I think you're a bit quick off the mark with this one. Maradona won Napoli the Scudetto. This current season is just over the half way point and Napoli currently hold a 2pt lead over 2nd place. A lot of football still left to play yet. Also worth noting that Napoli still have to go and play at their four closest challengers (Juventus, Fiorentina, Internazionale and Roma) grounds. I'm not going to even go into the difference in quality between Serie A now and Seria A in the mid-late 80's. As said, a lot can still happen.
They haven't won it yet, that's true. It's relative comparison, to the team performance, so opponents doesn't really matter that much.
It does. You can only judge a teams performance based upon the opponents they have to face. It stands to reason it's going to be easier, to a degree, to score goals/create chances/have assists/keep clean sheets etc etc against an inferior opponent. When weighing up how well two teams have performed over the course of a season you need to take into account the quality of their opponents surely.
No it doesn't, you're basing opponents "on paper" performance. It's the same if you win awful (on paper) opponent 1-0 scoring the goal or good (on paper) opponent 1-0 scoring the goal, because your whole team was better in the latter, relatively. Individually it's the same, in relation to team performance and individual importance, which this was about.
So what you're saying is it doesn't matter if the overall team performance was good or awful (or anywhere in between) in any single game because the individual performance will always be the same...?
How do the goals (without penalties, unless won by himself) and assists (wide + strict criteria) against the top teams appear? Level of competition - teams and rivaling stars in their prime - was not particularly strong in 1986-87, that is true. Those seasons happened (1993-94 was another one). Keep in mind too that Higuain is the leading scorer of Napoli whereas Carnevale was in 1986-87.
Yes, because you can't asses teams "on paper", but you can asses games after the results have happened. Teams have different forms throughout the season, different tactics and so on. They could face awful (on paper) opponent being out of form, injured and then needing a wonder goal, and then win a great (on paper) opponent on paper needing a wonder goal. Relative importance is the same.
It was a league with 16 teams back then. Say: 2-4; 5-8; 9-12; 13-16. For Higuain that would mean 1-5; 6-10; 11-15; 16-20.
What a lot of bovine scatology you talk. You really do. So you can't assess team performance on paper but it's fine to assess individual performance on paper (as witnessed by the multitude of charts you post regarding Lionel Messi). You know, making stuff up, just to prove your right, only makes it right in your mind. The vast majority of people (many non Lionel Messi haters may I add) see it for what it is. Bada Bing - an individual player performance will always be the same regardless of whether the team performance was good, bad or indifferent. Bravo. That's your best yet, and believe me, that's saying something!
Because I actually asses games based on what actually happened, what you're suggesting is to base assessment on looking something trivial like perceived level of a team before the game, which has zero relation to the actual game that was played. Now you're changing the debate on more personal level, which is common with you and few others when they get their asses handed to them on logical thinking. And this is the exact point when the more intelligent part of the debate ignores the other...
By actually watching every minute of every match in both seasons...? Right, because the quality of the opposition you face is never likely to have any kind of bearing on the outcome of the game... How trivial of me.
Just off discussion. I wonder how bookmakers work out their odds for football match results before a ball is kicked...? They seem to make quite a good living from it as well. Must be magic.
Also the bookmakers work with models nowadays, even if 100% accuracy is impossible. But the outcome of 38 games is of course easier to estimate than the outcome of one game. Because of mid-season transfers, you also need to have an idea about the player quality. http://soccer.chadmurphy.org/ http://statsbomb.com/2016/01/a-compilation-of-epl-model-predictions-after-round-2038/ That allows them to go as detailed as tapping on the points total (or points range) of the eventual EPL winner.
I'd say Serie A in 2015/16 is better than 86/87 in particular. Haven't looked at the squads during Maradona's 2nd Scudetto though, but if Higuain maintained this form then it's an equally great achievement IMO. Napoli were 3rd favourites for the title this season, don't know what the pre-season expectations were for Napoli in 86/87. Probably gives Maradona the edge there. Ofcourse Dybala won't let this happen though
Sassuolo (no goal/assist) 2-1 D Lazio (2 goals) 5-0 W Juventus (1 goal, 1 assist) 2-1 W Fiorentina (1 goal) 2-1 W Internazionale (2 goals) 2-1 W Roma (no goal/assist) 0-0 Draw Sassuolo (2 goals) 3-1 W Added Lazio and Sassuolo as they've been around the top 5 positions. None of these goals were penalties.
Atm against League 2-4 opponents (excl. penalties taken not won): Maradona 86-87 2. Juventus W 1-3 (0+0), W 2-1 (0+1) 3. Inter D 0-0 (0+0), L 1-0 (0+0) 4. Verona D 0-0 (0+0), L 3-0 (0+0) Total W-D-L, (G+A)/Team Goals 2-2-2 33% win, (0+1)/5 = 20% Higuain 15-16 2. Juventus W 2-1 (1+1) 3. Fiorentina W 2-1 (1+0) 4. Inter W 2-1 (2+0) Total W-D-L, (G+A)/Team Goals 3-0-0 100% win, (4+1)/6 = 83%
I hope that after showing his quality so clearly this season, people will start focusing more on the positives regarding Pipita and stop beating him up for presumably costing their teams titles, especially when others were equally to blame with misses of their own. In any case, regarding the Maradona-Napoli comparison, the following things should also be taken into account IMO, 1) Pipita is a an out-and-out striker unlike Maradona's role in 86/87 2) Both Insigne and Hamsik are having pretty decent seasons themselves, especially Insigne who is at 17 G+A (breakup is 9 goals and 8 assists), six behind Higuain's 23 G+A, as per whoscored 3) Napoli's defence has been pretty good as well, conceding only 18 goals till date Lastly, I think the assist total of 6 given for Maradona's 86/87 Serie A needs to be rechecked, especially if the assists are supposed to be counted as per the wider rules. Allow me to correct you here, since as per my source, Maradona was actually the top scorer if we only look at Serie A goals for 86/87. Carnevale had 8 goals in the Serie A that season to Maradona's 10 (of course considering pks, removing which it might be different, but by definition Maradona was the top-scorer for Napoli in the 86/87 Serie A). Source - http://www.rsssf.com/tablesi/ital87.html
Yeah that's true, although AM should be involved in goal scoring, and more assisting than striker, which numbers also suggest. But it isn't completely balanced. If we added "involvement" as being direct part of attacking move of the goal, it would be better, and closer comparison. I may still revisit the goals if I find time, and check "involvement".
If you have the time, that would be fairer. In some cases, the involvement might turn out to be the real decisive move as well e.g. a long through ball by a midfielder to a forward with only the gk to beat, who then squares it up for another forward to tap-in. I suppose it can become quite subjective even after a case-by-case examination.
They are third best this season indeed, in 1986-87 second best. This number is actually correct for 1986-87 - I stick my hand in the fire for that. In his first three seasons he didn't have many assists (1984-1987). At strict rules in 1984-85: 4 or 5; in 1985-86: 4; in 1986-87: 4. Especially at a low scoring league (where one goal often wins games and points), with player having relatively modest tasks and duties, it is not irrelevant to count goals and assists. 1. Napoli - Torino 3-1, Giordano (Rebound) [Torino ended 11th] 2. Sampdoria - Napoli 1-2, Caffarelli (Rebound) [6th] 3. Napoli - Ascoli 3-0, Romano [12th] 4. Torino - Napoli 0-1, Giordano [11th] 5. Napoli - Juventus 2-1, Renica [2nd] 6. Ascoli - Napoli 1-1, Carnevale [12th] Example, the 2nd placed team: At 1:00 Goals in 1986-87: Note: 2-2 against Atalanta was a penalty too Yes sorry; I meant excluding penalties. In league: Carnevale 8; Maradona 7 (+3PK); Giordano 5; Bagni 4. At all competitions (= Coppa Italia, UEFA Cup): Giordano 15; Maradona 14 (+3PK); Carnevale 14; Bagni 7. In Coppa Italia they only met Serie B/Serie C teams with the exception of Atalanta (15th in Serie A and relegated), so he might have been surpassed by flat track bullies. Anyway, in different wording I said the same as you above: "Pipita is a an out-and-out striker unlike Maradona's role in 86/87" I do believe however that their win was not as miraculous as it is often made out. Many competitors and 'legends' were past their peak, and in that 1986-87 season just two new foreigners entered the entire league as fresh faces (a record low). Winning the league with 70.0% of the maximum points isn't sufficient in almost all other seasons (not between early 60s and 1997-98). No other team had invested as much money as Napoli had at that point in the past two/three seasons. And that is without going into the proven illicit stuff (that didn't exist around other teams). Previous competitors as AS Roma, Juventus, Torino and Verona had declined considerably, with AC Milan, Inter and Sampdoria placed in the near future.