SIRcumalot:

This is enough answer that lengthy tirade just makes me think you personally hate the guy.
Well I disagree with you, Mata was Chelsea Playmaker,and one of the finest in the league at that time,he was two time CFC player of the year in that role which is impressive for a stat Padder!!
I myself have greatly adjust my expectations since he joined us,it obvious that for Mata to shine for us we'll have to recreate the same environment he thrived in at Chelsea which won't be good for anybody except Mata.
I thought Chelsea Physical style of play ended with Jose first stint with the Club, the style of play wasn't employed by AVB or Carlo Ancelotti ?

Nope. It was still the same physical players with the same mentality although Carlo made some little adjustment but it was still the same style.
Their style of play even became more ugly when Di matteo took over after AVB was sacked and that was Mata's first season.
No doubt that Mata thrives best in a counter attacking team where there is enough space for him to operate. But then, his performance still depends on the opponent giving him enough space too.
Playing Mata in a possession based team like Van Gaal is doing is suicidal. There's a reason Del Bosque preferred Silva to Mata in the Spanish possesion based style.

Mata being Chelsea 2 time player of the year makes no meaning. Infact, the first was undeserved because Drogba and Ramirez were better than Mata and the reason behind Chelsea winning the CL that year but because Mata looks more elegant in style and had better stats than them in the league, he was voted above them. Let me also made it known that those his stats amounted to nothing because Chelsea still sat in 6th position at the end of that season.
It was only the 2nd award he deserved because that year, he thrived in Bennitez counter attacking set-up which was built around him. Even then, he was still his useless self against teams like City, Pool, Swansea e.t.c and was poor in the CL. However, he was able to do well against the 2nd fodder teams in the Europa league. Even then, Oscar was the playmaker in that team.
Let me reiterate to you and Coogar, creativity is not playmaking. There's more to playmaking than just creativity. A playmaker is someone that conduct and orchestrate play in the midfield e.g Zidane, Xavi, Alonso, Kroos, Verratti, Pjanic, Modric, Schweinsteiger, Sahin, Silva, Pirlo and our retired ginger man, Scholes. These players are rare commodity unlike the SS and AMC we have in abundance.

shirley07, mata was chelsea's best playmaker since they had zola. no debating! mourinho just didn't like him cos he wanted him to be more defensive. mourinho wouldn't have liked any of xavi & iniesta too cos they don't suit his "jam body" football.

in terms of vision, key passes, final passes, guile, close control, deft touches, etc mata is a king. i could care less about his defensive side. anyone expecting mata to be as defensive as toure or matic is a lunatic. he's not built like a tank.

playmaker stats (11/12 season)

appearances


possession


passing areas


creativity


goal scoring

coogar:
shirley07, mata was chelsea's best playmaker since they had zola. no debating! mourinho just didn't like him cos he wanted him to be more defensive. mourinho wouldn't have liked any of xavi & iniesta too cos they don't suit his "jam body" football.

in terms of vision, key passes, final passes, guile, close control, deft touches, etc mata is a king. i could care less about his defensive side. anyone expecting mata to be as defensive as toure or matic is a lunatic. he's not built like a tank.

I'm just laughing at Shirley07

Everthing went through Mata during those 2 years

11/12 Mata received the highest number of passes in that Chelsea midfield and was involved in almost 40% of Chelsea's league goals.

Created the most chances, created chances faster than anybody else, threw the most through balls...the man was the heartbeat of midfield

I've told shirley07 to upgrade to a plasma screen and stop listening to OGBC2

Nihilist:


I'm just laughing at Shirley07

Everthing went through Mata during those 2 years

11/12 Mata received the highest number of passes in that Chelsea midfield and was involved in almost 40% of Chelsea's league goals.

Created the most chances, created chances faster than anybody else, threw the most through balls...the man was the heartbeat of midfield

I've told shirley07 to upgrade to a plasma screen and stop listening to OGBC2

mata was a beast that season!
he was miles better than silva & that was mata's debut season at chelsea. thank feck he's now a red devil.

Nihilist:




My nigga this is 2014, you need to upgrade from OGBC2 FM Stereo to flatscreen HD signal.

Oscar was the playmaker

Just because the team was built around Mata and he was shouldered with the creativity duties doesn't change the fact that Oscar was the playmaker for that team that season. If you rewatch some of Chelsea games when Mata was there, especially the games against Juve and Donetsk, you would notice a deceptively looking frail child dropping deep into the centre of midfield to conduct play, making intelligent movement and incisive passing all over the centre of play. That child was Oscar.
Even now that Fabregas has been assigned the duty of a playmaker, Oscar still do that playmaking job as it's a second skin nature to him. Mourinho even attested to it here: http://www.goal.com/en/news/1717/editorial/2014/10/19/5260511/oscars-evolution-crucial-in-chelsea-coping-without-costa

coogar:


mata was a beast that season!
he was miles better than silva & that was mata's debut season at chelsea. thank feck he's now a red devil.

Beast indeed yet, Silva made a fool of him everytime they encountered each other.
You probably mean beast against pub team like Qpr, Aston Villa and other 2nd fodder pub teams.

@Shirley Mata is a wonderful attacking midfielder mate, him winning 2 player of d year awards was no fluke, Chelsea fans weren't happy at all when Mourinho sold him to us ,de were so angry dat mourinho had to compensate dem with d acquisition of Mohammad salah to prove his point of selling him ...

...u keep yammering about how mata only plays well against teams dat afforded him space n how he didn't play well against d likes of city ,Liverpool ,Swansea n dat bloody Southampton.., well dats a boatload of crap!! Mata dictated d play at Chelsea particularly his second season when he had settled down in d league, he thrived when playing d number 10 role n was d focal point of attack for Chelsea den


During d 2011/2012 season ,d first leg at Stamford bridge against City, he was obviously one of d best players dat night despite being played on d left wing,he had 14 league assists n 6 goals dat season...

It got better for him in 2012/2013 season where under benitez he was moved to d number 10 role n he was magnificent, I will never forget his performance against Tottenham dat season,he scored twice n assisted sturridge in a 2-4 win for Chelsea n also his performance against benfica in d Europa league final so I don't get d hate,Juan Mata is a playmaker which he publicly said last season... d reason he was sold by mourinho was dat he was asked to adapt to playing on d right wing n to be more defensive while mourinho decided to make Oscar his playmaker...

coogar:


mata was a beast that season!
he was miles better than silva & that was mata's debut season at chelsea. thank feck he's now a red devil.

Your stat states otherwise. Silva was far better.

How did we allow a player like Modric to leave the EPL? Plus Bale? Next time Man United should do it like Bayern Munich.

Must be an anxious wait for man united fans..

elampiro:

Your stat states otherwise. Silva was far better.

How did we allow a player like Modric to leave the EPL? Plus Bale? Next time Man United should do it like Bayern Munich.

only few people know how to read statistics here & you are not one of them. can you not see mata creates a chance every 25 mins to silva's 27?

where exactly did silva do better than mata in that stats provided in 11/12?

coogar:
shirley07, mata was chelsea's best playmaker since they had zola. no debating! mourinho just didn't like him cos he wanted him to be more defensive. mourinho wouldn't have liked any of xavi & iniesta too cos they don't suit his "jam body" football.

in terms of vision, key passes, final passes, guile, close control, deft touches, etc mata is a king. i could care less about his defensive side. anyone expecting mata to be as defensive as toure or matic is a lunatic. he's not built like a tank.


goal scoring

What about Lampard? In 2011/12 season you compared, Lampard did far better than Mata in terms of passing. I can also see Mata having 74% pass accuracy in opposition half which is horrible when compared to Silva, Modric, Carrick and Arteta.

How I completely forgot that Blind is a Manchester United player. Lolzzzzz. GGMU

coogar:


toure provides steel. he's a beast at breaking down plays - he does exactly what fellaini does for us but much better at it. he has the drive to bring the ball forward from the deep end & create chances. he's a box to box dynamo midfielder. his energy levels might have gone down a notch but he still provides steel.



the 3 of them are gorillas - we don't have anyone as strong as them in our team. when you have kompany, mangala, & those 3 destroyers in the same team then the creative players get the license to roam & express themselves without fear or fervour.



blind is just a young carrick.....
his strength is mostly positioning & interception. he's not much of a hard tackler & he doesn't travel with the ball like toure does. he needs to bulk up too to withstand the physical demands of his role.



city's failure in europe is just teething problems. they don't know how to manage games in europe yet & that's to do with their inexperience as a team. city's 2nd team is better than arsënal but arsenal manage european games better than city cos of their experience over the years.....the tactical approach, the confidence & the psychological angle are all important too. it's one thing to be good, it's another thing to know how to win.



the 3 players floating behind city's striker are fluid. they all roam and occupy different positions as the game dictates. silva isn't really an out & out winger. he often gets into the hole to deliver a killer pass. he's mostly everywhere. their attacking football is fluid!



without 2 strong DMs behind mata, the burden falls on his shoulders to track back & make up for the deficiencies in the pivot. last season, we had a very weak midfield & the AMs were asked to protect the pivot - and that takes something away from their attacking play.

trequartista should be what they are - modern football is destroying the game by making everyone defend like zombies. if you have 2 centre halves & 2 DMs to protect the back 4, why is there another need to put AMs in defensive mode? that's 7-9 players in defence, it blunts attacking football.

Can you state Yaya defensive stats here? Infact, you're getting it upside down because what Yaya provides nowadays, is energy and attacking play, not much defensive work. He provides his little share of defensive duties but it's not his cup of tea, same thing Di Maria did for Madrid.
Yeah, City deploys Silva in a sort of free role on the wing which allows him to drift and drop into the midfield but it's not as convenient as playing in the centre and the difference showed in their game against Barca where Silva was deployed in the centre.
In that game, majority of City's players were their usual out of sort, this included Yaya and Fernandinho who were poor in that game but Silva took their game to another level single handedly. They fashioned out better chances than Barca and outclassed Barca's midfield through the help of one man- Silva. City would have won that game if not of the ineptness of their forwards.
With the way Silva performed that day, City can beat anyone infront of them. However, City's strength is also its achille heel because they don't utilize the only playmaker they have to the best of his potential.
Let me also tell you that Blind is very much a DM. He's a different DM to the likes of Sandro, Vidal, Bender e.t.c. He's a sitting DM (holding midfielder) similar to Busquets, Fernando, De Rossi e.t.c. They carry out their defensive duties not by running around but by sitting back and mopping out the danger at the back of the midfield. They also contribute to the buildup play from the back which provides a platform for the other midfielders to do their work.
Teams that employs a roaming DM often deploy a sitting playmaker (deep-lying playmakers). For example, Vidal with Pirlo, Alonso with Khedira e.t.c. I guess different stroke for different team.
Like I said earlier, Before his injury, Blind was among the top midfielders with high no tackles and intercept and this is a player, burdened with our playmaking duties.
Let me also ask you, how much grit and steel does Madrid have when they won the Cl last year, Bayern, Barca, Holland or Germany?
Surrounding Mata with all the DM in the world would even make him look worse. IIRC last season, Mata's performance became better with Kagawa on the pitch. And it was Kagawa who was dropping deep into the midfield from the left side to orchestrate play, similar to how Silva do his thing for City. Our last season match against Newcastle and A. Villa will tell a better story of it. Infact, those matches had Kagawa written all over it. He provided the incisiveness and conducted the play which benefitted Mata in those games.
Another way to make Mata play better is to deploy him in a counter attacking set up. That still doesn't change the fact that Mata is a Second Striker. Shalom.

elampiro:


What about Lampard? In 2011/12 season you compared, Lampard did far better than Mata in terms of passing. I can also see Mata having 74% pass accuracy in opposition half which is horrible when compared to Silva, Modric, Carrick and Arteta.

the key to the best playmaker is the one that creates a chance the fastest. mata was creating a chance every 25 mins. he towers above others in that simple statistics. his 74% pass accuracy in the opposition half still created one chance in every 25 mins.

silva was creating his chance every 27 mins. there's a reason mata was the player of the season for chelsea, not lampard. lampard is the microcosm of what mata is with the ball. mata is the playmaker king since his arrival from valencia.

coogar:


only few people know how to read statistics here & you are not one of them. can you not see mata creates a chance every 25 mins to silva's 27?

where exactly did silva do better than mata in that stats provided in 11/12?

We are talking about playmaker. I am perhaps one of the few who pay attention to details and follow the line of an argument. Shirley is talking about playmaker.

Playmaker is primarily about control of the flow of a game. This is why Shirley has been talking about Xavi, and not Iniester. In this regard, Mata is woeful in comparison with the guys you listed up there.

coogar:


only few people know how to read statistics here & you are not one of them. can you not see mata creates a chance every 25 mins to silva's 27?

where exactly did silva do better than mata in that stats provided in 11/12?

Playmaking is not all about being creative. Infact, when a playmaker creates chances, it's seen as a bonus that comes with playmaking.
In a lame man's word,
Playmakers are often known as the assist of the assists.
Don't also forget Mata takes all the free kicks and corner kicks when he was at Chelsea compared to Silva who rarely did.

elampiro:


We are talking about playmaker. I am perhaps one of the few who pay attention to details and follow the line of an argument. Shirley is talking about playmaker.

Playmaker is primarily about control of the flow of a game. This is why Shirley has been talking about Xavi, and not Iniester. In this regard, Mata is woeful in comparison with the guys you listed up there.

rubbish!
playmaker is about creativity - chance creation. passing, running, dribbling, crossing, ball control are all means to an end(goal scoring). the player that makes the final pass more often is the playmaker.....he's the one blessed with the vision to make the pass that would lead to a shot taken.

mata was miles better than his peers in that regard in 11/12 & this is why his passes created more shots than any other. if silva's high passing accuracy in the final third is returning less created chances than mata then logic dictates silva made more safe passes than mata.

coogar:


the key to the best playmaker is the one that creates a chance the fastest. mata was creating a chance every 25 mins. he towers above others in that simple statistics. his 74% pass accuracy in the opposition half still created one chance in every 25 mins.

silva was creating his chance every 27 mins. there's a reason mata was the player of the season for chelsea, not lampard. lampard is the microcosm of what mata is with the ball. mata is the playmaker king since his arrival from valencia.

In my understanding, the primary argument here is about playmaking and not creativity. Shriley gave a perfect example between Xavi (a playmaker) and Iniester (a creator). The key to a playmaker is knitting passes together for the team, particular towards offensive play. Scholes was a good example for us.

However, we could get a complete playmaker in players like Zidane who knit the game and as well create for his team.

Shirley07:

Playmaking is not all about being creative.

Infact, when a playmaker creates chances, it's seen as a bonus that comes with playmaking.
In a lame man's word,
Playmakers are often known as the assist of the assists.
Don't also forget Mata takes all the free kicks and corner kicks when he was at Chelsea compared to Silva who rarely did.

english language will forever be your biggest challenge. playmaking is creativity.

you make something - you create something. the word explains itself thoroughly. the only significant stat about playmaker is the frequency at which they create chances.

every other stat is just beating about the bush. passing, dribbling, ball control are all a means to an end(goal scoring). from the definition of created chance - the pass that leads to a shot taken, it's clear as daylight who the king was in 2011/12.

elampiro:

In my understanding, the primary argument here is about playmaking and not creativity. Shriley gave a perfect example between Xavi (a playmaker) and Iniester (a creator). The key to a playmaker is knitting passes together for the team, particular towards offensive play. Scholes was a good example for us.
However, we could get a complete playmaker in players like Zidane who knit the game and as well create for his team.

playmaking is creativity.
xavi & iniesta are both creators. however, iniesta sometimes played as an auxiliary forward for barca & his stats somehow gets spruced & confuse jew men like you & shirley. if a playmaker isn't about creativity, what is he about then? defensive?

the exact reason scholes gets hailed by his peers in europe is because he's a playmaker - the king of the final pass that leads to a shot taken. xavi said that much when he was paying tributes to scholes - and what are such passes called?

coogar:


rubbish!
playmaker is about creativity - chance creation. passing, running, dribbling, crossing, ball control are all means to an end(goal scoring). the player that makes the final pass more often is the playmaker.....he's the one blessed with the vision to make the pass that would lead to a shot taken.

mata was miles better than his peers in that regard in 11/12 & this is why his passes created more shots than any other. if silva's high passing accuracy in the final third is returning less created chances than mata then logic dictates silva made more safe passes than mata.

Creativity is the secondary. Dictating the flow of attacking play is the primary.

Open play chances created.
Silva 36.5
Mata 40.17.

Even, Silva was more effective in knitting passes together and creating chances thereof.

elampiro:


In my understanding, the primary argument here is about playmaking and not creativity. Shriley gave a perfect example between Xavi (a playmaker) and Iniester (a creator). The key to a playmaker is knitting passes together for the team, particular towards offensive play. Scholes was a good example for us.

However, we could get a complete playmaker in players like Zidane who knit the game and as well create for his team.

Same as Silva.
People talk of Iniesta as the heir to Zidane's throne but that's one fat lie. Silva is the closest to Zidane, a pity City often under utilized him.
@elampiro, have you seen how Suarez has been underperforming so far when deployed as an out and out 9 for Barca?

coogar:




english language will forever be your biggest challenge. playmaking is creativity.

you make something - you create something. the word explains itself thoroughly. the only significant stat about playmaker is the frequency at which they create chances.

every other stat is just beating about the bush. passing, dribbling, ball control are all a means to an end(goal scoring). from the definition of created chance - the pass that leads to a shot taken, it's clear as daylight who the king was in 2011/12.




playmaking is creativity.
xavi & iniesta are both creators. however, iniesta sometimes played as an auxiliary forward for barca & his stats somehow gets spruced & confuse jew men like you & shirley. if a playmaker isn't about creativity, what is he about then? defensive?

the exact reason scholes gets hailed by his peers in europe is because he's a playmaker - the king of the final pass that leads to a shot taken. xavi said that much when he was paying tributes to scholes - and what are such passes called?

Nope. Playmake is make a play i.e, conduct play, my engrish teacher.

Shirley07:

Nope. Playmake is make a play i.e, conduct play, my engrish teacher.

so how do you make a play?
you guys are making me laugh with your bush english comprehension. the player with the vision to tread a pass that leads to a shot taken is the playmaker.....he is the one that receives the most passes in the game & distributes the ball with accuracy & panache.

mata was that man for chelsea in 11/12.

coogar:




english language will forever be your biggest challenge. playmaking is creativity.

you make something - you create something. the word explains itself thoroughly. the only significant stat about playmaker is the frequency at which they create chances.

every other stat is just beating about the bush. passing, dribbling, ball control are all a means to an end(goal scoring). from the definition of created chance - the pass that leads to a shot taken, it's clear as daylight who the king was in 2011/12.




playmaking is creativity.
xavi & iniesta are both creators. however, iniesta sometimes played as an auxiliary forward for barca & his stats somehow gets spruced & confuse jew men like you & shirley. if a playmaker isn't about creativity, what is he about then? defensive?

the exact reason scholes gets hailed by his peers in europe is because he's a playmaker - the king of the final pass that leads to a shot taken. xavi said that much when he was paying tributes to scholes - and what are such passes called?

Playmaking is not primarily about creativity. Pls update your yourself. Even, with Carrick on your list, you have lost the argument. How did Carrick get into the list before our wingers and forwards?

Bye. See you later.

Shirley07:

Nope. Playmake is make a play i.e, conduct play, my engrish teacher.

Exactly, creativity is the secondary role for a playmaker.

Logging out. I will be back in two hours or less.

elampiro:

Playmaking is not primarily about creativity. Pls update your yourself. Even, with Carrick on your list, you have lost the argument. How did Carrick get into the list before our wingers and forwards?

Bye. See you later.

carrick is a deep-lying playmaker - you are a big olodo. you don't even know carrick dictate play from the deep. all those long balls like the one hernandez scored against chelsea is a final pass. his examples are pirlo, modric & xabi fücking alonso.

Shirley07:

Nope. Playmake is make a play i.e, conduct play, my engrish teacher.

Mata received the more passes than any other Chelsea midfielder that year, indicating that the whole team was constantly looking to get him on the ball as he was the focal point of the midfield play.

In addition to receiving the ball more than any other Chelsea midfielder, Mata was also registering more touches of the ball than any other player, indicating that he was having time to dwell on the ball a bit longer than anyone else, before he picked out a pass.

He was directly involved in 36.9% of all of Chelsea's league goals.


Finally he created chances quicker and in more volume than any other Chelsea player.

If that's not a playmaker, then I don't know what your definition of playmaker is.

Nihilist:

Mata received the more passes than any other Chelsea midfielder that year, indicating that the whole team was constantly looking to get him on the ball as he was the focal point of the midfield play.

In addition to receiving the ball more than any other Chelsea midfielder, Mata was also registering more touches of the ball than any other player, indicating that he was having time to dwell on the ball a bit longer than anyone else.

He was directly involved in 36.9% of all of Chelsea's league goals.

Finally he created chances quicker and in more volume than any other Chelsea player.

If that's not a playmaker, then I don't know what your definition of playmaker is.

don't mind the stark illiterates!
look at that one saying carrick being included in the list means others aren't playmakers. this is how to separate the men from the women.

Shirley07:

Playmaking is not all about being creative. Infact, when a playmaker creates chances, it's seen as a bonus that comes with playmaking.
In a lame man's word,
Playmakers are often known as the assist of the assists.
Don't also forget Mata takes all the free kicks and corner kicks when he was at Chelsea compared to Silva who rarely did.

On what stats do will judge a very decent playmaker ?
We mostly have two kinds those that play deeper Carrick and Pirlo and those that play closer to the goal this is where Silva,Mata and Ozil belong this is the more popular kind of playmaker and we judge this ones based on Assists and goals.
" Assist of the Assist" stats are meant for DLP they aren't very many of these in todays game.

coogar:


so how do you make a play?
you guys are making me laugh with your bush english comprehension. the player with the vision to tread a pass that leads to a shot taken is the playmaker.....he is the one that receives the most passes in the game & distributes the ball with accuracy & panache.

mata was that man for chelsea in 11/12.

Nope.
You know why Southampton are on the losing end lately? Because Morgan Schnerderlin, their deeplying playmaker is out injured. Check all their losses, includind their defeat against City, you would notice it coincided with the absence of Morgan. Even City were only able to get through them after Morgan was subbed out due to injury.
Does Morgan creates many chances per game? Nope. So, why?
Because that's Tadic's job. But why is Tadic finding it difficult to create? Because he has no one to knit play behind him and provide him with the incisive passes.
You're right that playmakers should be the one with the most touches and passes but it is not always like that due to various reasons. First, the position of the playmaker may be of hindrance. For example, Silva have to drift into the centre to get more touches but when he's unable to do this, he's liable to get few touches.
Secondly, inability of the team mates to recognize the actual playmaker and this is the fault of coach. For example, Chelsea players didn't recognize Oscar as the actual playmaker, they probably thought that Mata is the playmaker since the team was built around Mata. However, the player that actually made play happened was Oscar, even with the little touches he had. Same thing happened with Mata and Kagawa in the games against Newcastle, Aston Villa, Westham e.t.c. Everyone defered to Mata in those games but Kagawa was the main playmaker.
In a right set up and with an insightful coach, the playmaker gets more touches on the ball.

Shirley07:


[size=18pt]Secondly, inability of the team mates to recognizing the actual playmaker and this is also the fault of coach. For example, Chelsea players didn't recognize Oscar as the actual playmaker, they probably thought that Mata is the playmaker since the team was built around Mata.[/size] However, the player that actually made play happened was Oscar, even with the little touches he had. Same thing happened with Mata and Kagawa in the games against Newcastle, Aston Villa, Westham e.t.c. Everyone defered to Mata in those games but Kagawa was the playmaker.
In a right set up and with an insightful coach, the playmaker gets more touches on the ball.

So the players thought Mata was the playmaker, and Mata performed as the playmaker, but OSCAR was the real playmaker?

Yet us Chelsea fans are unintelligent buffoons.