Cristiano Ronaldo ~ Your Favorite Player Is So Much Better!! Thread

By the same standard and token, the best and key player for Argentina is undoubtedly Mascherano in WC 2014. I'll respect you if you kept the same standard!

 

As I said, there are so much ambiguity and misleading statements in that text.. that being one of them. At no point did I or anyone suggested that a mere higher volume of passes makes Messi more valuable than Ronaldo so nobody is expecting Ronaldo to match Messi in passing volume in a more counter-attacking-like systems, nor is that in and of itself valuable.

Also worth notting is that counter-attacking system is a bit stretch to say for Real, but for the sake of argument.

Another way to look at how deep players play and how much they contribute to their teams in build up is to see percantage of passes they make for their team.

For example, in 2018 la liga, Ronaldo has averaged 22-ish passes per game, while Real was averaging 524. That means Ronaldo was included in 4,2% passes of his team. Messi the same season was averaging 42,5 passes per game in a team that averaged 557 passes per game or 7,6% of team's passes.

I don't care enough about this to run numbers through all seasons and competitions and compare it to their temmates.which would give as a more whole picture of their invovlment in build up (aka playing "deep"), but the same thing will surely be seen throughout majority of their career.

You will say that most of those passes are short, pointless passes, which is not true. Messi is one of the most forward-minded passes there is and we know he averages incredible amount of progressive passes by any standard.

This agenda you are trying to put forth is hilarious. Trying to make us seem crazy by cherry-picked data and interpretation and shuting any discussion on the topic while shouting that it is a fact, when in reality, we've all been watching them for years and years and years and know who plays deeper and who is more involved in build up.

Also, nobody cares what did Ronaldo do pre-2007. So you dont bring up that period of time.

You are yet to explain how is Ronaldo producing a greater quality and output in general than Messi?

 

Ronaldo transitioned to a central forward role progressively from around 2015-16. By 2017-18 he was a center forward - in that position in his old age, including his Manchester United stint, he was player a more forward position than Messi. But this is a blip in his entire career and when the man was old and past his prime. Ronaldo spent his Manchester United days and the bigger part of his Real career in far deeper positions than Messi.
The change in position is literally supported by every piece of data you can think of:

1. Match footage
2. Transfermarkt line-ups
3. Expert / tactical analysis
4. Statistics provider analysis
5. Heatmap data
6. Touch data
7. Shot data

All this stuff, shows that there was an evolution.
As for Messi he took a different trend,
He started as a right forward then transitioned to a false nine, then eventually back to some right-forward hybrid, and spent his last season at PSG as some kind of false 9/AM hybrid.

 

Not quite. Messi didn’t miss the final, and he didn’t miss a crucial penalty to win a game. If he’d done those things and Argentina won the tournament, then I’d probably agree! Was even going to make the same analogy in my prior post!

 

If the criteria for a poor performance is missing a crucial penalty, the number of tournaments for Messi we would have to discount is extroardinary.
Ronaldo did not miss the final, he was injured and missed most of it.
Messi performed badly, was shut-down, and missed a key chance in the 2014 WC final, all the while not providing a single decisive moment after Switzerland Round of 16 assist!
There is no argument to be made that Ronaldo was more important in progression as an offensive player - and in any case, both teams depended on big defensive performances - in Argentina's case moreso and certainly by the criteria you applied Mascherano was the better player! Stay consistent man!

 

That is not true. Messi is "forward". Lol. Messi averaged higher percantage of his team's passes.

Rationalize that? How play who played deeper was less involved in his team's passes than player who played his entire career as forward?

And again, before you say it. If Barcelona makes a lot of "pointless passes" so does everyone do that including Messi and that would have no affect on the percantage of team passes, but as I said, Messi is more direct and forward minded than virtually any teammate he has ever had.

The counter attacking teams argument doesn't explain why Ronaldo has lesser percantage of passes compared to his own team.

"All these data supports that"

No, your (mis)interpretation of data supports your claim that goes completely against a consensus in football.

And how do you extrapolate how deep Messi and Ronaldo played based on their shots? You are just saying stuff. Ronaldo played deeper because he would more often send shots from 30+ meters into sky or what?

Do you understand what FALSE nine even means? Messi was literally not playing as a forward to the point they (and including you now) called him false nine.

"A blip in his career" is everything past 2011-ish? But 2007-2010 period is majority of his career. And at best, in that period of time Ronaldo can be argued to play similarily as deep as Messi was for majority of his career. At no point Ronaldo was very build-up involved player for his team.

 

False nine is a forward. You need to read more.
No, I gave you the numbers. 2015-16. I think you've inserted yourself in the discussion and have failed to read all the posts and heatmaps provided. This is tiresome - so I am not going to go through the exercise again.

 

This is just a straw man. I never called the performance “poor.” I very explicitly said the opposite multiple times. Please read over my posts on this and reconsider.

And you know exactly what I mean about the Euro 2016 final. As for saying “there is no argument to be made that Ronaldo was more important in progression as an offensive player,” I absolutely agree except I have a feeling you mean the opposite of what I’m agreeing to.

The bottom line is this: Argentina didn’t win WC 2014. If they had won and Messi had barely played in the final and had missed a late penalty to win an earlier game, then there’d certainly be a solid argument that someone like Mascherano was the “main protagonist” in their win. As it is, none of that happened. They didn’t win the tournament, the team didn’t win the final essentially without him, and Messi didn’t miss a late penalty to win a game. And even without all that stuff, you have on many occasions still tried to argue that Mascherano was the key player for Argentina in WC 2014 and yet you completely disagree about Pepe in Euro 2016, so I’m not sure why you’re the one telling me to be consistent.

 

so then winger is a forward as well and Ronaldo was forward since 2008-ish

 

FYI, it’s worth noting by the way that the heat maps don’t even actually really support the point SayWhatIWant is making. See the time lapse of their heat maps from 2009-2010 onwards:

Messi: mapa de calor desde a temporada 2009-10 até o jogo mais recente pelo @FCBarcelona (2021) / #Messi: heatmap since 2009-10 until his most recent game for #Barcelona @TeamMessi pic.twitter.com/8AStCqLMi5

— Pedro Pereira (@data_pedro) July 13, 2021

Mapa de calor do Cristiano Ronaldo desde a sua chegada ao #RealMadrid (2009) até o jogo mais recente pela #Juventus (2020) / @Cristiano's heatmap since his arrival at Real Madrid until his most recent game for Juventus #CristianoRonaldo #CR7 pic.twitter.com/7XuIKGA6KC

— Pedro Pereira (@data_pedro) December 15, 2020

At best, they support an argument that the heat maps don’t look super different in terms of depth in Ronaldo’s earlier Real Madrid years (but definitely are further forward in his later Real Madrid years). But that’s despite the tactical differences of the teams, so in the context a similar looking depth in a heat map would suggest Ronaldo was playing further forward. I’ve actually already presented this evidence, but it kind of just got ignored in favor of stating that the heat maps support this argument about Ronaldo.

 

Yes, but while Messi was a center forward/false nine, Ronaldo was playing as a left forward - which is further from the box and zone 14 - whereas Messi was playing much closer and had far more possessions in danger zones.

 

The heatmaps provided literally prove my point. Do we need to re-do this exercise? It's tiresome lessthanjake. You're better than this.

 

No, but you have made arguments repeatedly that Messi had an absolutely great WC 2014 and that he was the deserved winner of the Golden Ball.
There is an evident contradiction in your words here.
Either he was the best player and the sort of performance that he provided in the context of a defensive masterclass from Argentina (no goal contribution beside the assist vs switzerland! in round of 16) or Mascherano was the better, key player. If the criteria that obviates Ronaldo from being the key player in Euro 2016 (there is an argument if you wish to emphasize the defensive contributions as the primary driver of their run!), then by the same token you cannot argue for Messi's performance in WC 2014 and will have to change your position henceforth.
I think the latter is probably closer to the truth.

 

I think this is an example of you seeing what you want to see. Given those heat maps and the difference in tactical system (not to mention that Messi produces more “dribbles,” which go down as “touches” further up the pitch than he received it, since a dribble is an “event”), I think this pretty strongly supports the notion that Messi actually played deeper. As does the percent-of-the-team’s-passes data that @Sexy Beast referred to. As does the eye test from having watched these players. You’re latching onto certain pieces of information, refusing to engage in any discussion of the context of that information or to look at any other pieces of information, and just shouting into the void that you’re right, when everyone can plainly see you’re not.

 

You’re just abstracting things to the highest level of generality and refusing to engage in details that clearly distinguish the two situations you’re seeking to compare. Again, if Messi had basically not played in the finals and had missed a crucial penalty, and Argentina had actually won WC 2014, then maybe Messi wouldn’t have been the “main protagonist” overall. That’s not what happened, though. And, frankly, if Portugal had lost the Euro finals, then maybe it’d make sense to call Ronaldo the main protagonist overall in their Euro finals run. But basically not playing in the finals while your defense carries the match is a huge deal (especially in the context of the finals being by far the hardest opponent of the tournament for them) that has a major effect on who was the “main protagonist” overall. The question of “main protagonist” might’ve been close before the finals, but the finals win tipped the scales decisively away from Ronaldo. If Messi had gotten injured early in the WC 2014 finals and Argentina had nevertheless won, then perhaps the same would be true there, but that’s not what happened.

 

Well, I know that already cuze Ive been watching those heatmaps on per season basis while it was happening.

It is clear that there was a substantial period of time when Ronaldo was much more forward than Messi was at his most forward days which was 2013-2014 period (id have guessed that purely based on eye test).

Heatmaps are also scaled based on player's number of touches and not some overall scale. All the red parts are quite misleading in a sense that Ronaldo wasnt really that active all over the pitch. Messi's yellowish parts are often equivalent of Ronaldo's redish parts.

Also heatmaps are using gradient like approach to smoothen action zones creating an illusion of where touches actually happened.

For example, if player had many touches in the left halfspace and the right halfspace but no touches inbetween those two zones, heatmap would still imply high activity in those central zones.

Ronaldos heatmaps indeed were more scattered across the pitch which, coupled with this scale and gradient, gives a misleading perception of where and how often he was involved in play.

Even excluding that and tactical aspects, as you said, it cant be concluded that Ronaldo was playing deeper or as deep as Messi based on those videos.

Messi playing more centrally doesnt mean he had easier chances to do something. Quite contrary, central zones are the most occupied and defended areas of the pitch (precisely for the reason youve said. It has the highest potential for danger) and therefore the most difficult area to make a difference.

Teams are willing to give space and time to opposition on the flanks and are focused on defending central areas. That is why teams play with 2, 3 central defenders, 2, 3 central midfielders and not 3 fullbacks.

Messis ability to recieve passes in danger zones and to quickly react to complex dynamics creating chaos is the exact reason why he is special and has capacity to play there.

If central zones are the most dangerous area on the pitch where player can make most damage to opposition, why didnt managers put Ronaldo there?

It would seem rather obvious to put a complete player that Ronaldo apparently is that can do everything anyone ever attempted in football in those central zones.

He wasnt put there for the same reason why he would never be able to be a central midfielder and wasnt as involved in build up as much, because he cant play there.

All of what you are saying implies that Ronaldo was vastly underutilized in his entire career by being forced to play deeper, in more difficult parts of the pitch, for some unkown reason.

The reason was probably that all of managers in his career had an agenda in making Messi seem better than him, so they forced him to play in more difficult positions.

 

@Sexy Beast

FYI, we actually have team and player passing data from WhoScored for 2009-2010 onwards:

If we look at Messi’s per-90-minute passing numbers in La Liga as a percent of Barcelona’s per-game passing numbers in La Liga, from 2009-2010 to 2020-2021, Messi averaged making 8.23% of his team’s passes (and, for what it’s worth, it was 7.88% in the years Xavi started, and 8.49% after that). And, at PSG, it was 9.63% on average. If we look at Ronaldo’s numbers in the league for the same time period, he averaged 6.37% of his team’s passes. Of course I can hear the dissent now: As has already been asserted, “Ronaldo transitioned to a central forward role progressively from around 2015-16.” Okay, even though that’s just conveniently exempting a large swath of Ronaldo’s career from this analysis (and the need to do so genuinely defeats the point being made), let’s look at just 2009-2010 to 2014-2015. In that time period, Ronaldo averaged making 7.14% of his team’s passes. And he never even had a season that was as high as Messi’s average! So, even controlling for Barcelona making more passes as a team, Messi was more involved in his team’s passing.

That’s just the domestic league though. What about the Champions League? Well, in the Champions League, we see an even bigger difference. From 2009-2010 to 2020-2021, Messi averaged making 9.09% of his team’s passes. That was up to 10.04% at PSG. Meanwhile, from 2009-2010 to 2020-2021, Ronaldo averaged making 6.52% of his team’s passes. And if we instead look at just 2009-2010 to 2014-2015, Ronaldo averaged 7.37% of his team’s passes. Again, Ronaldo never even had a single campaign where he had as high a percent of his team’s passes as Messi averaged overall.

_____________________

So where does this leave us? Well, I’d just pose a general question:

If Player A played on a notably more possession-based team than Player B, and Player A played a deeper role than Player B, what would we expect to see in the data?

Well, we’d probably expect to see the following: (1) Player A’s teams would have a lot more passes than Player B’s teams; (2) Player A would nevertheless have a higher percent of his team’s passes than Player B; (3) heat maps might capture a somewhat similar looking average depth—because possession-based tactics systematically produce touches further forward than more counter-attacking tactics do and that fact would counteract Player A’s deeper role when it comes to where on the pitch their touches occurred—but would likely indicate that a higher percent of Player B’s touches were in the box; and (4) our eye test would tell us that Player A was positioned on his team’s forward line a lower percent of the time than Player B.

And what do you know? We see all of that here! Messi’s teams had significantly more passes, but Messi still had a notably higher percent of his team’s passes. The heat maps capture fairly similar looking depth, despite Ronaldo playing in a less possession-based system. The heat maps and touch data reflect that a higher percent of Ronaldo’s touches were in the box. And our eye test tells us that Messi was positioned on his teams’ forward line a lower percent of the time than Ronaldo. It’s honestly just gaslighting to suggest otherwise on this topic. Not to mention that, on its face, the argument explicitly requires ignoring a huge portion of Ronaldo’s career (including periods where he was very successful, won Champions Leagues, Ballon D’ors, etc.) simply because those time periods aren’t convenient for the argument.

 

That would be an interesting way of comparing players outside Messi and Ronaldo conversation. I would assume that Xavi would be at a very high end of that stat. Kroos as well. Pirlo, etc.

But surely some interesting names would pop up as well from non-posession based teams (maybe Rodri in Atletico Madrid?) Or historically.

I wonder how accurately percantage of team passes correlate with involvment in build up.

Then it can be expanded onto percantage of forward passes, etc.

It would surely give an unique insight into involvment and playing style.

 

I am not sure I really understand what you mean by "more dribbles". Your eye test is completely wrong and makes no sense from a basic tactical perspective. Ronaldo did become a striker progressively from 15-16 and was fully a center-forward by 17-18.
He certainly did not start his Real Madrid career that way (as everybody knows).
If your analysis is restrained to comparing Messi as a false-nine to right forward with Ronaldo in a 3ish year period at the tail-end of his career - it's not pertinent analysis.


"So, even controlling for Barcelona making more passes as a team, Messi was more involved in his team’s passing."

This has never been a question.

 

FYI, I actually did a similar type of analysis here:

https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/p...6-vs-messi-2022.2123982/page-43#post-41169510

That used FBref data to analyze the percent of a team’s passes in the middle-third and attacking-third different players had. That specific data only exists from 2017-2018 onwards, so it doesn’t include older players, but we can see there the type of curve you get depending on player type/role. Out of the players I used in the analysis, we had a deeper metronomic midfielder (Kimmich) at the top (note: doing the calculations now, I can say that if I’d included Kroos, he’d have been at the top above Kimmich, with like 15.17%). We then had box-to-box guys like Modric and Rakitic below that, with the attacking midfielder types of players just below that (and Messi being near the top of that group). And then we see a drop off and more involved forwards like Benzema and Ronaldo, followed by even more fully dedicated strikers like Lewandowski at the bottom.

Of course, it’s not the same thing as the WhoScored analysis—which is about passes instead of touches, and isn’t limited to just middle-third and attacking-third—but I think it goes to the question to some degree and is analysis I’ve already done, so I thought I’d flag it.

 

Okay, so this requires understanding the exact details of what touch maps actually are. “Touches” include all “events” a player is involved in. A “dribble” is an event. So if a player receives the ball and carries the ball forward and then gets a “dribble” past an opponent, that “dribble” is a “touch” which then goes onto a heat map (note that, without a “dribble” a carry is not an “event”). Since Messi has higher “dribbles” stats, he has more of those “touches” in his heat map, and those types of touches will very often not reflect Messi receiving the ball in a forward position but rather him having gotten the ball relatively deep and carrying the ball forward and then produced a dribble “event” further forward.

If that’s not in question, then what are you arguing? How is it that Ronaldo was less involved in his team’s passing but played deeper? Was Ronaldo just sitting there in deep positions but ghosting around and uninvolved? And if so, is that good?

The bottom line is that you’re talking out both sides of your mouth on this. You simultaneously argue that Ronaldo played deeper than Messi, while also arguing that Messi creating midfield overloads wasn’t as valuable as Ronaldo sitting on the defensive line making runs and pushing the defensive line back. These are not remotely consistent arguments.

 

This analysis is poor and shallow.
Ronaldo played at Real Madrid as a left forward from 2010-11 to 2014-15. By 2015-16 he was being transitioned to a center forward, especially when Benzema was not on the pitch. By 17-18, he was fully a center forward in most matches.
This means in the tail end of his Real career, he occupied advanced positions in the box. His shot composition changed completely as did his ball receptions.
That version of Ronaldo was not that consistently participatory in creative duties.

Your touch-map discussion is obfuscating and inaccurate. This is true for some maps, but not all. Some maps is purely ball-reception. As for the whole argument, it falls flat on its face - you would have to show that Messi is producing pre-dribble carries, post-dribble carries from deep at such a significant rate that it significantly skews the touch data. It doesn't. So there is no point in discussing this. We know that Ronaldo in 2009-10 had the most mileage with the ball, despite dribbling less than Messi. These are carries that advance the ball irrespective of whether he beats a man. In fact, Messi's carrying capacity declined heavily in latter years - though he maintained his dribbling volume, he did not take advantage of it to the same degree. This is a waste of an argument, that I won't be addressing further and obfuscates the dialogue. A red-herring.

Messi played centrally as a false nine. Naturally, he will see far more of the ball than a player on the wing (see Iniesta vs Xavi for example). That Messi had more touches was never much of a question - and an argument that Messi in a central position is more productive / effective because he has a 1-2% higher proportion of touch volume is a very poor argument. And has nothing to do with being deep. Ronaldo was deep on the wing. We know and NEVER argued as to who had more touches overall or as a proportion of his team's. That was always Messi, but I struggle to see how this is a measure of field depth, productivity, and quality.

 

First of all, making up 1-2% more of a team’s entire passing volume is actually significant and reflective of a serious difference in role. For reference, the average percent of the team’s passes Ronaldo had was just 1.64% higher before 2015-2016 compared to from 2015-2016 onwards. And you’ve talked about a significant role difference there. There is simply a meaningful difference between Messi and Ronaldo in that regard.

Anyways, it’s hard to understand your point here. Again, you simultaneously argue that Ronaldo played deeper than Messi while also arguing that Messi creating midfield overloads wasn’t as valuable as Ronaldo sitting on the defensive line making runs and pushing the defensive line back. These are not remotely consistent arguments, and you really cannot make both at once. So which is it?

And to the extent you’re abandoning the sitting-on-the-defensive-line stuff, and your argument is basically just that Ronaldo played as deep as Messi but was still less involved, then how is this a good argument for Ronaldo? I think you’re just losing the plot here a bit. The whole point being made about Messi playing deeper is that he was providing more value outside of scoring. Your argument basically now is that Ronaldo somehow played as deep or deeper than Messi but still wasn’t actually nearly as involved in his team’s play. What point do you think you’re making? The ultimate issue is one of value outside of scoring. Whether Messi is providing more value outside of scoring because he plays deeper or whether it’s because Ronaldo is ghosting in deep wing positions, Messi is deriving more value either way!

You also just completely gloss over the fact that your argument explicitly requires us to exempt huge swaths of Ronaldo’s career from the analysis. Like, apparently 2015-2016 onwards doesn’t count for Ronaldo? That’s an interesting position to take. Ultimately, the caveats you make to your own argument are self-defeating. It’s basically “Ronaldo didn’t play further forward than Messi if we exclude the bunch of years—including prime years where he won the Ballon D’or—where he absolutely played further forward than Messi.” Even with those caveats, the argument stumbles, but the need for the caveats in the first place is very telling and is self-defeating.

And it’s especially interesting when we map this on to other arguments you make where you certainly include those further-forward years when it’s convenient for you. For instance, when you compare stats in Champions League QF-onwards matches, do you cut out from the analysis the years where you admit Ronaldo played much further forward than Messi? No, you don’t, even though Ronaldo’s goalscoring record in those matches was unsurprisingly substantially higher in those years than it was before that. For you, those years count if it helps Ronaldo but definitely shouldn’t count if it won’t. Apparently, when we compare these players’ scoring numbers we should include years where we all agree Ronaldo played much further forward, but then we should compare the depth of their role (and therefore also, to some degree, the extent of their non-scoring value) without reference to those further-forward years. It’s an obvious sleight of hand, and goes back to the frequent tactic of trying to create a Frankenstein version of Ronaldo.

 

Ronaldo did not play as deep. He played deeper on average on a whole-career basis, and certainly in their primes.
I never realized "deep" was equated with % of a team's passes. I must have missed that insight.
How is this a serious point?
If we are going to discuss respective contributions - that is an entirely different discussion.
I do not have the stats in front of me, but Messi's percent share of passes likely increased over time. It is certainly not a measure of depth, when we know that Messi's most participatory season was 2009-10 in deeper zones.

 

This is a non-response to essentially everything I said. So I’ll repeat a few things:

1. Again, you simultaneously argue that Ronaldo played deeper than Messi while also arguing that Messi creating midfield overloads wasn’t as valuable as Ronaldo sitting on the defensive line making runs and pushing the defensive line back. These are not remotely consistent arguments, and you really cannot make both at once. So which is it?

2. Ultimately, the caveats you make to your own argument are self-defeating. It’s basically “Ronaldo didn’t play further forward than Messi if we exclude the bunch of years—including prime years where he won the Ballon D’or—where he absolutely played further forward than Messi.” Even with those caveats, the argument stumbles, but the need for the caveats in the first place is very telling and is self-defeating.

3. And it’s especially interesting when we map this on to other arguments you make where you certainly include those further-forward years when it’s convenient for you. For instance, when you compare stats in Champions League QF-onwards matches, do you cut out from the analysis the years where you admit Ronaldo played much further forward than Messi? No, you don’t, even though Ronaldo’s goalscoring record in those matches was unsurprisingly substantially higher in those years than it was before that. For you, those years count if it helps Ronaldo but definitely shouldn’t count if it won’t. Apparently, when we compare these players’ scoring numbers we should include years where we all agree Ronaldo played much further forward, but then we should compare the depth of their role (and therefore also, to some degree, the extent of their non-scoring value) without reference to those further-forward years. It’s an obvious sleight of hand, and goes back to the frequent tactic of trying to create a Frankenstein version of Ronaldo.

And, no we definitely do not “know that Messi's most participatory season was 2009-10 in deeper zones.” You seem to just think that because you don’t have any idea how to read and contextualize heat maps. I’d recommend that you read the above post from @Sexy Beast which should explain some things about heat maps to you: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/c...h-better-thread.2011827/page-24#post-41746957. I’ve also made similar points to you repeatedly, so you could peruse those too if you want more reading on this.

Along with the 2013-2014 season, the 2009-2010 season was Messi’s least participatory season in the data we have. You’re reading heat maps without understanding that they’re relative to the player’s touches, not some overall scale. If I played an entire game and my only touch was in the middle of the pitch to start the game and then I just laid down and fell asleep the rest of the game, my heat map would show a bright red area in the middle of the pitch, but it wouldn’t actually mean I was more participatory in deep areas than someone else. If Messi is dropping deep less and is playing more on the shoulder of the last defender than other years, then he’ll have fewer overall touches (which he did, in 2009-2010) and, in that scenario, a lower number of touches in deep areas could easily look darker on a heat map because heat maps are relative to a player’s own number of touches and the times he was playing further up weren’t as often producing touches. But this would neither reflect Messi being more participatory nor playing deeper. And we know as a factual matter that Messi was progressing the ball out of deep areas much more often in later years (as per the “deep possession value” data I provided). You misreading Messi’s heat maps this way is emblematic of you misreading Ronaldo’s heat maps in comparison to Messi. You just don’t know how to read and contextualize the information you’re talking about. At a fundamental level, someone who is much less involved wasn’t somehow more participatory in deep areas just because their heat map has dark spots in deep areas. And, I think you need to understand and acknowledge that before discussion can move forward.