Lionel Messi - v7

[BBZ8800]

The only relevant thing I can find about this, is a study that claims average height has grown by 10cm in the last 150 years. It doesn't even speak about even distribution of that growth. Which means about 0.67cm per decade. So, from 1980s to 2010s, assuming even distribution, which we have no reason to, the difference on average height would be 2 cm. I'd say it's negligible, or inside the margins of statistical error. So, we can't assume Maradona would be 170cm had he been born today.

It is not an error.
Some studies show that a growth boomed in the last 20 years.

Some studies say that an average height on guys aged 20 today in Southern Croatia and Montenegro (Dinaric apls area) is almost 186cm (6ft 1), lol.
And that was in 2005'.
14 years has passes, new kids are even taller, like giants.
Here is a link:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average_human_height_by_country

I used to be among tallest guys when I went to high school (186cm in 90s), today I look average compared to 20 years old kids who look like giants and 100s of them are 192, 195cm etc.
I have two neighbors, younger guys, one is 192, the other one is 195.
I chatted with them a few days ago and had to llook up all the time left and right while talking to them.
And at least in my experience, it happens often with these new kids.

So, my point is, if I were let's say a CB in some Croatian club in 90s, I would have been among the tallest CBs back then, compared to people who lived and played in that era.
But if you take my height from 90s and put me into todays football with Van Dijk, Pique, Varane and similar who are around 192-194, then I would be a CB of an average height today (186) and you could say today: what are you talking about? That Bbz player was not tall at all.

So, you see, when I was aged 20, I was above average height compared to people of my age.
Today, I am meh compared to height of a new gen of kids.

So, Maradona was short.
But if he was 165 and if an average footballer was 175, that isn't much different than a 170cm Messi today against an average footballer with 178 today, for example.
But if you take Maradona from 80s and compare him with current players, then he would have been the shortest player on a rooster today.
But again, you can't compare people from different eras since the average height has changed.

 

[BBZ8800]

Another thing to consider:
Till late 90s, only 1 club per country (a champion) played in a CL/Champions cup.

So, Maradona played in a CL only twice with Napoli.

For example, if we applied the same rules:
Barca wouldn't have played at all in a CL in 2009 and 2015.
Real wouldn't have played in 1998, 2000, 2014, 2016 (maybe as a 2nd team since Barca won in 2015, but then Barca shouldn't have played in 2015 in the first place, but a champion from 2014: Atletico. So, RM again wouldn't have played), 2017.

So, if Messi and Cr7 played in 80s or 90s, Messi would have CL titles:
2006, only a few appearances and injured in quarters, semis and a final.
2011

CR7:
2008 Man Utd
2018 Real

2 Cls for Messi, zero Nt titles.
2 Cls for Cr7, 1 Euro
Quite less spectacular...

Suddenly Van Basten's 2 CLs and 1 Euro from late 80s and early 90s, don't look as average anymore...

So:
1. Champions league is different today. Cr7 and Messi literally had 15 chances/seasons to win it.
Maradona and Van Basten had 3-4-5 attempts.
2. Domestic league became a joke with ultra rich clubs (internet era, higher earnings) are bullying small teams and statpadding titles, 100 points per season, 100-120 goals scored per season and team's and individual records

So, to some extent, imo, it is unfair to measure Messi and Cr7 with former players based on BallondDOrs, CL titles and statpadding la liga numbers.

 

[Centauri B]

Another thing to consider:
Till late 90s, only 1 club per country (a champion) played in a CL/Champions cup.

So, Maradona played in a CL only twice with Napoli.

For example, if we applied the same rules:
Barca wouldn't have played at all in a CL in 2009 and 2015.
Real wouldn't have played in 1998, 2000, 2014, 2016 (maybe as a 2nd team since Barca won in 2015, but then Barca shouldn't have played in 2015 in the first place, but a champion from 2014: Atletico. So, RM again wouldn't have played), 2017.

So, if Messi and Cr7 played in 80s or 90s, Messi would have CL titles:
2006, only a few appearances and injured in quarters, semis and a final.
2011

CR7:
2008 Man Utd
2018 Real

2 Cls for Messi, zero Nt titles.
2 Cls for Cr7, 1 Euro
Quite less spectacular...

Suddenly Van Basten's 2 CLs and 1 Euro from late 80s and early 90s, don't look as average anymore...

So:
1. Champions league is different today. Cr7 and Messi literally had 15 chances/seasons to win it.
Maradona and Van Basten had 3-4-5 attempts.
2. Domestic league became a joke with ultra rich clubs (internet era, higher earnings) are bullying small teams and statpadding titles, 100 points per season, 100-120 goals scored per season and team's and individual records

So, to some extent, imo, it is unfair to measure Messi and Cr7 with former players based on BallondDOrs, CL titles and statpadding la liga numbers.

If the CL was like the old European Cup, then it would have been much easier for Messi's Barca to win. Remember that we won the league in 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2018 and 2019. It would mean that teams that eliminated us like Chelsea (2012), Bayern (2013) Atletico (2014 & 2016) Roma (2018) and Liverpool (2019) & (2007) wouldn't be there at all. The old EC was a Mickey Mouse tournament compared to the CL of today.

Edit: we only once took 100 points in LL (2013)

 

[Mitchell1978]

btw serie A was the strongest league in the world in the 90s (i would say from 88/89 untill 2000 perhaps), so not really in the period Maradona player there but after

while its true its difficult to compare numbers from different era's not just the 80s vs now but also the period and competition Pele played in and against

but you can compare how players do versus their own peers and Messi and CR7 blow their competition out of the water much more then Maradona, Van Basten etc

so the reality is that Maradona is not a goat level goal scorer, barely elite really and Messi, Pele and CR7 are among the very best goalscorers ever (with the likes of Puskas, Bican, Muller, Eusebio and maybe 2 or 3 others)

 

[Centauri B]

btw serie A was the strongest league in the world in the 90s (i would say from 88/89 untill 2000 perhaps), so not really in the period Maradona player there but after

while its true its difficult to compare numbers from different era's not just the 80s vs now but also the period and competition Pele played in and against

but you can compare how players do versus their own peers and Messi and CR7 blow their competition out of the water much more then Maradona, Van Basten etc

so the reality is that Maradona is not a goat level goal scorer, barely elite really and Messi, Pele and CR7 are among the very best goalscorers ever (with the likes of Puskas, Bican, Muller, Eusebio and maybe 2 or 3 others)

True. Messi destroys the competition during his era, while Diego almost never topped the scoring charts and 30% of his goals were penaldos.

 

[KingLeo10]

Centauri beat me to the flaw I was going to point out with BBZs argument .

This has always been your Achilles heel BBZ. You only consider numbers that support the narrative you want to present. Analysis/ science is evaluating how numbers/results correspond with all hypotheses/ scenarios to then weigh which scenario is most plausible.

You’re a politician.

 

[KingLeo10]

Messi and CR7 are all time greats. I have Messi #1 and CR7 top 5. Van basten isn’t close to either, sorry. He had maybe 5 top seasons.

 

[bismp]

So, if Messi and Cr7 played in 80s or 90s, Messi would have CL titles:
2006, only a few appearances and injured in quarters, semis and a final.
2011

CR7:
2008 Man Utd
2018 Real

2 Cls for Messi, zero Nt titles.
2 Cls for Cr7, 1 Euro
Quite less spectacular...

Suddenly Van Basten's 2 CLs and 1 Euro from late 80s and early 90s, don't look as average anymore...

This argument is as flawed as it can get.Yes,by your logic Messi would only have won in 2006 and 2011.But if only the champions were playing in the CL,how can you tell that Messi wouldn't have won in 2007,2010,2012,2014,2016,2017 or 2019(the years that followed the domestic championship in this hypothetical CL tournament)?

In fact,I would argue that it's HARDER to win the CL nowadays compared to the old format.If only the champions would participate,Barca would have to face 3-4 good teams per year(the champions of England,Italy,Germany and maybe France) instead of the roughly 10 good teams that they can potentially face now.

Imagine that.That would practically mean a GUARANTEED qualification to the semis EVERY YEAR.

Which would mean that Barca and Messi would win at least 2-3/7 hypothetical CLs.Add the 2 "real" ones(2006+2011) and you have 4-5 CLs...which is at least as well as Barca and Messi have done in the real life situation.


In the meawhile Real would have only QUALIFIED to 2 CLs(2013 and 2018) in the last 10+ years and would have probably won only 1 CL

As for PR7,he would have played in only 5 CLs(2008 and 2009 with ManU,2013 and 2018 with Real and 2019 with Juventus) and would have probably won 2-3 CLs(2008,2018 and probably 2009)

So,in conclusion in this hypothetical world the last 14 years we have:

Barca: 3-5 CLs // Real 1 CL
Messi: 3-5 CLs //PR7 2-3 CLs

 

[BBZ8800]

If the CL was like the old European Cup, then it would have been much easier for Messi's Barca to win. Remember that we won the league in 2005, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2018 and 2019. It would mean that teams that eliminated us like Chelsea (2012), Bayern (2013) Atletico (2014 & 2016) Roma (2018) and Liverpool (2019) & (2007) wouldn't be there at all. The old EC was a Mickey Mouse tournament compared to the CL of today.

Edit: we only once took 100 points in LL (2013)

You can't say Messi's Barca.
Lately we had Neymar, Suarez, random 100m signings.

Look at us today, we need a Cf, we will buy a 1110m Lautaro.
We need a Lw, we will buy a 180m Neymar.

Barca's transfers today is like playing football manager with cheating codes (unlimited funds).

So, if Messi played in 80s, he would play with Alena, Puig, Samper, Oriol, Paco, Denis and similar of that era.
We couldn't buy 10 superstars.
We had 2-3 stars, 10 local players and 10 spanish players like Denis, Paco and Dani Parejo.

Now, if Messi had Samper, Denis, Paco and Parejo in a league where teams were even, do you think that we would win la liga all the time?
And then, why on Earth should we dominate CL in 80s with Paco and Parejo?
Now, if you will reply: Messi alone would be enough, then how come that Messi alone can't win even Copa America with average teammates?

About a part of your post how we wouldn't lose to Roma and Liverpool since they weren't champions, you are assuming that we would have been champions.
I was talking about Seria A where you had 7 big teams, not even including Napoli.
You are comparing it to a 2 horse race vs Real and Barca.
I mean, even in Spain from 1990-2002 you had 5 different chanpions: Real, Barca, Atletico, Deportivo, Valencia.
Which shows how teams were more even, rich teams weren't as rich and it was harder to score goals, win matches, win titles and statpad numbers.
No wonder that champions had 70-80 points in that era.

Can you imagine 5 different champions in la liga today, lol?

 

[KingLeo10]

You can't say Messi's Barca.
Lately we had Neymar, Suarez, random 100m signings.

Look at us today, we need a Cf, we will buy a 1110m Lautaro.
We need a Lw, we will buy a 180m Neymar.

Barca's transfers today is like playing football manager with cheating codes (unlimited funds).

So, if Messi played in 80s, he would play with Alena, Puig, Samper, Oriol, Paco, Denis and similar of that era.
We couldn't buy 10 superstars.
We had 2-3 stars, 10 local players and 10 spanish players like Denis, Paco and Dani Parejo.

Now, if Messi had Samper, Denis, Paco and Parejo in a league where teams were even, do you think that we would win la liga all the time?
And then, why on Earth should we dominate CL in 80s with Paco and Parejo?
Now, if you will reply: Messi alone would be enough, then how come that Messi alone can't win even Copa America with average teammates?

About a part of your post how we wouldn't lose to Roma and Liverpool since they weren't champions, you are assuming that we would have been champions.
I was talking about Seria A where you had 7 big teams, not even including Napoli.
You are comparing it to a 2 horse race vs Real and Barca.
I mean, even in Spain from 1990-2002 you had 5 different chanpions: Real, Barca, Atletico, Deportivo, Valencia.
Which shows how teams were more even, rich teams weren't as rich and it was harder to score goals, win matches, win titles and statpad numbers.
No wonder that champions had 70-80 points in that era.

Can you imagine 5 different champions in la liga today, lol?

The AC Milan team of van basten literally bought superstars. VB had Balon D’Or winner Gullit and superstars like Maldini baresi rijkaard. The Euro win was the Dutch trio also.

And now you want to say we need to discount Messi because we bought Ney (funny how you rate him highly now that it suits your agenda ) and Suarez.

You’re flat out incorrect on this one. Stop changing goalposts and go pick another argument.

 

[BBZ8800]

but you can compare how players do versus their own peers and Messi and CR7 blow their competition out of the water much more then Maradona, Van Basten etc

You'll get offended but...
In 90% of matches today, Messi is playing against Mickey Mouse opponents due to us being so rich.

The only time where Messi plays against somewhat even opponents is:
World cup
Copa America
CL ko stages

And in the last 5-6 years, he is quite bad in all of this.
Ok, not bad.
But hardly the best or a gamechanger, especially not the greatest of all time.

Now people will say: but Argentina sucks and Barca has EV.
Well, exactly.
Maradona turned fckng Napoli into champions.

I don't want to talk against Messi.
But my view is that a current era is designed that way that super rich teams will dominate easily and their best players will easily statpad numbers, especially against smaller teams.
And today 90% of opponents are Mickey Mouse teams due to differences in money.

So, while Messi is surely in top3-4 ever, as time passes and when I account these things from above, it is hard to tell who is the best ever.





so the reality is that Maradona is not a goat level goal scorer, barely elite really and Messi, Pele and CR7 are among the very best goalscorers ever (with the likes of Puskas, Bican, Muller, Eusebio and maybe 2 or 3 others)[/QUOTE]

 

[BBZ8800]

Centauri beat me to the flaw I was going to point out with BBZs argument .

This has always been your Achilles heel BBZ. You only consider numbers that support the narrative you want to present. Analysis/ science is evaluating how numbers/results correspond with all hypotheses/ scenarios to then weigh which scenario is most plausible.

You’re a politician.

Name that flaw.
I have answered.
If you have new flaws, feel free to post.

 

[BBZ8800]

Messi and CR7 are all time greats. I have Messi #1 and CR7 top 5. Van basten isn’t close to either, sorry. He had maybe 5 top seasons.

About 5 seasons, remember a few things:
1. Big teams weren't as rich as today.
Ajax and similar teams could have offered similar wages back then.
2. Teams could have played only 3 foreigners back then.
And EU was created in 1993.
So, Crujff was a foreigner.
At Milan in 80s, Van Basten, Gullit and Rijkaard were foreigners.
So, to play for Milan or Barca back then, you needed to be a player who brings a difference.
3 spots were secured for best foreign players.
That means that top clubs back then weren't buying 18 years old Cr7 but 25 years old Brasilian in his prime.
Van Basten came to Italy aged 23.
Crujff came to Barca aged 26.
Imagine that Cr7 came from Sporting aged 23.
To RM.
And that Real won 2-3 la ligas in his time.
He would have 2-3 la ligas and 0 Cls more or less (only 2-3 Cl attempts).
Players today come aged 18, they play in super rich teams for 15 years, and dominate league and break records.
Plus they have 15 CL attempts.

Now compare how many CL attempts Crujff and Van Basten had compared to Messi and CR7.
And how many La liga/Epl seasons.
Crujff and Van Basten had 5-6 years in top clubs.
Since this is how it worked back then.

Van Basten in 6-7 years on top managed to win:
3 Ballon D Ors
2 Cls
1 Euro 88 with a wtf decisive goal in a final when it mattered
https://youtu.be/pFMbqgTGhB4

Btw I am comparing Van Basten to let's say Suarez, Cr7, Neymar, Lewa, Salah, who have monster goal stats today.

 

[Centauri B]

You can't say Messi's Barca.
Lately we had Neymar, Suarez, random 100m signings.

Look at us today, we need a Cf, we will buy a 1110m Lautaro.
We need a Lw, we will buy a 180m Neymar.

Barca's transfers today is like playing football manager with cheating codes (unlimited funds).

So, if Messi played in 80s, he would play with Alena, Puig, Samper, Oriol, Paco, Denis and similar of that era.
We couldn't buy 10 superstars.
We had 2-3 stars, 10 local players and 10 spanish players like Denis, Paco and Dani Parejo.

Now, if Messi had Samper, Denis, Paco and Parejo in a league where teams were even, do you think that we would win la liga all the time?
And then, why on Earth should we dominate CL in 80s with Paco and Parejo?
Now, if you will reply: Messi alone would be enough, then how come that Messi alone can't win even Copa America with average teammates?

About a part of your post how we wouldn't lose to Roma and Liverpool since they weren't champions, you are assuming that we would have been champions.
I was talking about Seria A where you had 7 big teams, not even including Napoli.
You are comparing it to a 2 horse race vs Real and Barca.
I mean, even in Spain from 1990-2002 you had 5 different chanpions: Real, Barca, Atletico, Deportivo, Valencia.
Which shows how teams were more even, rich teams weren't as rich and it was harder to score goals, win matches, win titles and statpad numbers.
No wonder that champions had 70-80 points in that era.

Can you imagine 5 different champions in la liga today, lol?

No, we wouldn't be playing with random Masia players, we would be able to have the best in Spain (the best of which were our canteranos) like Xavi, Iniesta, Busquets, Pique, Puyol, Pedro, Alba. We could also buy any number of other Spanish stars, such as David Villa (which we did) and David Silva. The only limitation back then was in relation to foreign players (only allowed 2 or 3) So, we could have had Eto'o, Alves and maybe one more as Messi would be made Spanish for sure.

Yes, the big clubs are more dominant now (but they compete against each other) but there was lots of domination back then as well. All of Real Madrid (5), Benfica (2), Inter (2), Ajax (3) Bayern (3) Liverpool (4 in 8) AC Milan (2) won back-to-back mickey-mouse European Cups. So, if you had a great team (and all these teams were inferior to MIX Barca) it was inevitable to win ECs by the bucket-load. If the MIX Barca existed under the rules of the 70s & 80s, the EC would be a cakewalk for at least 5 years. By virtue of having Messi alone, we would be nailed-on favorites for a decade and a half. It's as simple as that.

Moreover, you seem to be forgetting that there was lots of domination in domestic league football as well. Real Madrid were winning the majority of Ligas for decades on end and won 5 on the trot in the late 80s. Liverpool won 7 out of 9 leagues during their golden era.

 

[Mitchell1978]

There's another metric to put goalscoringnumbers into perspective and thats expected goals and guess what, apart from the 15/16 season Messi outperforms his expected goals by massive margins.

https://understat.com/player/2097

and those numbers don't even include his best 2 goalscoringseasons