Hate when Hazard gets compared to all the other players in his position in order to supposedly work out how good he is. He is Eden Hazard and he's the best player in the league in my opinion, he shouldn't need comparing

I'm not one for stats but just out of curiosity I'd like to compare his stats with Ronaldo's while he was in England.

 

This is his third season in England. Can anyone compare his goals and assists ratio with playing time with Ronaldo's first three seasons in England?

 

How many seasons did Ronaldo have at Man Utd and how old was he?

 

Stats don't tell the whole story of course, not by a long shot, but it would be interesting nonetheless.

 

(Stats from Transfermarkt)

 

Cristiano Ronaldo:

Season 1 (2003/04 - age 18/19)

League - 29 games 4 goals 4 assists (1559 mins)

Europe - 5 games 0 goals 1 assist (293 mins)

Season 2 (2004/05 - age 19/20)

League - 33 games 5 goals 5 assists (2424 mins)

Europe - 8 games 0 goals 0 assists (564 mins)

Season 3 (2005/06 - age 20/21)

 

League - 33 games 9 goals 7 assists (2285 mins)

Europe - 8 games 1 goal 0 assists (662 mins)

 

Eden Hazard:

Season 1 (2012/13 - age 21/22)

League - 34 games 9 goals 14 assists (2624 mins)

Europe - (CL) 6 games 0 goals 3 assists (459 mins); (Europa) 7 games 1 goal 2 assists (446 mins)

Season 2 (2013/14 - age 22/23)

League - 35 games 14 goals 9 assists (2889 mins)

Europe - 9 games 2 goals 0 assists (679 mins)

Season 3 (2014/15 - age 23/24)

 

League - 32 games 13 goals 11 assists (2831 mins)

Europe - 7 games 3 goals 3 assists (653 mins)

In my lifetime I've never seen us have a potential Ballon d'Or. He's better than Zola already in my opinion.

Too soon to say, Zola played at a different time aswell, think if Zola were playing now he'd be at these levels.

Also seeing Zola in 97, no one in England was doing what he was doing at the time. Zola is still best player I've ever watched.

Hazard would destroy La Liga.

(Stats from Transfermarkt)

 

Cristiano Ronaldo:

Season 1 (2003/04 - age 18/19)

League - 29 games 4 goals 4 assists (1559 mins)

Europe - 5 games 0 goals 1 assist (293 mins)

Season 2 (2004/05 - age 19/20)

League - 33 games 5 goals 5 assists (2424 mins)

Europe - 8 games 0 goals 0 assists (564 mins)

Season 3 (2005/06 - age 20/21)

 

League - 33 games 9 goals 7 assists (2285 mins)

Europe - 8 games 1 goal 0 assists (662 mins)

 

Eden Hazard:

Season 1 (2012/13 - age 21/22)

League - 34 games 9 goals 14 assists (2624 mins)

Europe - (CL) 6 games 0 goals 3 assists (459 mins); (Europa) 7 games 1 goal 2 assists (446 mins)

Season 2 (2013/14 - age 22/23)

League - 35 games 14 goals 9 assists (2889 mins)

Europe - 9 games 2 goals 0 assists (679 mins)

Season 3 (2014/15 - age 23/24)

 

League - 32 games 13 goals 11 assists (2831 mins)

Europe - 7 games 3 goals 3 assists (653 mins)

 

Thanks very much Plokoon. I didn't realise Ronaldo was so young when he joined Utd. I remember he had one season when he suddenly exploded and scored loads. Must have been the season after or the one after that.

Thanks very much Plokoon. I didn't realise Ronaldo was so young when he joined Utd. I remember he had one season when he suddenly exploded and scored loads. Must have been the season after or the one after that.

 

I was surprised by that myself, I thought he was in his early 20s when he joined Man Utd but apparently not. The following (his fourth) season he got 17 goals and 17 assists, and it was the season after that in which he became the totally ridiculous goalscoring force  he is today (31 goals, 8 assists).

I was surprised by that myself, I thought he was in his early 20s when he joined Man Utd but apparently not. The following (his fourth) season he got 17 goals and 17 assists, and it was the season after that in which he became the totally ridiculous goalscoring force  he is today (31 goals, 8 assists).

 

Okay, so the season he was 22/23 years of age, his 5th in England, he got 31 goals and 8 assists (excluding domestic cup games I presume).

 

Hazard at the same age had more assists but half the goals (again, excluding cup games). However it was only his 2nd season in England.

 

The encouraging thing is that, like Ronaldo, Hazard is getting better year by year, and this is reflected in his stats.

 

I prefer Hazard's style of play but that's just a personal choice. I doubt very much he'll ever match Ronaldo's numbers in terms of his career, but for me, he integrates better into the team and that will always do it for me.

 

Edit: There are so many other factors that contribute to those stats, but it's interesting nonetheless, and thanks for providing them.

Edited April 22, 201511 yr by Davey Baby

I prefer Hazard's humility

To put things into perspective, Hazard has 98 career club goals at 24 and Zidane had 125 career club goals in his entire career. Luis Figo had 133. It's a myth that Hazard is this low-scoring player or that he needs to score more goals than he currently is to be the best player in the world. I personally feel Hazard will be the best player in the world when the Messi/Ronaldo era is over. Ronaldo is already in a steady decline this season. Don't let his goals deceive you, his all round play has declined.

 

I think too much of us buy into the infantile, juvenile nonsense from social media from Arsenal fans and the like, using stats to somehow "prove" player "a" is better than player "b", regardless of how ridiculous they might be. Even some football sites are guilty of this now. I remember seeing a stat earlier this season "proving" how Sanchez was allegedly better than Hazard because he had more goals and assists than him, and it was  only after the first 6 games of the PL season. 

 

Stats without context can be used to prove anything and are very misleading, especially when the stats are merely just goals and assists and not advanced stats. A cursory look at advanced stats clearly show Hazard to be at least one of the top 5 players in Europe this season. But then again, I don't need to look at stats to know how good Hazard is.

 

I think Hazard's individual honours and weekly exhibitions speak for themselves. 

Neymar is not a striker. He plays virtually the same position as of Hazard in Barca with less freedom to roam around as of Hazard.

And Neymar is not just about goals imo, he has brilliant technical ability and very good at taking on players, he can also create moments of magic to win the matches just like Hazard. 

 

When he's the main man (i.e) Brazil, he's even better.

It's true Neymar is not an out and out striker (Barcelona don't have any) but it's wrong to say he virtually plays the same position as Hazard. Neymar is basically a shadow striker who looks to make runs in behind and across the back four while the defense is pre-occupied with containing Messi and Suarez. Out of that front 3, he is the least one concerned with being a facilitator and playmaker. His role in the team is chiefly to score goals. It's no surprise that almost half of his goals this season have come from Messi's assists. An incredible 13 goals of Neymar have come directly from Messi's boot. 

 

Hazard on the other hand is the ball carrier and playmaker for his team. Hazard's role for Chelsea is similar to Messi's role for Barcelona. He isn't the one latching to the end of passes and throughballs like Neymar, but the one giving those passes.  So, same starting position, but very different roles in the team. 

 

A stat comparison between both players better shows the differences in qualities and team roles of both players. 

 

 

P.S : This one is not the most recent and should be filtered to either average per game or a 90 min metrics, but is gives a general picture. 

Edited April 23, 201511 yr by The Liquidator

Put it this way would I swap Hazard for anyone else in the world right now? No!

I can't wait to see how good  he is next season.

The Smooth Criminal, Eden Hazard! 

 

Edited April 23, 201511 yr by enigma

It's true Neymar is not an out and out striker (Barcelona don't have any) but it's wrong to say he virtually plays the same position as Hazard. Neymar is basically a shadow striker who looks to make runs in behind and across the back four while the defense is pre-occupied with containing Messi and Suarez. Out of that front 3, he is the least one concerned with being a facilitator and playmaker. His role in the team is chiefly to score goals. It's no surprise that almost half of his goals this season have come from Messi's assists. An incredible 13 goals of Neymar have come directly from Messi's boot. 

 

Hazard on the other hand is the ball carrier and playmaker for his team. Hazard's role for Chelsea is similar to Messi's role for Barcelona. He isn't the one latching to the end of passes and throughballs like Neymar, but the one giving those passes.  So, same starting position, but very different roles in the team. 

 

A stat comparison between both players better shows the differences in qualities and team roles of both players. 

 

 

P.S : This one is not the most recent and should be filtered to either average per game or a 90 min metrics, but is gives a general picture. 

Neymar need not to be the creator at Barca as they already have Messi(who is the best creator in the world, alongside Iniesta and Xavi and even Busquet). In Chelsea Hazard is basically our main creative force alongside Fabregas, that's why he'll always be better creatively than Neymar.

But it doesn't mean he's better than Neymar at that aspect. Neymar for Brazil is a completely different player, he is as good creatively and have great killer instinct... and finishing.

 

But tbh, it's down to personal opinions, and for me Neymar is bit better all round player than Hazard and is a potential 50-60 goals a season player.

Edited April 23, 201511 yr by CFCBlue12

Wenger thinks it's him or Sanchez for POTY

http://m.skysports.com/article/sports//9818326

Sanchez would have been a contender if he kept his form up all season like Eden but he hasn't.

It's Hazard or Kane in terms of form.

Wenger will just need to deal with it.

Wenger thinks it's him or Sanchez for POTY

http://m.skysports.com/article/sports//9818326

I have to be honest, I dont think Wenger's got much chance!

Wenger thinks it's him or Sanchez for POTY

http://m.skysports.com/article/sports//9818326

Honestly can't stand the man, how on earth could Sanchez be ahead of Kane, Costa or Aguero? Baffling, constantly trying to get a dig in and the way he responded last week with the "as usual" comment really annoys me, suck it up that we can actually beat a big side when the pressure's on and have a proper title challenge

Honestly can't stand the man, how on earth could Sanchez be ahead of Kane, Costa or Aguero? Baffling, constantly trying to get a dig in and the way he responded last week with the "as usual" comment really annoys me, suck it up that we can actually beat a big side when the pressure's on and have a proper title challenge

He's a twat who hates us cause we turned over his little "invincibles" side! We stopped them potentially dominating, I honestly think after 03-04 he thought they were going to.

For me it's always the Arsenal young fans that always go on about the invincible season, the ones who didn't see it happening.

 

The ones that did see it happen know it wasn't really that great, especially the ones that saw United's treble season and Chelsea's first season under Mourinho.

 

Besides being undefeated in the league despite drawing a sh*t load of games and the Pires dive they weren't exactly invincible. Invincible is the term I would use for Pep's Barcelona in its prime when they could just wipe the floor with any team they played.  

For me it's always the Arsenal young fans that always go on about the invincible season, the ones who didn't see it happening.

The ones that did see it happen know it wasn't really that great, especially the ones that saw United's treble season and Chelsea's first season under Mourinho.

Besides being undefeated in the league despite drawing a sh*t load of games and the Pires dive they weren't exactly invincible. Invincible is the term I would use for Pep's Barcelona in its prime when they could just wipe the floor with any team they played.

Preaching to the choir it's why I always call them "invincibles" with the "". They were just a great side but certainly not invincible.

Preaching to the choir it's why I always call them "invincibles" with the "". They were just a great side but certainly not invincible.

 

Look at the records we have broken in the PL table, just from the top of my head. 

 

Most PL points in a season

 

Most PL goals scored in a season

 

Least PL goals conceded in a season

 

I know there are plenty more than that also. Yet what recognition do we ever get from that? I don't think I ever see that get brought up. 

Look at the records we have broken in the PL table, just from the top of my head. 

 

Most PL points in a season

 

Most PL goals scored in a season

 

Least PL goals conceded in a season

 

I know there are plenty more than that also. Yet what recognition do we ever get from that? I don't think I ever see that get brought up. 

Also most wins in a season (29) and most home games without defeat over continuous seasons (84? or something crazy) 

Look at the records we have broken in the PL table, just from the top of my head.

Most PL points in a season

Most PL goals scored in a season

Least PL goals conceded in a season

I know there are plenty more than that also. Yet what recognition do we ever get from that? I don't think I ever see that get brought up.

People often label us as a team that bought the league which is really baffling to me, every team that wins it has to spend money. Prices have inflated drastically since the 90s, were Newcastle not trying to buy the league in 1996 when they spud a world record fee for Alan Shearer? What about all the money United have spent over the years? Remember when Fergie spent a million pounds in 1989? That was huge at that time and he spent that trying to deliver a a league title.

Edited April 24, 201511 yr by Bobbywoodhogan

They'll moan they werent backed by a sugar daddy though..