he even did it in one game for Chelsea vs Juventus under Di Matteo. False nine is not something Mourinho believes in though. As for central midfield, I'm sure if Pep had him, he will try him there.

(iii) I think Hazard suits either a possession based team or a counter-attacking team. Besides, Real Madrid and Chelsea dominate possession vs around 80% of the teams they play against, so the term "counter-attacking team" isn't 100% correct.

As for Gotze in general, he still has a way to go before reaching the elite, world class level of a Neymar, Silva, Reus, Bale or Hazard. It's not a question of quality, but full application of his talents.

1. I think Götze's decision making is better. His passing seem to be more mixed in terms of length while Hazard prefers a more direct or vertical way of playing. Not saying that because one plays for Bayern and the other for Chelsea, but Götze also played for Dortmund who are more comparable to Chelsea and I think they were different in their style of passing. Hazard plays more "key passes" but Götze distributes the ball better.

2. Dunno about that. It's speculation whether Guardiola would play him there. And having played a few times as false nine doesn't really mean that he established himself there. In his 3 years at Chelsea, how many games did Hazard not play as winger? I don't remember many.

3. Dominating possession doesn't mean they're not counter attacking. It's more due to their pressing and due to the opposition just giving the ball away quickly and/or playing very direct that Chelsea and Madrid dominate possession against smaller teams. Underdog teams dropping very deep often have the problem of having a very long distance to the opposition's goal when they win the ball and aren't often able to bypass Chelsea's or Madrid's first or second phase pressing.

Götze stagnated a bit at Bayern and is more injury prone than Hazard, but both players are certainly world class.

 

[DirtySanchez]

How anyone can call Hazard "direct" when he has a 91% passing accuracy is beyond me.

 

[KingMessi]

How anyone can call Hazard "direct" when he has a 91% passing accuracy is beyond me.

Low pass accuracy = direct then? @_@

 

[DirtySanchez]

Low pass accuracy = direct then? @_@

In most cases yeah.

Just think saying Hazard is direct is way out of mark. Out of all the wingers being championed he's the most Barca player of them all at the moment. He excels in a possession based system Rudi Garcia's philosophy at Lille), uses the ball very intelligently, somewhat unselfish to a fault and is excellent at combination football.

 

[footyfan]

I agree with what you said as I also think Hazard is more agile these days, but again these stats should be taken with a grain of salt since not all dribbles are made/born equal.

It's interesting how this argument pops up only when Messi's the one behind, and I also find it ironic because you're one of those who posts the number of dribbles Messi made after a particular game ended. Look, it's acceptable if the numbers were somewhere close to each other, but that's not the case. Messi has more unsuccessful than successful dribbles while Hazard has almost twice as many successful dribbles as unsuccessful ones, at the same time having more dribbles than Messi overall. That's a huge difference.

If you're implying Messi's dribbles are harder and more special, the eye test (atleast from my POV) for Messi and Hazard this season doesn't support that. Messi has better close control that's for sure, but that doesn't negate the difference in speed and persistence from Hazard. The majority of Messi's dribbles (both successful and unsuccessful) are made when he drops deep and is faced with only 1 man, or on the wing or on the counter (again typically 1 man). Hazard's decision making is often below par, as he tends to lose the ball more after finishing his dribbles, and he also can't combine passing and dribbling like Messi can, though he's improving in that regard.

Messi may be the better dribbler than Hazard at this point in time, but he's not showing that.

 

[Luftstalag14]

It's interesting how this argument pops up only when Messi's the one behind, and I also find it ironic because you're one of those who posts the number of dribbles Messi made after a particular game ended. Look, it's acceptable if the numbers were somewhere close to each other, but that's not the case. Messi has more unsuccessful than successful dribbles while Hazard has almost twice as many successful dribbles as unsuccessful ones, at the same time having more dribbles than Messi overall. That's a huge difference.

If you're implying Messi's dribbles are harder and more special, the eye test (atleast from my POV) for Messi and Hazard this season doesn't support that. Messi has better close control that's for sure, but that doesn't negate the difference in speed and persistence from Hazard. The majority of Messi's dribbles (both successful and unsuccessful) are made when he drops deep and is faced with only 1 man, or on the wing or on the counter (again typically 1 man). Hazard's decision making is often below par, as he tends to lose the ball more after finishing his dribbles, and he also can't combine passing and dribbling like Messi can, though he's improving in that regard.

Messi may be the better dribbler than Hazard at this point in time, but he's not showing that.

Ironic? What's wrong with posting Messi's stats after games? Stats are posted to show how he did, not to compare with other players, is that too hard to understand?

Like I said, everything is subjective, your eye test is not better than mine or anyone else's, and vice versa. And again, I was agreeing with your observation to a certain degree, in case you did not notice!

 

[footyfan]

Ironic? What's wrong with posting Messi's stats after games? Stats are posted to show how he did, not to compare with other players, is that too hard to understand?

I never said it's wrong, I said ironic, because you're posting dribbling stats to show how well he did, but when the same dribbling stats are used to show that another player is twice as efficient, you talk about subjectiveness not captured in the stats.

Like I said, everything is subjective, your eye test is not better than mine or anyone else's, and vice versa. And again, I was agreeing with your observation to a certain degree, in case you did not notice!

l didn't imply my eye-test was better than everybody else's, in fact I implied in my first paragraph that the eye test/subjective outlook is only useful if the stats were somewhat comparable to each other, which they're not.

 

[Hamzah]

Youd think hazard was the best player in the world judging by this thread,

 

[DonAK]

Didn't Agbonlahor have better dribbling stats than Messi last season? lol