Kevin de Bruyne

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Central midfielders in our system? we obviously need to change our central midfield, i wouldnt be worried about it because right now we are playing Ramires more than anyone in that position, and it doesnt work. The only question for me (i havent seen de Bruyne too many times, this was the 3rd or 2nd time) is if de Bruyne can play simillar to players like Gundogan, Kross when he playes deeper, because he does remind me of them.

I'm speaking generally of the 4-2-3-1. In that system, the central midfielders will, on average be around the centre of the pitch. De Bruyne is almost always the second or third most forward player on the pitch for Bremen.They need to have a fairly high passing percentage and do a lot of defensive work. De Bruyne has been very good this year, but he has been very good doing the things that attacking midfielders do. (creating chances, scoring, crossing, etc...) It's a very different job description. . I'm not saying that he won't be able to play the pivot, just that assuming that he will be good in the pivot as because he is having a good year with Bremen is premature. De Bruyne is a terrible tackler at this point in his career and while that's not as important in a advanced role, it is important in the pivot. Ideally, I'd like to see KDB back at Chelsea next season and his versatility and quality will ensure that he gets plenty of run.

[nadavTKL 1,787]

I heard his tackels arnet bad, from someone who watched every game of him this season. For me he seems like a potential for the pivot, question is if he can get the job right away or we should buy someone.

[ja1 1,166]

Few occasions I've watched him I've been pleasantly surprised with his work-rate, covers a lot of ground. Harries players and tracks back, but not seen many tackles. All part of him adapting to his new position - just hope we show patience with him.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

I heard his tackels arnet bad, from someone who watched every game of him this season. For me he seems like a potential for the pivot, question is if he can get the job right away or we should buy someone.

I read (on WAGNH) that De Bruyne's tackle pct% is around 25% which is atrocious. Whoscored.com lists his tackling as "very weak". That's worse than Mata's rating. He does have potential for the pivot but can't see Chelsea handing him an uncontested starting job.

[teignman 441]

I read (on WAGNH) that De Bruyne's tackle pct% is around 25% which is atrocious. Whoscored.com lists his tackling as "very weak". That's worse than Mata's rating. He does have potential for the pivot but can't see Chelsea handing him an uncontested starting job.

As much as we all desperately want someone for the pivot, KDB is definitely not ready for that task (at least right now), for the reasons you mentioned. He's got a way to go before he can effectively play that deep.

[zolayes 14,489]

imo he is the most natural winger we have ....he certainly is the best crosser ... now we have Ba and hopefully soon another striker orLukaku ..I would use him on the right wing

[Blue Gino 377]

So DeBruyne is a weak tackler, as is Josh McEachran and Oscar will track back but not known for tackling either. However it's not a requirement of a deep lying playmaker, just be great at positioning to intercept passes and harass. For me Josh has the best vision and passing accuracy of them all and should be in that first team next season. There will be room for all three once a handful of players are let go next season.

[royg 96]

He wont be a pivot player for now but he would be if he plays there consistently. As of now he would be the best to complete our TRIO behind our Striker. We dont need Isco if we have KDB next season.

Oscar should play the deep-lying playmaker (which he is sometimes played there by the manager) next season and KDB to fill in the supporting TRIO.

[SykikJV 146]

So DeBruyne is a weak tackler, as is Josh McEachran and Oscar will track back but not known for tackling either. However it's not a requirement of a deep lying playmaker, just be great at positioning to intercept passes and harass. For me Josh has the best vision and passing accuracy of them all and should be in that first team next season. There will be room for all three once a handful of players are let go next season.

You can't draw conclusions like that from some internet statistics-page. He's played his best games in the CM position in a team that's dominant over their opponents.

With all respect to Josh, i doubt that he has better vision/passing then De Bruyne at the moment.

[Bir_CFC 3,455]

Josh is nowhere near KDB's level right now. At the moment, I'd say KDB is better than Oscar too. KDB will be fine, because he's a player who can still influence a match even when his team and players around him are playing bad which we have't seen from even our own attacking mids Hazard, Mata and Oscar. He's a strong character.

I also don't think he'll be right for the double pivot. His passing is way too aggressive, his work rate and positioning is very good but he can't tackle and fouls way too much. Plus you loose so many of his qualities if you push him to the pivot.

He should be a CM in a 4-3-3 or any one of the attacking mids in the 4-2-3-1, he's versatile and good enough to play any 3 of those positions. He'll be a squad player next season for sure. Very excited to see him, I love his play style, so effortless, he makes the game look easy.

[nadavTKL 1,787]

I read (on WAGNH) that De Bruyne's tackle pct% is around 25% which is atrocious. Whoscored.com lists his tackling as "very weak". That's worse than Mata's rating. He does have potential for the pivot but can't see Chelsea handing him an uncontested starting job.

Sorry but its pretty ridicilous that you're saying stuff like that based on stats and what some site listed him. I dont know myself if those sites are wrong because i havent seen him enough, but im definitely wont judge him by stats. For now i will listen more to the guy who saw him every game, but anyway i'll watch him more from now and see myself.

[Mufassir08 2,400]

imo he is the most natural winger we have ....he certainly is the best crosser ... now we have Ba and hopefully soon another striker orLukaku ..I would use him on the right wing

Agreed,His crossing is just wonderful.

[ja1 1,166]

He would be a perfect winger if he had acceleration.

You guys do know it is not just about tackling? I think some of you expect him to be rushing around slide tackling players, an interception is just as good, and effective and something that KDB with his reading of the game and awareness could do well. As I said before he also presses very well, so at least the other player in possession can not just skip past him. He could take adapting to a new role - yes - but if we show patience I believe he could really grow into a great DLP.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Sorry but its pretty ridicilous that you're saying stuff like that based on stats and what some site listed him. I dont know myself if those sites are wrong because i havent seen him enough, but im definitely wont judge him by stats. For now i will listen more to the guy who saw him every game, but anyway i'll watch him more from now and see myself.

It's not ridiculous. Someone who has a 25% success rate in tackling IS a very bad tackler. There are plenty of stats that don't tell the whole story, but plenty of them also tell you a lot. If someone has a 60% passing rate, they're not a good passer. If someone has 4 goals on 90 shots, they're a poor finisher. One of the positives of stats is that they can bypass subjectivity. It is not possible to have a 25% tackle success rate and not be a very bad tackler. That said, that is right now. Tackling is something can a player can improve on.

[JDY 1,290]

It's not ridiculous. Someone who has a 25% success rate in tackling IS a very bad tackler. There are plenty of stats that don't tell the whole story, but plenty of them also tell you a lot. If someone has a 60% passing rate, they're not a good passer. If someone has 4 goals on 90 shots, they're a poor finisher. One of the positives of stats is that they can bypass subjectivity. It is not possible to have a 25% tackle success rate and not be a very bad tackler. That said, that is right now. Tackling is something can a player can improve on.

His tackle success rate is 76%, not 25. Think you might have confused it with his unsuccessful rate, which is 24%.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

His tackle success rate is 76%, not 25. Think you might have confused it with his unsuccessful rate, which is 24%.

I took it from WAGNH. "He's a terrible tackler at this point, committing fouls or coming up empty on over 3/4 of his attempts to dispossess an opponent."

[JDY 1,290]

I took it from WAGNH. "He's a terrible tackler at this point, committing fouls or coming up empty on over 3/4 of his attempts to dispossess an opponent."

That is pretty wrong then. They are confusing his tackling ability with his concentration when faced with an opponent. His tackling is pretty consistent, but he often gets bypassed too easily. Two different things.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

That is pretty wrong then. They are confusing his tackling ability with his concentration when faced with an opponent. His tackling is pretty consistent, but he often gets bypassed too easily. Two different things.

Then why does whoscored (which is based entirely on statistics) rate his tackling as "very weak"?