Historic World Wide Balon d'Or 23 player short lists

1) you are a quintessential example of the fake news brigade. You refuse to answer the questions I asked, too.

Udinese did not improve at all and in fact achieved one point less in his best season as the season before (without him).

2) it was said for you that this isn't the place for it, but you just ignore.

 

I know how those free passes work, thanks.

I just think there were about five clearly better. Umtiti, the influential Van Dijk, Ottamendi, Koulibaly, Chiellini, Hummels were all better if not more of them.

Check the SofaScore and WhoScored ratings, too.

 

Well, here's a problem in the periods of time because the Ballon d'Or, the World Soccer Awards, the Top 100 of The Guardian, the UEFA Team of the Year and the IFFHS Awards, they're all, in theory, based on the chronological year and this exercise is based on the season of each one (2017-18 for both) at club level. Only the FIFA/FIFPro World XI is based on the season and here I think there is an important detail, that in this season I think was a notable imbalance in terms of forwards/attackers over central midfielders that makes it understandable how Kanté could be more easily chosen in his role than Immobile in an ideal XI.

In regards to awards and considerations based on the season:

Ciro Immobile

- 1 nomination in the ESM Team of the Month
- UEFA's 5th best player of the UEFA Europa League
- UEFA's UEFA Europa League Team of the Tournament

- Joint-top scorer of the UEFA Europa League
- Joint-top scorer of the Serie A
- Serie A Team of the Season

N'Golo Kanté

- Ligue 1's Best French Player playing abroad
- Chelsea Player of the Year 2017-18

I think Immobile had a huge season according to my personal appreciation, so powerful and lethal for Lazio in Serie A (I'd say he was the best player of the tournament, even over Icardi) and UEFA Europa League, although he couldn't score for Italy and, of course, his national team didn't qualify for the World Cup.

​

To be fair, I think Kanté is under-represented in seasonal awards. He was not included in an official ideal XI of a competition (FA Premier League (PFA Team of the Year), UEFA Champions League or World Cup), but he was not far in any front. It's hard to decide if the was on the average level of the list, but I think he was somewhat less than in his 2 previous seasons.

World Champion as one of the base players, but I feel he was not as dominant as the best central midfielder.

​

 

I feel like while the Ramos challenge on Salah in the Final maybe cost Salah an opportunity (given he'd seemed to start the game particularly well, and could look forward to a World Cup injury-free until that happened) when it comes to making a case for Player of the Season...and by association the Ballon d'Or, maybe it should also go against Ramos (even if it can't be proved for sure he'd been studying illegal Judo moves or something - it was reckless style of foul at the least, without due care and attention, when he pulls his arm and dumps him on the floor like that).

I don't know if it was Tom's intention, but obviously France Football with the Ballon d'Or did incorporate a fair play/sportsmanship element in their criteria originally.

As for Salah, it's my perception that he has a better case for the calendar year than the season. Maybe it's too simple a summary, but in general I think his great form was in the second half of 2017/18. His first half hadn't been so impressive, even though he'd been among the goals reasonably regularly. De Bruyne would surely be well ahead at Christmas? I'm not saying ahead of Messi for example necessarily, but ahead of Salah I mean. I do feel De Bruyne's World Cup wasn't especially great consistently, but he did have his moments of class in Belgium's run for sure. For calendar year though (irrelevant to this selection I know) I assume it should be Hazard who'd be the Belgian in the mix with Messi, Salah etc, not De Bruyne.

 

I know you can do a better and more imparcial analysis with better conclusions than this type of 'thing': "Udinese did not improve at all and in fact achieved one point less in his best season as the season before (without him)', superficial and at least ambitious.

Objectively, Zico has improved the poor Italian Udinese team, that's a fact. Udinese with him on the pitch scored ~ 55% more goals with the same proportion of goals conceded without him (so he really had very positive GoaIImpact for the context), had ~ 70% more wins+draws and of course fewer losses.

Talking specifically about the 83/84 season in question, he clearly improved the team as the data from ClubElo shows, the Friuli team with Zico exceeded their own expectations in 58% of the times (65% before his injury), while without him only in 33%, what does it could indicate? That besides being too good for the team, maybe he was also playing for a team in decline, something that could be verified in two seasons after Zico goes out,with the relegation of the North Italian club: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986–87_Serie_A


All in all, I hope I don't have to come back with this theme again, although this time the post is within the topic (my apologies for the off-topic posts), since for now we aren't talking about careers, but of seasons, and in the 1983/1984 season, Zico, for the exposed reasons, should be def on this such list of the 23.

 

How do you consider KDBs season
Certainly (although it’s not being said) I think it was a historic campaign and one of the best I ever saw by a midfielder


Every Match of the day for some time during late 2017 was like a highlight reel of exquisite KDB passes

he gets underrated because Manchester City were such a dominant club regularly steamrolling teams by 3+ goal margins.
Even though they are challenging and will possibly end up winning the PL (again)they haven’t been the same force as they had been with KDBs creative ingenuity

There isn’t a single “objective” source that ranks salah ahead of KDB in the PL last season
What’s amazing is salah scored flipping 44 goals and he didn’t do it as a complete tapin striker as Mário Gomez or huntelaar(and there are the assists too)
Still though his whoscored average rating is well below many players last season(even in his own league)

 

About Salah, he clearly overperformed his scoring expectation last season: https://statsbomb.com/2019/03/evaluating-mohamed-salah/
31 NO-PK Goals + if I'm not wrong 12 Assists in the PL. Crazy and unsustainable!

 

I think he's in the mix for Player of the Season worldwide maybe, but you'll have a better idea about Messi having watched more La Liga. Salah making more impact in the CL and finishing the season better counts for something I guess.

Maybe I'm a bit surprised to see a positive relation to Expected Goals for Salah even, as I seem to remember he was getting a lot of chances and not taking a big percentage earlier in the season. But I don't know how the stat really works, and at least some of his goals would be from shots he'd be deemed not expected to score with so that balances the misses off I guess (or more than balances them off seemingly). I really haven't looked into how the stat works and what is a normal standard etc. On the face of it maybe being expected to score with such a low percentage of shots indicates taking too many shots but who knows! It doesn't detract from calling it a great season for him anyway. I'm not meaning to be too judgemental with these comments of course (with Rivaldo neither and yes the video was impressive and nice...but I'll keep the comment here brief as it's also in the off-topic category!)

 

CR scored 60 goals in a single Individual campaign(2011/12)
In the same season Gonzalo higuain And Karim Benzema both scored 30+ goals each
This was the one season arguably that CR assisted benzema the most and not just via “ opta assists”(through his creativity mainly WC crossing)

0:43-0:53
1:30-1:45
2:44-2:57
3:19-3:40
6:23-6:29
7:14-7:27
7:28-7:36
8:28-8:37
8:41-8:53
9:42-9:56
12:24-12:34
14:23-14:32
15:08-15-13
These are just 18 examples from a single season(2011/12) of chances for benzema

At least 14 are what would normally be considered clear cut(a striker should not miss period)
4 can be defined as maybe half chances that require a bit more work(not out of the capabilities of someone like benzema)

 

Yes, in fact the Understat data show other numbers, perhaps more realistic. But still they are excellent numbers: https://understat.com/player/1250

 

Before the misunderstanding arises, I'm not the originator of this theme. Other 'south american' posters Vegan 10 (as you know) and leadleader preceded me (leadleader, credit where its due, had a few good posts on this with correct facts).

It's also not necessarily the most important thing for me; the fact Zico actually struggled to get a result against Platini (or Rummenigge indeed) is just as important if not more so.

 

Well, what makes 2017/2018 Messi so ridiculous, at least as far as league form is concerned, is that he combined both the creativity of KDB (at least in the final 3rd) and the scoring prowess of Salah, two of the best league performers in all of Europe that season, all in one package.

 

Rummenigge? Only in your world.
and Maradona struggled to get a result against Zico as well, how does that come into your math?

Btw, regardless of what is important to you, the metrics, the narratives you follow doesn't matter how desilusional it can be, it is your problem.

Statistics, Objetive Data, Media Ratings and ClubELO says totally the opposite. Who should I believe in, Statistics, Objetive Data, Media Ratings and ClubELO or in two or three fake members (some of them being xenophobics, ignorants or dishonests) of an Internet forum? What a doubt...

 

It really doesn't. Gazzetta and GS are (by far) the two best and rated him lower than his rival. End of story.

ClubElo:
http://clubelo.com/1986-07-01/Udinese

No significant improvement or decline after him (1983 to 1985). The improvement before him is steep.

Statistics: only one assist, 8 free kicks and 4 penalties. 12 less non-penalty goals + assists as his 'rival'.

I will leave it here.

 

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

You're walking in circles. Guerin did rated Zico better than Platini according @schwuppe. According with his link, Guerin Sportivo had Zico as the Best Udinese player in 16 out of 24 Matches (66.7%) and Platini as the Best Juventus Player in 11 ou of 28 Matches (39,3%). The average GS make of 4 sources did rated Platini slight better tho, and it was by 0.07 margin. Probably the whole Juventus squad was much better rated than the Udinese squad tho making Zico more outlier and more time the best of his team compared with the French. Overall doesn't matter much, Zico was the best rated Udinese player and the second best of the League and then he had - at least subjectively - positive impact ( which already destroys the leadleader arguments).


But not only that, he improved Udinese a lot objectively, at least before his injury in 1984.

You could check it for yourself.

In 07/1983 the average Italian League score was 1565; Udinese, 1536, in 03/1984 before his injury (he played 20 matches out of 21, the only 1 he didn't played Udinese had negative points) the Italian League Score was 1594 and Udinese score was 1613, that is a 77 point improvement in 20 matches (77/20 =.3.85)

07/1983
http://clubelo.com/1983-07-01/Udinese

03/1984
http://clubelo.com/1984-03-01/Udinese

Compare with the best rated season of all time by Guerin D'Oro, Diego Maradona 1984/1985.

http://clubelo.com/1984-07-01/Udinese

http://clubelo.com/1985-07-01/Udinese

In 07/1984 the average Italian League score was 1623; Napoli, 1603, at the end of the season - with Maradona playing all 30 matches - the Italian League Score was 1652 and Napoli 1669, that is a 66 point improvement (66/30 = 2.2). That is the adjusted score, remember.


Udinese with Zico playing in 83/84 had a positive result in 14 out 24 times (58,3%), before his injury it was 13 out of 20 times (65%) higher than Juventus with Platini playing that was 17 out of 28 times (60,7%) while without Zico Udinese had positive results only in 33% of the time while Juventus without Platini had 100%.

Only counting the Elo Game Difference, Zico improved Udinese in 40 Points (24 matches he played) and Maradona 33 Points (30 matches), before the injury in 1984, Zico improved Udinese in 57.5 Points (20 matches he played).

Show Spoiler Hide Spoiler

ELO GAME RESULTS


==> Zico 1983/1984 (his best rated league season in Italy)

with Zico
+ 40 Points in 24 Matches (1.67 Points per Game)
Before his injury
+54.5, 20 Matches = (2.72 Points per Game)

without Zico
- 23.4 Points in 6 Matches (- 3.9 Points per Game)


==> Maradona 1984/1985 (his best rated season in Italy)

Maradona +33.5 in 30 matches (1.12 Points per Game)


==> Platini 1983/1984 (his best rated season in Italy)

with Platini
+ 1 Point in 28 Matches (0.04 Points per Game)

without Platini
+4 Points in 2 Matches (2 Points per Game)

Udinese without Zico lost many points (-23.9) while in Napoli we can't estimate if without Maradona they could perform better (like Juventus in 83/84 without Platini) or worse (Udinese without Zico), remember 1 year before Maradona arrived, Napoli was ranked as the 5º in the League in ClubElo ahead of Italian average and had a underachiaver season in 1983/1984, but probably had some more potential than let's say Udinese that 1 year before Zico arrived was the 15º team in the League. http://clubelo.com/1982-07-01/Udinese.


and after...(one season is too few to analyze the big picture.)

Platini ended his carrer at Juventus in 5/1987, this 3 years after: http://clubelo.com/1990-07-01/Juventus
Maradona ended his carrer in Napoli in 6/1991, this is 3 years after: http://clubelo.com/1994-07-01/Napoli
Zico ended his carrer in Udinese in 5/1985, this is 3 years after: http://clubelo.com/1988-07-01/Udinese

It seems that Udinese struggled more after Zico than Napoli after Maradona and specially Juventus after Platini.

 

^

On the contrary, it matters. That's much the point even.

 

So doesn't matter the fact that Platini didn't really improved Juventus according ClubElo in the 83/84 Serie A campaign (Juventus without him got more Elo points match by match) and had a 6.84 rating (with let's say Juventus squad being rated as 6.50 on average), being outplayed by his own teammates in 17 out of 28 matches he played according GS....

vs Zico who really improved Udinese in his first season (the team that was a disaster without him on the pitch), improved more so than Maradona in the best rated season of an Serie A player of all time, with 6.77 rating (just 0.07 less than Platini) in a 6.20 squad being the man of Udinese in 16 out 24 matches (GS) and with more winning goals of the league than any other?

Here we talk about the importance of being on a good team.... at very least Zico had better GoalImpact proportionally than Platini that season relative their teams.

Anyway, my point was to say that Zico was still a world class in 1983/1984 (which combines for at least 10.5 seasons as a world-class player), which would be a relatively long time, from being the Best ranked player of the Campeonato Brasileiro in 1974 to the arguably the Best Player of the 1983/1984 Italia Serie A and that playing on a disastrous team.

 

As you say, many of the prizes given at the end of the year refer theoretically to the calendar year, although, I believe that, in practice, they reward the merits during the season, in this case the 2017-18 and the World Cup. Therefore, I think they are very valid references to place the most outstanding players of the season and Kanté was without a doubt.


Against Immobile is that his team did not play the Champions League nor its selection the World Championship. In his favor, his good performances in Serie A and in the Europa League. In my particular ranking, it appears in the Top 100, but very far from the first 23.

 

I mean, if France football separated goalkeeprs from the outfield players as for their "Etoile d'Or" ranking at some point, it was for the goalkeeprs winning points for their average team "won" the whole thing systematically in the mid-90s : for exemple Piveteau (Le Havre), Revault (Le Havre)... Revault then failed in Paris, Piveteau was very good at Monaco too until one point but it is not the same environment fore sure, there's way less pressure over here. Then, I hope that nobody will bring this that Zico had all the population from the city of Udine on his back.

Juventus hired Platini to win the European Cup, not to improve their Elo numbers in the Serie A. At the time, generally, when a club targeted the European Cup win, it was at the expense of the league results. Most of all in a league as competitive as the Serie A where you can have the luxury to overlook even only a couple of matches if you want to be the champion in the end.
Zico never shown very good physical shape in Italy (so he was hardly world-class) but he scored goals and that's it. His duel with Platini was about the canonniere title, period. Platini was at his peak and Zico was on the wane. Zico still had that fantastic allure and technique though, that never really disappear, most of all when you're not really finished (so I was just saying that he was on the wane, not finished) and from that it's in everbody eye/ heart to chose his favorite (if it's not them who chose you). But, no, in all honesty, I don't think that Platini and Zico played exactly on the same stage at that time so to speak (though playing in the same national league). Platini : main stage. Zico : not. He quite rapidly went back to Brazil, in his club of Flamengo. Wich was like a retirement. He was always injured since then. He probably continued to score some goals though. Good.

That's what I mean. Now if you want to have him as world-class during 10 years from 1974 (?) to 1984, as you want.
That's because Platini was from '76 to '86 perhaps?

 

To be honest I agree with you, I indeed think Zico wasn't at his best alrealdy in the first part of 1983, but he still kept a little of his form until March of 1984 (Round 21), then he had some injuries, lost his form and in sequence had more injuries. He even played injured the 1986 World Cup, although for other reasons. After March of 1984, Zico was only more or less recovering his physical form in 1987, indeed out of his peak, still worth (won de Bola de Prata etc)



Here the results of Zico by physical phase and Udinese with Zico and without Zico in the Italian Serie A period.




Until March of 1984 he was earning an average of 3 Elo Game point per match.
Maradona with a Napoli in a similar stage - but with a team with more potential imo - in his 1984/1985 season - where he got the highest rating ever in the Serie A according the 4 sources combined, only managed to win the average of 1.1 Elo Game point per game, and Zico did it really improving his team with excellent ratings and with winning goals.

in that season I think he was clearly World Class and still a impactful guy, arguably he was the best player of the 83-84 Serie A when fit (too bad that was just for a few time), he wasn't only for the capocannoniere, but also for the award of best player of the league, and he won the title in some publications as the best for a much less team with a much worse support cast. It is like nowadays someone of Getafe put out performances rated on par with Messi making solid impact while his team is in decline.

But yes, he goes back to Brazil because Udinese besides other things and unlike what Edinho told him earlier, didn't have a real project to improve the team, as was proved later with the relegation... and Flamengo was always there.

Not sure about Platini but Zico won the Bola de Ouro trophy by Placar as the best rated Brazilian Player in 1974 and then he stand out in the Campeonato Brasileiro and the Carioca League, year after year, too bad there is no Club Elo for South American teams.

 

Well, we have 8 differences:

Busquets, de Gea, Eriksen, Godín, Isco, Kanté, ter Stegen and Umtiti for Agüero, Coutinho, Firmino, Immobile, Kroos, Mané, Ramos and Suárez.

Apart from Kroos and Ramos, already bounded, I've doubts about Suárez.

I left him out in the 2017 list, although he scored more goals then, but in this season he seems to be perceived much better, from less to more (a slow start of campaign in La Liga, but a big increase in his level and productivity since October) to finish a single goal behind Cristiano Ronaldo with 2 penalty kicks less. On the other hand, he again had a discreet season in the UEFA Champions League and although he didn't do badly in the World Cup, I feel that he was oveshadowed by Cavani.

Don't you think the cases of Mané or Firmino are solid by the UEFA Champions League? What about Agüero on the average per minute in the FA Premier League?

 

In the first half of the season, of the so-called new "Fab Four" of Liverpool, I think Coutinho was the main star of his team with Salah nearby, but in a supporting role. He began to be perceived superiorly after the departure of the Brazilian.

Yes, Hazard would probably be ahead of De Bruyne in the calendar year.

In the regular season I think Hazard was really very good at club level, but perhaps half a step behind his best seasons with Chelsea away from competing the title in England or Europe (something that also affects Kanté, I think).

For me Hazard was the best player in the World Cup, but I don't think that compensates the overall difference in favor of his compatriot De Bruyne.

 

Yes, it's not a bad reference. Actually, this season I began to review each case according to the order of the Guardian's Top 100, but I notice that most of the time there is a mixture in the emphasis given to what was done in the previous season and sometimes more to the one in progress without any wink to what was done in the previous year.

I think that for specific cases their evaluations are very different.

What stopped me about Kanté was that it was not a great year for Chelsea and I expected a special distinction about him, which he didn't get (no nomination in the ESM Team of the Month, not standing choice in the UEFA Champions League and not elected in the PFA Team of the Year (I even noticed that in several independent reviews many preferred Fernandinho over Kanté in his specific role)).

He was starter of the world champion team, but there was not solid consensus about him as stellar figure of the tournament (not elected in the official team of the tournament, although no defensive midfielder was and he was elected in some independent elections).

From that point of view his case seems me doubtful for me and I don't clarify so well reviewing him in game. His averages also don't seem so extraordinary (24th in FA Premier League and 68th in UEFA Champions League according to WhoScored).

In my own perception I think Immobile was consistent and showed world-class level this season to step hard as the best player in Serie A, but not only was a figure and top scorer of UEFA Europa League, but his record is really very effective because of the first 7 games he entered as a substitute in 4 and didn't play in 3.

He didn't have the same impact with Italy, but at club level he scored 41 goals in 47 games and I've noticed that many independent criteria coincide in pointing him out as one of the best players of the season in Europe (Sportskeeda chose him in his ideal team of the European season in terms of local leagues (de Gea, Alex Sandro, Otamendi, Piqué, Kimmich, Busquets, Kroos, De Bruyne, Messi, Immobile, Salah)).

 

For the 2017-2018 season, we used a rating system consisting of supplementing the scores of Whoscored and Sofascore with the minutes played and the presence of each player in their teams and in the different competitions, as well as the results obtained in them. To the results of these averages I add a specific value due to the nominations of the ESM, making a classification based on the presence of each one in the team of the season and the month and with the final accumulation of votes. By the way, I've been searching for the details of the nominations for some time and I rarely see it published. If someone knows this information and can share it ...
The comparison of these two players was as follows:
Whoscored: Kanté: 27º; Inmobile: 107º.
Sofascore: Kanté: 35º; Immobile: 108º
ESM: Kanté: 76º; Immobile: 35º
Indeed, the complementary coefficient that I used in the World Championship benefited Kanté, while Immobile was harmed by the absence of his team in the Champions League and his selection in the World Championship. On the other hand, Kanté was not well valued by the specialists of the publications of the ESM, while Immobile received 8 votes in October of 2017 for a total of 9 votes in the 2017-18 season.
The truth is that depending on the scale and the merits that are taken as a reference, the season of one or the other stands out over its "adversary". Anyway, fantastic work yours and great selection in the Top 23