robsblubot

I feel you are making good points that are slightly contradictory. you claims he’s cool and enjoying his football, but at the same time you claim he’s right up there with Ronaldo even mentioning Ronaldo’s drive as something hazard lacks. That I cannot agree with. hazard in my view lacks creativity esp with the final pass, the assist. I could put money on that his stats would go lower at real esp goals. no I disagree - they score a bit more goals and it’s mostly due to how terrible the opposition are. Tough games it’s all he same to me.

Well I happen to think that Hazard improving in a more attacking side is just wrong and illogical why? Because the personal stats, the ones that count when comparing players at the top don’t necessarily increase and often actually decrease... While the collective attacking output of an attacking side may be higher, the individual stats are divided amongst all attacking players! There are only so many assists to be made or only so many goals to be scored. Will a team double the number of goals by sticking a second striker up front? Won’t a single striker score more goals individually if being the focus of the team? anyway, the (attacking) point is at the very least, debatable. Yeah you gave me a: he’s a nice guy and loves Chelsea and his life and won’t force a move. Which for me is precisely the reason he will never really compete with the other top players. And I have to confess I don’t particularly buy it: when a top side really wants a player they ultimately get him. yes he could force a move like Coutinho is doing right now even when He plays well. It sucks but players do that all the time. fair enough on the NT but I will refrain my judgement after Russia.

On talk chelsea he is indeed top 3, elsewhere he’s top 5-10... lists come up from pundits and players all the time some include Eden, while others do not. For me the causality cannot possibly be established as easily as some around here claim: too many variables and all the supposition around what he would be able to do in a more attacking side is just that, supposition and wishful thinking from his most ardent fans. But for the sake of argument, let’s assume we know that he would indeed become top 3 player (Messi shouldn’t be in the mix imo). Then the question I have is why does Eden play for a club that does not make him a better player? A defensive side team instead of attacking minded? Why is he satisfied having to play with these “donkeys” (personally find the idea that he carries a bunch of donkeys nonsense)? PSG paid Neymar’s release clause and took him increasing his wages... the transfer market is pretty competitive and the best players draw the best wages. So, why is hazard stuck at chelsea? Does he lack ambition? If so, Wouldn’t that also affect his game at chelsea? Does he love chelsea so much? (hope folks aren’t that naive lol) Finally, he needs to show up at the international stage. It’s usually KDB pulling the strings and Eden pretty subdued in WC/important games.

You can’t possibly be this naive... do we selectively listen to managers and pundits when it fits our agenda or perhaps it fits theirs? of course they will say great things about eden - they all want him! That’s not the point again... we are pitting him against the best or some are. And it’s still a bit short of every manager... Or most managers... some not even managers. i will be convinced when they put money where their mouth is. Sign him as a key player perhaps replacing another... then we will see. im not trying to convince anyone - I have my opinion and you have yours.

Only folks in here keep comparing him to Messi and Ronaldo that was my point earlier. you seem to have some information that I don’t: what every manager in the world thinks of hazard so i will leave it at that.

Combine them and you’d end up w a very good player but right now they both just ok for me. one has the end game and nothing else; the other lacks the final touch.

It just hit me today watching him against Everton - he wasn't terrible and yet just as bad to me eyes, and it is something that showcases his IMO poor technique: it actually reminds me of zouma, but essentially it's players who just aren't that natural playing the game and need to adjust their bodies even to make the easiest of passes. It's not elegance when you look stoic when making a pass, but rather an adjustment in your upper body, so that you can actually make that pass. Natural footballers Do all that, dribbles, moves, when running forward, backwards, sideways, and when falling down. Once again, I hope to be at least somewhat wrong about him. Otherwise we will be stuck with a very inapt player for a very long time (or sell him at a hefty loss), but I've seen this before and it all ends up the same way.

haha yeah true that! Ironically he actually lacks creativity IMO: it's like you said, a "dancer", but sometimes a different take would work best, but he's always the "dancer."

nah he's better, but I wish he were as good as you make him out to be. I often speak with other PL fans, (most pool fans) and none seem as crazy about Eden as Chelsea and Belgium fans. Personally I think he's a great player, but nowhere the level of the best players in the word and never will be, again IMO. I have a different take here: it's not so much how good Hazard is but how insufficient our squad is, and esp the players you mentioned. Most hazard fans thing he'd blossom elsewhere due to the limitations imposed to him by the lack of overall quality in the squad, but I look a his game and just don't see it in him. He's like Ozil in different packaging: great player but without the drive and the ambition to become one of the greats.

Yeah he’s better than either one. However, given a chance for a straight swap between them and hazard I’d go fo it. They are inferior players, but not that far behind and sane has insane potential. goes back into the betterment of th squad vs keeping the key player. In the above case even money wise would make sense to swap. Id say we rate hazard a bit higher here than elsewhere tbh.

I only disagreed with this bit, "No one will miss Salah and Kdb if we brought top quality players instead.No one will miss Salah and Kdb if we brought top quality players instead." Because I don't really think it is possible for this club to buy that kind of talent. We only acquire real talent behind the scenes, when they are still unknowns, or at least not fully established. Keeping the likes of KDB and Salah, in my view, is really the only way to achieve that end and, like we both said, we fucked up. I'm not quite sure lack of ambition is the problem. Perhaps it is too much short-term ambition that leads them to make long-term mistakes like they did with Salah and KDB... or even Lukaku, who's a lesser player, but still valuable. Is it just showing they've got no long-term plan? What kind of squad do they want to build? What type of player do they want/need to build that kind of squad?

you mean Bats will start?!?

I will partially disagree here. It's literally part of the job description for coaches, scouts, and other staff members to judge player's potentials. The fact we sold Salah, as someone pointed out recently, after he had already upped him game and was scoring a lot of goals was really strange. Buying players of Salah and KDB quality is not easy! Even if you have the cash lying around you have to convince both, the club to sell, and the player to join you (vs a diff perhaps bigger club). It is much easier to buy them young like we did. We just failed to keep them happy... to give them minutes. The fact that we completely fucked up should not go unnoticed. @yuvala Sorry, but once again some of us did predict he was going to be a great player (at least very good). Not going to quote that post again though. It's all about ball control...

No, they are not the same... esp this one would rather RLC stayed and Baka never came. Though sometimes players request playing time that the club cannot provide, hence loans are inevitable. RLC is 21 and bats is 24. One can improve a lot, while the other should already have been playing close to his potential. Let me present another example to illustrate my point: Bats consistently shows too much of the football when he plays; far more than Salah when he was with us. That's not decision making, but poor technique.

Haha fun list! ok Carlton cole may have a say... Should have said, in recent memory. No, Torres was better in his overall play even if his lack of pace hurt his ability to score. sheva had no pace left when he joined us...

We are just not very good at the moment. Too many players playing below the required level. Which I always think is one of the downsides of having a small squad: not many options for tweaks. playing hazard as false nine makes no sense to me. Pedro would potentially work better as he has little else to his game than finishing and pace. agree with many who said our midfield lacks creativity and that shows. i actually think we are missing David because his attacking flair helped balance the team which is a tad defensive considering the level of most opposition in the pl. @communicate I think exactly the opposite: aside from good overall technique which produces linkup play, the main thing Alonso brings is a threat (goals).

hmm not sure what else to say... I've watched him play enough times and think he's terrible: a no-skill player who can only run and shoot. The worst striker I've seen play for Chelsea without a doubt and one of the worst players too. I really can't comment on what I don't see or hear, so my opinion is indeed based on what I've seen of him thus far. Wow! For me Morata is literally twice the player. And I also think Morata needs to improve. Ball retention, passing, heading, turning, dribbling. Morata is better at pretty much every technical skill you can think of. The same reason you can say I have not seen enough of Bats, I can suggest Bats finishing stats might be misleading too, because starting games can be very different. ^^ Lukaku is still far better than Bats though. Although they share similar technical shortcomings, Lukaku still resembles a footballer. * Belgium really deserved better striker options IMO. Such quality team missing in a key position.

Disagree. I think he's completely out of his depth and the sooner we sell him the better. His value will only decrease as he plays fewer and fewer minutes esp if we sign someone in Jan. He's just not a very good player and does not belong at this level. And he's 24 now and should've been approaching his best years as a footballer, esp a forwarder.

nice of Rudiger to make the mistake for the Huddersfield goal - good way to support the youth. Agreed ^^ He does look composed and good on the ball, esp at his age.

yeah get a faster LB and move Alonso to the middle - transition should not be difficult considering his passing and overall technique is good. Can be cover for both positions... done thousand times before. Now do we want defensive LB in our current 3 cb formation? That usually doesn't work. Sandro of course is a top player, so that's going to a diff signing.

shamelessly and sadly quoting myself here... yes, from 2014... Sadly because I don't understand how this club loses so many good players.

well there is more to being a striker than goals. Morata can contribute more in tightly marked games than lukaku who thrives with space for runs and overpowering players. Lukaku's struggles are not really surprising to some of us who have said his characteristics are more adequate for smaller outfits, who see themselves countering a lot. He won't see much of that at United. He's not a terrible player, but he's not great either considering his overall poor technique. To your point Morata is not great either, but his good overall technique might suggest a higher ceiling.

The key player thing is very nuanced. Argentina, despite good overall quality in the squad had been playing like shit in WCQ, like Italy level of shit. Then Messi shows up and qualifies them with 3 goals when needed. Still, I cannot say that argentina would not have qualified without messi. Because without him, they might have had more cohesion, and become a better team without depending so much on a single player. It is a team sport. Now, of course they would be more likely to win a WC with messi on the team. well we agree on the last point for sure. Our staff like big strong players - technical ability does not seem as important to them. On Mourinho, I don't blame him for losing the players; I blame the club. He's known for rarely rotating and rarely giving minutes to youngsters. If a manager refuses to give play time to promising youngsters, he should be sacked even while bringing the results. Long-term vision should always take precedence... do we have one?

Fair enough on city. yes but the how much the key player may depend on his teammates varies a lot, not only by quality but also characteristics. Sorry I just cannot bring Messi into this... different world imo. Neither would I bring WHU as many of the players we criticize at chelsea would be key players there. even Hazard would not come to chelsea at this time. The point I always make is that you have to sign them young and keep them. imagine if we had kept KDB and Salah? Say instead of keeping hazard... would it be worse? I don’t know. Better keeping all 3 but perhaps resources play a part too. The club has no talent to build a quality squad though.

While you make a good point around the importance of the key player, I don't think the answer is all that black and white. Tottenham, the club, is not a good example because they haven't really achieve top tier status just yet. They've been working towards that goal, but it literally comes with trophies and knowhow as of how to repeat that. Liverpool is interesting in that, their issues stem from poor defending as they've always managed to find talent up front. City is a more interesting comparison IMO: they also don't have a particular key player. Wouldn't say any of their players is better than Hazard, but they have many players in their squad who are not far behind hazard in terms of ability to influence games. And yet they are the vastly superior team incidentally because it's more difficult to stop them. I honestly don't think this club is capable of filling the squad with quality players in every position and every time we add quality we lose some. So my questioning of Eden's usefulness to a side like ours comes from your own point of him being dependent of having quality players around him, which we do not have and will likely not have in the future. A different type of, or a better, key player might be able to do more on his own, with long shooting for example, creative passing, direct dribbling, but the point (whether accurate or not) was that blaming the overall poor quality of the team points to the fact Eden depends on teammates to play to his potential. Unless of course, it was just an excuse after a subpar performance.