Eden Hazard | "It's time to enjoy life drinking beers"

[Gio]

Since 442 was mostly eliminated for 3 forwards, the wide attackers are expected to score. Which is why Robben Salah, Bale Neymar Mane Mbappe etc have goals. Hazard is a wide forward not a winger in the mold of David Beckham

I don't expect Hazard to score as much as Haaland Lewandowski who are pure 9s but to at least match those world class wide forwards in his generation like those listed above

To break it down further, I think there’s a few differences that skew the figures.

Firstly, there is a distinction between the playmaking and goalscoring wide forwards. The playmaking group would more often be the route to move the attack into the final third, whereas the wide goalscorers would be ending those moves as it progressed into the penalty box. The first group include Hazard, Ronaldinho, Figo, Ribery, who all posted lower ‘end product’ than the guys who had less playmaking responsibility.

Secondly, there are personnel aspects to it. The goalscoring wide forwards hit their biggest numbers when facilitated by a foil or false 9 through the middle, creating space or slipping them in. Hazard never really had such a player at Chelsea. It was always about servicing classic centre-forwards such as Torres and then Costa, neither of whom could return the favour. Interestingly his numbers jumped up when he was alongside Giroud, Pedro or Morata in his final couple of seasons there - players who could sacrifice themselves for a greater talent.

Thirdly, there are tactical and quality factors. Hazard's Chelsea career was marked by a series of more defensively minded managers in Benitez, Mourinho and Conte. This bore out in the number of goals their teams scored. If we compare the wide forwards you listed above:

• Robben's Bayern scored 75 or more in 9/10 league seasons
• Salah and Mane's Liverpool scored 75 or more in 4/5 seasons
• Neymar and Mbappe's PSG scored 75 or more in 5/5 seasons
• Bale's Real (until he effectively retired in 2019) scored 75 (94 in fact) or more in 5/6 seasons
• Hazard's Chelsea scored 75 or more in 2/9 seasons.

Again no coincidence that when Hazard finally found himself operating under an attacking manager in Sarri, he hit 0.95 goals and assists per game.

 

[Zehner]

Well, he'd weaken that specific team's number 1 strength(arguably) which was their pressing off the ball.

Not sure he really improves that team honestly.

Do Liverpool really get better swapping out Mane for Hazard? Not convinced they do. He's better individually than Mane, but Mane added a lot of value to that team.

I was making more of a general point. If your team functions, it is easier for you to shine. And at least during Hazard's time, Chelsea never really functioned in the UCL.

 

[marktan]

To break it down further, I think there’s a few differences that skew the figures.

Firstly, there is a distinction between the playmaking and goalscoring wide forwards. The playmaking group would more often be the route to move the attack into the final third, whereas the wide goalscorers would be ending those moves as it progressed into the penalty box. The first group include Hazard, Ronaldinho, Figo, Ribery, who all posted lower ‘end product’ than the guys who had less playmaking responsibility.

Secondly, there are personnel aspects to it. The goalscoring wide forwards hit their biggest numbers when facilitated by a foil or false 9 through the middle, creating space or slipping them in. Hazard never really had such a player at Chelsea. It was always about servicing classic centre-forwards such as Torres and then Costa, neither of whom could return the favour. Interestingly his numbers jumped up when he was alongside Giroud, Pedro or Morata in his final couple of seasons there - players who could sacrifice themselves for a greater talent.

Thirdly, there are tactical and quality factors. Hazard's Chelsea career was marked by a series of more defensively minded managers in Benitez, Mourinho and Conte. This bore out in the number of goals their teams scored. If we compare the wide forwards you listed above:

• Robben's Bayern scored 75 or more in 9/10 league seasons
• Salah and Mane's Liverpool scored 75 or more in 4/5 seasons
• Neymar and Mbappe's PSG scored 75 or more in 5/5 seasons
• Bale's Real (until he effectively retired in 2019) scored 75 (94 in fact) or more in 5/6 seasons
• Hazard's Chelsea scored 75 or more in 2/9 seasons.

Again no coincidence that when Hazard finally found himself operating under an attacking manager in Sarri, he hit 0.95 goals and assists per game.

Great post. People don't tend to take into account the teams style of play, the players on the team and the quality of opposition into account.

I remember making this post on Grealish and Sancho's stats at Dortmund and Villa.

Namely Grealish scored 8 goals in the PL in 2019/20 for Villa, and Sancho scored 17 in the Bundesliga. But Villa scored 41 goals in the whole PL in 38 games, whereas Dortmund scored 84 goals in 34 games. And watching the goals Sancho scored, the quality of goals and the level of opposition defences were largely poor. And of course Sancho played with far better players. Something our scouts clearly don't take into account, I doubt anyone would argue now that Grealish hasn't been better than Sancho since their respective moves.

 

[kaiser1]

I think those kind of arguments are a bit pointless. You need your team to have a good CL run to leave your mark in the CL yourself nd Chelsea never really had one when Hazard was there. I mean, imagine prime Hazard in Bayern's 2020 team, does anybody believe he wouldn't have performed there? Or for Liverpool/City?

Who should be lifting the team? Is that not what is expected of their top stars like Hazard?

 

[Acrobat7]

The playmaking group would more often be the route to move the attack into the final third, whereas the wide goalscorers would be ending those moves as it progressed into the penalty box. The first group include Hazard, Ronaldinho, Figo, Ribery, who all posted lower ‘end product’ than the guys who had less playmaking responsibility.

The sentiment in your post is correct. I was just curious and checked the 4 you mentioned.

In the CL:
Hazard a goal or assist every 180 minutes.
Ribery every 140 minutes.
Ronaldinho every 125 minutes.
Figo every 140 minutes.

 

[Zehner]

Who should be lifting the team? Is that not what is expected of their top stars like Hazard?

I think that's an antiquated view. It's a team sport, every player performs best when his team is dominant. We've seen this even with the very best players of this generation.

 

[kaiser1]

I think that's an antiquated view. It's a team sport, every player performs best when his team is dominant. We've seen this even with the very best players of this generation.

Players make a team. The reason teams buy top players and pay them top wages above everyone else is to give them that lift in crucial games

Bayern won't get to the 2010 finals if Robben was not delivering at key moments
Liverpool won't make CL finals if Salah didn't produce at the level he did.
In the CL for Chelsea Hazard was often the worst performer on a regular basis which is why anyone can't recall a top CL game that Hazard dominated in his time there

 

[devaneios]

This id agree with. He's clearly a good, even world-class player, but the frustration I have always had with him is he was one of the few players with the talent to get close to Messi and Ronaldo but he lacked their mentality. In the end that meant there are hundreds of players over the last couple of decades you'd have in your side before Hazard. I think about someone like Robben. Hazard was more talented than Robben for me, but during his peak, Robben was one of the few players who could stand up alongside the elite and he did that by contributing meaningful goals and moments. IMO in those same moments Hazard wilted.

Why?

Robben was as good as Hazard at the only thing the latter was really great at. The dutch was a much better finisher, better passer, faster and had better link up plays(although both were very individualists). I mean, you're free to have whatever opinion you want, but I'm really curious to understand why you believe that.

 

[Zehner]

Players make a team. The reason teams buy top players and pay them top wages above everyone else is to give them that lift in crucial games

Bayern won't get to the 2010 finals if Robben was not delivering at key moments
Liverpool won't make CL finals if Salah didn't produce at the level he did.
In the CL for Chelsea Hazard was often the worst performer on a regular basis which is why anyone can't recall a top CL game that Hazard dominated in his time there

Yes but you have to provide your star players with a platform to shine. Let's be real, Chelsea never did that. Especially while Hazard was there, they were one of the most negative teams you could think of. Griezmann at Atletico or Dybala at Juve/Lazio are similar cases. There's no player in the history of football to whom your criticism doesn't apply. If Messi was the best player in history, why didn't he win more UCLs in his prime? Why did it take Cristiano 6 years or so to win a UCL for Real Madrid? Why hasn't Mbappe/Neymar won a UCL with PSG? Why did R9 never win a UCL?

In the end, it is a team game and the influence of one single player is very limited.

 

[kaiser1]

Yes but you have to provide your star players with a platform to shine. Let's be real, Chelsea never did that. Especially while Hazard was there, they were one of the most negative teams you could think of. Griezmann at Atletico or Dybala at Juve/Lazio are similar cases. There's no player in the history of football to whom your criticism doesn't apply. If Messi was the best player in history, why didn't he win more UCLs in his prime? Why did it take Cristiano 6 years or so to win a UCL for Real Madrid? Why hasn't Mbappe/Neymar won a UCL with PSG? Why did R9 never win a UCL?

In the end, it is a team game and the influence of one single player is very limited.

Griezmann playing for Atletico and Simeone made a CL final and has about 30 goals in the CL which is like 3 times that of Hazard, Dybala also got to the CL finals with Juventus and has about double Hazards goals
All these players when they didn't win we saw their impact on their team either getting them to advanced stages while they put up good numbers in goals
Hazard has 5 non PK goals in his entire CL career. Some players score that in 1 game.
It will be odd for an attacker, best player in the team with 5 career CL goals to point fingers at others for the teams CL failure
Non PK goals in CL
Hazard 5, Griezmann 26, Dybala 15

 

[devaneios]

Yes but you have to provide your star players with a platform to shine. Let's be real, Chelsea never did that. Especially while Hazard was there, they were one of the most negative teams you could think of. Griezmann at Atletico or Dybala at Juve/Lazio are similar cases. There's no player in the history of football to whom your criticism doesn't apply. If Messi was the best player in history, why didn't he win more UCLs in his prime? Why did it take Cristiano 6 years or so to win a UCL for Real Madrid? Why hasn't Mbappe/Neymar won a UCL with PSG? Why did R9 never win a UCL?

In the end, it is a team game and the influence of one single player is very limited.

Even Griezmann and Dybala performed much better then Hazard in UCL.

Barcelona got kicked out in 16/17 and PSG in 19/20 and 20/21, but Neymar was great in those years(you can argue that PSG was a better than any Chelsea Hazard had, but wasn't that great as a team and relied a lot on Neymar to create something for Mbappé or for himself).

People expected Hazard to at least have some great performances in UCL play-offs, which never happened. Also, he's a very invidualistc dribbler and playmaker(sounds weird, but his playmaking was extremely dependent(almost exclusively) on his dribbling; he wasn't a passing/linking up based creator), so it's not like he depended that much on his teammates to do what he do(if it'd be enough for win or not, or even go further in the play-offs, is another conversation and none would blame Hazard for that).

 

[Dancfc]

Bergkamp cannot be expected to score more than real 9 like Lukaku and Phillips

And sure Bergkamp scored more goals than Hazard about 100 more actually

How about Bruno Fernandez, by you logic his 20/21 self is better than any version of Bergkamp we saw at Arsenal.

Move the goalposts with that one!

 

[Dancfc]

Griezmann playing for Atletico and Simeone made a CL final and has about 30 goals in the CL which is like 3 times that of Hazard,

He's won never won the league, while Hazard was the best player in 3 separate league title winning teams.

 

[kaiser1]

How about Bruno Fernandez, by you logic his 20/21 self is better than any version of Bergkamp we saw at Arsenal.

Move the goalposts with that one!

Are you done with Bergkamp Lukaku-Phillips comparison and how did Bergkamp compare to Hazard in output

Lets see where your goalpost is

 

[Zehner]

Griezmann playing for Atletico and Simeone made a CL final and has about 30 goals in the CL which is like 3 times that of Hazard, Dybala also got to the CL finals with Juventus and has about double Hazards goals
All these players when they didn't win we saw their impact on their team either getting them to advanced stages while they put up good numbers in goals
Hazard has 5 non PK goals in his entire CL career. Some players score that in 1 game.
It will be odd for an attacker, best player in the team with 5 career CL goals to point fingers at others for the teams CL failure
Non PK goals in CL
Hazard 5, Griezmann 26, Dybala 15

Yeah but both other teams went on significant CL runs and both Dybala and Griezmann were more finishing oriented. Hazard was a left sided playmaker, the other two are second strikers. I think you're a) too focused on goals and b) a bit ignorant of the circumstances in your assessment of the player. I think there are very few players who would have a great UCL record (relative to their position) playing in the Chelsea sides Hazard played in. The guy was unplayable in his prime.

 

[kaiser1]

Yeah but both other teams went on significant CL runs and both Dybala and Griezmann were more finishing oriented. Hazard was a left sided playmaker, the other two are second strikers. I think you're a) too focused on goals and b) a bit ignorant of the circumstances in your assessment of the player. I think there are very few players who would have a great UCL record (relative to their position) playing in the Chelsea sides Hazard played in. The guy was unplayable in his prime.

Both Juve and Atletico went on those runs partly because their key attacker was delivering for them in key games like scoring braces to bury Barcelona while Hazard was doing what? If he was a playmaker can we check his assists too? They are also mid. 15 career CL assists.
Hazard was unplayable in the EPL, In the CL he was a non factor. Otherwise recall 3 CL games where you felt Hazard was unplayable

 

[Zehner]

Both Juve and Atletico went on those runs partly because their key attacker was delivering for them in key games like scoring braces to bury Barcelona while Hazard was doing what? If he was a playmaker can we check his assists too? They are also mid. 15 career CL assists.
Hazard was unplayable in the EPL, In the CL he was a non factor. Otherwise recall 3 CL games where you felt Hazard was unplayable

I don't buy into that "a player suddenly becomes much worse because the competition is different". I also think assists aren't a good statistic to measure playmaking so I took a quick look into Hazards fbref scouting report for the 17/18 UCL. The report compares him with UCL forwards. He was in the...

best 1% in shot creating actions
best 5% in goal creating actions from open play
best 1% in key passes
best 10% in expected assists
best 5% in progressive passes
best 5% in passes into penalty area
best 3% in touches in final third
best 1% in successful dribbles (with a mindblowing 5 dribbles won per game)
best 3% in carries, carries into penalty area, carrying distance and progressive carrying distance

Those are insane statistics and much better than even I imagined.

 

[kaiser1]

I don't buy into that "a player suddenly becomes much worse because the competition is different". I also think assists aren't a good statistic to measure playmaking so I took a quick look into Hazards fbref scouting report for the 17/18 UCL. The report compares him with UCL forwards. He was in the...

best 1% in shot creating actions
best 5% in goal creating actions from open play
best 1% in key passes
best 10% in expected assists
best 5% in progressive passes
best 5% in passes into penalty area
best 3% in touches in final third
best 1% in successful dribbles (with a mindblowing 5 dribbles won per game)
best 3% in carries, carries into penalty area, carrying distance and progressive carrying distance

Those are insane statistics and much better than even I imagined.

I bet these are in the EPL and not in the CL. So you don't think Hazard performed poorly in his CL career?

 

[Zehner]

I bet these are in the EPL and not in the CL. So you don't think Hazard performed poorly in his CL career?

No, it is definitely the UCL as the 17/18 scouting report for the EPL has different numbers (actually worse ones even). You can convince yourself here.

I don't think Hazard has performed poorly in his CL career, no. But I can't say that I've watched too many Chelsea UCL matches either. All I can say is that he's an insane footballer and I don't believe he suddenly stopped being one when it was an international game and that the stats I've seen support this impression. Again, those are absolutely unreal playmaking stats.

 

[Dancfc]

Are you done with Bergkamp Lukaku-Phillips comparison and how did Bergkamp compare to Hazard in output

Lets see where your goalpost is

You've been banging on about how forwards should be judged on stats yet whenever I bring a comparison you move the goalposts to them not playing in the exact same forward position.

Well Bergkamp and Bruno Fernandez do, so are you going to have the gonads to admit you rate the latter higher due to his stats or are you moving the goalposts once more?

 

[Care_de_Bobo]

Great post. People don't tend to take into account the teams style of play, the players on the team and the quality of opposition into account.

I remember making this post on Grealish and Sancho's stats at Dortmund and Villa.

Namely Grealish scored 8 goals in the PL in 2019/20 for Villa, and Sancho scored 17 in the Bundesliga. But Villa scored 41 goals in the whole PL in 38 games, whereas Dortmund scored 84 goals in 34 games. And watching the goals Sancho scored, the quality of goals and the level of opposition defences were largely poor. And of course Sancho played with far better players. Something our scouts clearly don't take into account, I doubt anyone would argue now that Grealish hasn't been better than Sancho since their respective moves.

Grealish would have struggled just as much at United as Sancho has. He would have been under more pressure to perform and he probably wouldn't have played in his favoured position. He's good, but he wasn't going to replace Bruno or Rashford in the team when there's hardly anyone else scoring goals.

The point you make about Sancho and Grealish playing for a different quality of team before they were signed also applies to their current clubs.

 

[kaiser1]

You've been banging on about how forwards should be judged on stats yet whenever I bring a comparison you move the goalposts to them not playing in the exact same forward position.

Well Bergkamp and Bruno Fernandez do, so are you going to have the gonads to admit you rate the latter higher due to his stats or are you moving the goalposts once more?

Does it matter that Bergkamp and Fernandes played in 2 different eras almost 2 decades apart and the game has changed since then?

20yrs ago no one will think passing abilities will matter for a defender never mind a goalkeeper

 

[kaiser1]

No, it is definitely the UCL as the 17/18 scouting report for the EPL has different numbers (actually worse ones even). You can convince yourself here.

I don't think Hazard has performed poorly in his CL career, no. But I can't say that I've watched too many Chelsea UCL matches either. All I can say is that he's an insane footballer and I don't believe he suddenly stopped being one when it was an international game and that the stats I've seen support this impression. Again, those are absolutely unreal playmaking stats.

The numbers Hazard posted in the CL are quite poor and you will have a hard time convincing anyone that he didn't perform poorly while having 5 non PK goals his entire career

 

[Zehner]

The numbers Hazard posted in the CL are quite poor and you will have a hard time convincing anyone that he didn't perform poorly while having 5 non PK goals his entire career

I mean, if goals is the only stat that counts for you then we won't come to an agreement. The stats I posted speak for themselves, not sure what else I could say to convince you that Hazard was a player that didn't need to score to have excellent games.

 

[kaiser1]

I mean, if goals is the only stat that counts for you then we won't come to an agreement. The stats I posted speak for themselves, not sure what else I could say to convince you that Hazard was a player that didn't need to score to have excellent games.

Goals count, assists count. Those are stats that count for top attackers . Hazard has few of those in the CL to show.

 

[Abraxas]

I don't have any big thoughts on how great he was but at his pomp he was the sort of player you wanted to watch. If he played for your team you'd be off your seat. That low centre of gravity and dribbling ability was outstanding. It feels like this sort of dribbling talent is becoming rarer.

 

[Zehner]

Goals count, assists count. Those are stats that count for top attackers . Hazard has few of those in the CL to show.

I don't disagree that they count, I disagree with the notion that they are the only things that count

 

[Ted Lasso]

Is he going to crystal palace or what?

 

[NewGlory]

I don't have any big thoughts on how great he was but at his pomp he was the sort of player you wanted to watch. If he played for your team you'd be off your seat. That low centre of gravity and dribbling ability was outstanding. It feels like this sort of dribbling talent is becoming rarer.

I agree. At the top of his game, just seeing his name on the team sheet of the opposing team would make you concerned. There are not many players that can do that, and usually these are world-class.

It is unfortunate that he declined like a sinking ship.

 

[antk]

Griezmann/Dybala have played further up than Hazard almost their entire careers, what a weird comparison.

 

[jakko]

If you are an attacker. It helps a lot to put goals and assists on the board

Can you name a highly rated attacker who doesnt score? Football is not gymnastics you need goals to win

Jack Grealish
The way you judge how good players are is such a casual way.

 

[MackRobinson]

Jack Grealish
The way you judge how good players are is such a casual way.

It's lazy. Almost purposely so.

 

[Cascarino]

If you are an attacker. It helps a lot to put goals and assists on the board

Can you name a highly rated attacker who doesnt score? Football is not gymnastics you need goals to win

The problem is people compare Hazard to players who operate in completely different roles. People point to the goals Salah or Son score, but then won’t do the same for vital statistics like passes, dribbles, etc. He wasn’t an inside forward getting on the end of things, he was an instigator of plays.

It’s akin to railing against David Silva or Iniesta because numbers wise there’s nothing to write home about, completely ignoring how vital what they did on the pitch was to winning games.

 

[kaiser1]

Jack Grealish
The way you judge how good players are is such a casual way.

Is Grealish rated high by anyone? How high do you rate him in the EPL as a start? Top 3 top 5 top 10 or top 20?

For me even in City I wont rate Grealish top 5, In the league I wont rate him top 20

 

[kaiser1]

The problem is people compare Hazard to players who operate in completely different roles. People point to the goals Salah or Son score, but then won’t do the same for vital statistics like passes, dribbles, etc. He wasn’t an inside forward getting on the end of things, he was an instigator of plays.

It’s akin to railing against David Silva or Iniesta because numbers wise there’s nothing to write home about, completely ignoring how vital what they did on the pitch was to winning games.

Silva and Iniesta were midfielders, Hazard was an attacker. in a 433, Silva and Iniesta are in the middle 3, Hazard in the front 3 in every team he played for. Belgium Chelsea or Madrid

 

[jakko]

Is Grealish rated high by anyone? How high do you rate him in the EPL as a start? Top 3 top 5 top 10 or top 20?

For me even in City I wont rate Grealish top 5, In the league I wont rate him top 20

Is Grealish rated by anyone? what? of course!.
DanCFC is right you, just move the goal posts every time.
Like the time i told you Hazard created the most chances in the PL in his 7 seasons at Chelsea you asked me to give you proof, i did and then you totally dismissed it.

 

[kaiser1]

Is Grealish rated by anyone? what? of course!.
DanCFC is right you, just move the goal posts every time.
Like the time i told you Hazard created the most chances in the PL in his 7 seasons at Chelsea you asked me to give you proof, i did and then you totally dismissed it.

How did I shift goalpost? I asked which top rated attacker does not score or assist you mention Grealish and I ask how high is Grealish rated?

Straight question, How high do you rate Grealish in EPL? Top 5, top 10 or top 20. If you are to rank all EPL players where will Grealish be?

 

[RedDevil@84]

Has he started drinking beers yet?

 

[jakko]

How did I shift goalpost? I asked which top rated attacker does not score or assist you mention Grealish and I ask how high is Grealish rated?

Straight question, How high do you rate Grealish in EPL? Top 5, top 10 or top 20. If you are to rank all EPL players where will Grealish be?

Grealish at Villa was one the best in the league in his postion, one of the best players in the league before his injury. Not huge on the Grealish at Cty but he's still rated by many fans, managers etc.

 

[kaiser1]

Grealish at Villa was one the best in the league in his postion, one of the best players in the league before his injury. Not huge on the Grealish at Cty but he's still rated by many fans, managers etc.

Put a number to where Grealish is in your own rating currently. Top 10, top 20..