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

LOL, we literally have hard data showing that he had a substantially larger role in the team’s progression and build-up play in later years and that he simultaneously had a substantially smaller role as a recipient of passes in dangerous areas in later years. We also have eyes, so we all saw this. Obviously, the focus of his role changed in later years (largely due to the midfield deterioration), in a way that was materially less conducive to scoring (as demonstrated very clearly by being the receiver of substantially less net possession value than before) while simultaneously being more implicated in progression/build-up (as demonstrated by the stats conclusively showing he had a substantially larger role in the team’s progression and build-up). Try to save face as much as you want, but you’re wrong and that’s already been completely demonstrated.
____________________

Anyways, I have some interesting data on an unrelated issue:

Specifically, I have looked into how these two players did in club matches against teams that had a higher elo rating than their team in the given season (as shown by http://elofootball.com/). I pulled stats on those games from Transfermarkt (so I’ll note that this uses wide rules assists) and, where available, got ratings for each match from WhoScored. I’ll list several different time periods for each, mostly because it’s not clear whether we should cut off the last few years where these guys have been old. Obviously, these guys haven’t actually played a ton of matches like this because their teams have often been so good, but we’re looking at samples of around 30 total matches for both.

Messi against teams with higher elo rating from 2008-2009 through 2020-2021

Goals per game: 0.65
Assists per game: 0.29
Goal Contributions per Match: 0.94
Average WhoScored rating: 7.83

Messi against teams with higher elo rating from 2008-2009 through 2022-2023

Goals per game: 0.57
Assists per game: 0.24
Goal Contributions per Match: 0.81
Average WhoScored Rating: 7.65

Ronaldo against teams with higher elo rating from 2007-2008 through 2020-2021

Goals per game: 0.47
Assists per game: 0.07
Goal Contributions per Match: 0.53
Average WhoScored Rating: 7.22

Ronaldo against teams with higher elo rating from 2007-2008 through 2022-2023

Goals per game: 0.59
Assists per game: 0.07
Goal Contributions per Match: 0.66
Average WhoScored Rating: 7.17

We see that Messi has pretty clearly been the superior performer in club games against higher-elo teams.

NOTE: WhoScored ratings don’t exist for all of these games, so the average WhoScored rating listed is just for the games we have (which is the vast majority of them). For reference, though, in the relevant games WhoScored doesn’t have data for, Messi has over twice the goals+assists per match that Ronaldo does. So it’s highly likely that the gap in their WhoScored ratings would be a good bit higher if we had ratings for all the relevant matches.

NOTE 2: I should note that I think that looking at this does have inherent flaws. For instance, one flaw is that these guys are good enough that they end up boosting their team’s elo rating a lot, so there’s of course games that aren’t counted here but where their team is only better because of them. So it’s definitely not a perfect measure of exactly when a player was playing against a superior team. However, I provide this analysis because this has been alluded to before and I think the reality is a lot different than was theorized.

 

Yes and the poster have gave the rejoinder here: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/t...o-as-best-ever.2016490/page-104#post-32361589 and you didn't respond which makes me think you had no way to refute.

I already said to you. Ronaldo making a run is using his vision to read the game and timing to create the opportunity. Those well timed and explosive penetrative runs are very valuable since the defense will stretch leading to goalscoring opportunities or opening gaps that his teammates can be taken advantage of. This is just an example of something very valuable on Ronaldo's game that doesn't account for the WhoScored rating system since WhoScored doesn't account how many penetrative runs Ronaldo did on a game.

The discussion about the games against Juve and Bayern was with SexyBeast, not with you, so it doesn't make sense for you to mention that I put up group stage matches. SexyBeast had said that Messi would do more G+A having the same number of games against these teams so I showed that they had the same number of games and Ronaldo did much better.The matter about KO was up to you.

Come on, first I said that Ronaldo was extremely superior from the QF onwards. Then you replied that there was no logical reason for me to withdraw from the round of 16 and that Messi had a higher WhoScored rating than Ronaldo. Then I replied that WhoScored rating system is biased towards Messi's strengths over Ronaldo and his end product were on another stratosphere. Then I showed you that Ronaldo also did far better than Messi in the games in which his team were eliminated from UCL. I also showed you that Ronaldo did far better than Messi in away games in KO stages including R16. Then you answered that I was excluding the finals. Then I included the finals and showed that Ronaldo still did far better than Messi.

You see? You're always finding excuses and when it doesn't works, then you appeal to your good and old WS ratings bullshit

 

We have some problems here because I showed you that Ronaldo and Real Madrid did Better between 14/18 than Messi and Barcelona between 08/12 so I'll give you 3 alternatives:

A) Guardiola is worse than Ancelotti and Zidane in UCL (since you said Ronaldo had more good managing)

B) Barcelona 08/12 is worse than Real Madrid 14/18 in UCL (since they needed an outstanding performance by Messi and Real Madrid didn't needed this from Ronaldo according to you)

C) Messi is worse than Ronaldo in UCL (you'll have to choose that if the previous 2 alternatives are wrong)

 

LOL, are you really now trying to substantively reprise a discussion that I had 8 years ago with a now-banned poster? The bottom line here is I didn’t say what you said I said. In fact, that poster’s response that you’re now referring to was actually the one that basically said goals and assists are all that matters. That plainly wasn’t my argument at all, and you had just acted like it had been. It wasn’t, so you were completely misrepresenting something I’d previously said. That’s the bottom line here. Trying to pivot to say that what I did actually say 8 years ago was wrong because I didn’t respond to some truly overwhelmingly long post someone replied with (which another poster literally asked me not to respond to) is a pretty wild move and has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that we were discussing your claim that I’d previously said something I didn’t actually say (or rather that you were completely misrepresenting the meaning of).

Yes, and I already explained to you multiple times that Messi is the most marked player of his generation and exerts a tremendous amount of off-ball gravity at essentially all times, such that it’s very hard to argue that Ronaldo makes more space for teammates when he’s off the ball than Messi does. Your whole argument is basically to identify value that Ronaldo provides that stats don’t account for, to assume that Messi provides no value not accounted for by stats, and to therefore conclude that Ronaldo is far superior outside of stats and that stats/ratings are therefore biased in Messi’s favor. But, of course, the assumption that Messi provides no value that’s not accounted for by stats is incredibly flawed. If anything, Messi provides more value that isn’t accounted for by stats, given his off-ball gravity, the huge effect of providing midfield overloads, and other things I’ve mentioned.

This is just you listing the various ways you’ve tried to cherry-pick things (both in terms of the matches you try to consider and considering only goals+assists), and then complaining that I’ve kept pointing out that you’re cherry-picking.

 

Posted by you:

Seems like old @lessthanjake agreed with @OffTheBallMovement until it no longer suited his purposes.
You've written extensively on the topic and called Messi's off ball a "negative".

Other nice quotes:
"The fact that Messi's movement can be quite helpful to Argentina when he is active only reinforces the fact that movement from the star attacker can be really effective, and therefore that being static is a negative. And it is undeniably true that Messi was relatively static (the fact that you can show instances in which he did make intelligent movement certainly doesn't disprove that. I'm saying that he was relatively static, not that he never moved)."
@OffTheBallMovement careful not to get bogged down in endless debates too much. My recommendation is share information with the community and keep it moving. We al appreciate it.

 

Buddy, I provided Messi's entire touch history. And provided touch history in big matches across his career.
It is not even remotely arguable that he offered less touches in build-up/midfield compared to pre 2009, and 10-11.

The assertions I asked to you to prove were:
1) Messi's touch volume in deeper zones INCREASES as Barcelona's midfield weakened.
Correction: The entire touch history DISPROVES this.
2) Messi's touch volume in deeper zones INCREASES against tough opponents
Correction: Never proven. Matches where data is available clearly suggests otherwise/opposite.
_________________


No essay, paragraph or deflection can save you. I provided the entire touch history.
This is the equivalent of what you've done:

Demonstration:
Messi 5 touches in build-up. Barcelona 10 build-ups.
50% participation

Messi 4 touches in build-up. Barcelona 7 build-ups.
57% participation


Messi 10 goals. Barcelona 30 goals.
33% participation

Messi 8 goals. Barcelona 22 goals.
36% participation


Data manipulation at its FINEST.
Anyhow, I have no reason to argue with you. I literally posted Messi's every ********ing touch.
This is more EGREGIOUS because you are on RECORD saying TOTALS matter more than PROPORTIONS/PERCENTAGES in 2 separate debates (per touch Xavi debate, G+A + dribbles + passes Messi vs Ronaldo debate when discussing that Ronaldo has less touches). By YOUR standards, YOU know better.

 

Ronaldo also have gravitational effect on defenders since his mere presence on the field also often requires extra defensive attention with the defenders having to closely mark him opening up space for other attacking players. They are equals on that regard

Messi creating an overload on midfield is a trade off since he is creating an underload on attack. He is doing things easier for the midfielders but harder for the attackers. (If the team is on a 4-3-3 playing against a 4-3-3 and Messi drops deep than you have a 4-4-2 against a 4-3-3 with 2 attackers against 4 defenders at the same time you have 4 midfielders against 3. As I said, that's a trade off)

The whole point is that Messi's major strenghts are recognized by WhoScored but no Ronaldo's. Messi opens space for his teammates with dribbling but dribbles is statistically recognized by WhoScored. Ronaldo's penetrative runs also open space for his teammates but we don't have statistical recognition for his penetrative runs. Messi doing a Key pass or a through ball is highly rewarded by WhoScored but Ronaldo creating his own space and opening a window of pass in dangerous areas isn't recognized by WhoScored. I'm sure a shot have less value than a key pass for WhoScored algorithm even one being dependent of the other. The number of touches have the same value independent of the touches being inside the box or outside so Ronaldo receiving the ball into dangerous areas has the same value as Messi receiving the ball deep with any danger. We have a category for bad controls but we don't have a category for good controls and Ronaldo's first touch headers/shots are one of his major strenghts. Ronaldo's fake runs deceiving defenders thus creating his own space does not receive recognition by WhoScored. WhoScored doesn't count xG for his ratings, etc... The most Messi major strenghts are recognized by WhoScored. The reverse is the case of Ronaldo

The next will be I bringing all KO games which Ronaldo is superior also and you saying I'm cherry picking the KO rounds and Messi have a higher WS rating or saying that UCL isn't the only competition that matters. Then you will probably say how much difficult is to win a copa del Rey.

 

I just read @EdgarAllanPoet 's post you linked. It is the most thorough dissection I have ever read online! So clear and well explained.

 

What’s your point? You can see me making points similar to that recently, including for instance arguing that the very best all-time off-ball movers move a lot. And I’ve even specifically referred back to that exact discussion with BadaBing in discussions here recently. Ultimately, if Messi moved a lot more than he does (while retaining the intelligence of his movement), then he’d provide even more off-ball value, since he’d be being marked super closely and be moving defenders even more. But that doesn’t mean he’s not still providing substantial value with space creation from being heavily marked. Indeed, in one of my posts in that discussion with BadaBing, I said the following: “I agree that Messi garners a ton of attention from the defense even without the ball. This, of course, does make it relatively easier for his teams to produce goals, even without his involvement, since it gives his teammates more space. You cannot deny, though, that it would be even better if Messi actually ran a lot.” That position is completely consistent with everything I’ve been saying in various recent discussions.

Anyways, the funny thing is that you refer back to me having a pretty heated argument where I was arguing against Messi as if that shows I’m somehow inconsistent with my views, while simultaneously often suggesting that I’m just a “Messiphile” who always insists Messi is the best at everything. Obviously that’s not the case. I provide balanced analysis regardless of player, and you’ve just demonstrated that.

LOL, of course touches (even in relatively similar areas) definitely aren’t all the same when it comes to getting touches most conducive to goalscoring (which is the main underlying issue here). It’s been conclusively proven that he was the recipient of substantially less net possession value (basically, passing into dangerous areas) in later years, while simultaneously being more implicated in the team’s ball progression. The data on this is clear. All you’re pointing out is that he also dropped deep a good deal in earlier years as well—which is something I’ve specifically pointed out too and which just goes to the point that he always provided significant value from overloading the midfield, even if he was clearly relatively more focused on being the tip of the spear in those earlier years. You’re pointing out a good thing for Messi! But there’s just no way around the data that clearly demonstrated a shift in role and a shift in the focus of his efforts and where he was deriving his value. And by the way, the idea that he might’ve still provided only similar or less net possession value with his passing in later years because the denominator is different would (1) require you to believe Barcelona had less than half the net possession value in later years compared to 2010-2011 and even like almost 50% lower net possession value even by 2014-2015, which is all just really not plausible at all; and (2) would require you to believe that the absolute amount of net possession value of passes Messi was receiving in later years was only a tiny fraction of what it was in earlier years, which would destroy your argument (since your point must ultimately be that he generally had the same opportunity to score in later years).

Of course, there’s also the fact that, regardless of his tactical role, having substantially deteriorated midfield/fullbacks obviously will also make it harder to score (especially in tough matches), as football is an 11v11 game (albeit not so much harder to score that the team having less than half the net possession value as before is remotely plausible!).

 

No, you didn’t show that Ronaldo did better in 2014-2018 than Messi did in the Guardiola era. You showed that in away CL matches in those eras, Ronaldo had more goals + assists. That’s it. The information you provided literally also showed Messi having a substantially higher average rating in those very games. Not to mention that you weren’t considering home or neutral-site matches, and in those matches in those time periods Messi has a substantial advantage in G+A per game (1.64 G+A per game for Messi vs. 1.33 G+A per game for Ronaldo) and a substantial advantage in WhoScored rating (9.38 for Messi vs. 8.16 for Ronaldo).

 

Two assertions were made:
1) Messi increases his touch volume deeper in tougher matches
2) Messi increases his touch volume deeper over time as Barcelona's midfield weakened

Neither has been demonstrated to be true. In fact, the latter is DECIDEDLY false based on his entire touch history being available.

These were made in the context of us examining his CL record against tough opponents and in away match-ups both IN and OUT of HIS and BARCELONA's prime.

"And by the way, the idea that he might’ve still provided only similar or less net possession value with his passing in later years because the denominator"

This is Derailing / Permutation of Discussion and Arguments. I never spoke about the VALUE of his passing. You are taking me to the Indian Ocean - I want to stay in the atlantic.
NPV has nothing to do with the above.

(That Messi IMPROVED his passing game over time is a DEMONSTABLE FACT. His decision-making and passing capabilities MATURED. This is NOT what we are discussing
His passing in 14/15 and playstyle became more direct.)


For the record, older Messi got more touches in the box than Prime Harry Kane from open play. That he achieves less touches than in his prime is due to decreased athletic ability and better defenses.

 

I genuinely don’t understand how you’re equating the two discussions in a way that you think logically makes sense. It’s like you’re seeing basic concepts or words in one discussion and tying them to another discussion without really thinking through it at all. In the discussions you’re talking about, my point was that we shouldn’t measure players’ quality on a per-touch basis. And I am in no way doing that here. This is a discussion of Messi’s role. I am not saying Messi was a better or worse player in one time period or the other, but rather that the focus of his role changed. And the data clearly shows that.

In any event, it doesn’t even really matter, because the percentage numbers there make it highly implausible that Messi wasn’t progressing more in later years in absolute terms (unless you think Barcelona was getting less than half the net possession value in later years), so the whole premise of the point I think you’re trying to make is silly anyways. And meanwhile, if the denominator is indeed lower in later years, then that makes the downturn in net possession value received even more stark—which is actually the most important thing here, since we’re talking about him having less opportunity to score in later years. Him having less opportunity to score is a function of both a change in role (as shown by his received passes becoming a significantly lower percentage of the team’s net possession value) and the team being less good (and therefore the team just being able to produce less in general). I’ve made both points, and your point about the denominator only essentially makes one of those points back to me.

 

@lessthanjake :
"I agree that WhoScored ratings aren’t the gospel"
"beyond that it also of course has the same issues as WhoScored and SofaScore. "
"as with WhoScored and SofaScore, the rating is ultimately just an arbitrary weighting of underlying data, and another arbitrary weighting of underlying data"

Not sure why we should be wasting our breath on a metric this poster demonstrably thinks is false. I rather not say what I think on this matter at this present time. If you want to "win" an argument on the basis of evidence that YOU yourself believe is false, then you are just wasting all our time.

@lessthanjake
Dismissed Opta's xG data for Ronaldo when it doesn't suit the argument.
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/d...er-of-all-time.2114820/page-118#post-41702489

Pointed out Opta's inconsistency gathering dribbling data
https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/p...6-vs-messi-2022.2123982/page-48#post-41176492


Dismisses Castrol and says the data is false, because OPTA is right and more "reliable" in order to SUPPORT XAVI.
(i.e. SofaScore—which IMO does use more reliable underlying data, since it’s from OPTA) has Xavi tied for #2 in the 2010 tournament and tied for #1 amongst players that actually made at least the semifinals.

 

Dude, this is just a dumb discussion. The argument is ultimately about whether Messi had the same opportunity to score in later years as he did in earlier years. I argued that he did not, and you claimed he did. The fact that there’s concrete data showing that in later years his received passes made up a substantially lower percent of the team’s total net possession value clearly demonstrates that he did not have the same opportunity to score in later years, even holding team quality constant. But, of course, as we both agree, team quality wasn’t constant, so on top of that we have the fact that the team was less good and that that also obviously gave him less of an opportunity to score. So basically, we see that both a shift in role/focus and a decrease in team quality both mean he had a lower opportunity to score.

The stuff about progression is largely a sideshow to the main point, since it merely answers the question of what he was doing instead of being in a position to receive as much net possession value. The fact that he simultaneously substantially ramped up his implication in the team’s progression just shows that he was offsetting his lesser opportunity to score by being more implicated in other ways.

 

What a hairy lie...
Messi and Barcelona between 01/01/2008 and 31/12/2012 in all UCL K.O. rounds:
30 games
26 goals
6 assists
16 wins
10 draws
4 losses
81.75 mins per G/A

Ronaldo and Real Madrid between 01/01/2014 and 31/12/2018 in all UCL K.O. rounds:
32 games
34 goals
8 assists
23 wins
4 draws
5 losses
70.05 mins per G/A

I'll ask you again. Select the correct alternative:

A) Guardiola is worse than Ancelotti and Zidane in UCL (since you said Ronaldo had more good managing)

B) Barcelona 08/12 is worse than Real Madrid 14/18 in UCL (since they needed an outstanding performance by Messi and Real Madrid didn't needed this from Ronaldo according to you)

C) Messi is worse than Ronaldo in UCL (you'll have to choose that if the previous 2 alternatives are wrong)

 

We examined Messi's numbers in his prime in CL with a prime Barcelona, and saw that his away record tanks. This is a constant pattern in his whole career. We also know he performed less well in knockouts.

Your explanation was that he substantially spends more time deeper "raising his team's level" in a way not captured by STATS or RESULTS, and this is what explains those numbers.

The argument was never whether Barcelona in 2018 was as good in relative terms to Barcelona in 2008. Anybody with half a brain knows the former is an inferior team.

We know that Messi was inferior in away matches IRRESPECTIVE of team strength.

Further, looking at his career xG data:


His xG from ?08/09 to 18/19 besides 2 outlier seasons is very stable.

This ignores the FACT that Barcelona remained a TOP Team. You are saying that Messi is INEFFECTIVE if he is NOT playing with the GOAT team. Essentially, Messi's achievements all correlate with the presence of the greatest assembled team of all time. Without it, he does not win.

The reasons why Messi's productivity went down are mainly:
1) Decreased athleticism - meaning less runs and less burst to create separation from opponents - meaning he had less capacity to dribble and create a shot in the box or play give-and-go's and get on the end of them in the box. This is the SINGLE BIGGEST reason.
His touch volume in deeper zones DECREASES with time (or remains stable). It certainly does not INCREASE. His "engine" is not busy doing something else, he just became a "less busy" and "less productive player". He adapted by becoming smarter with his passing, smarter with his moments, and improved his FK + long shot ability.
2) Restricted passing and shot portfolio. Lack of diversified options make him PREDICTABLE and organized defenses are better able to DENY him his TYPICAL goal-scoring opportunities by crowding the box. He lacks a good COUNTER to that. This is a huge reason for the drop-off. Meanwhile Ronaldo can get around that with heading for example.
3) Just better, less naive defenses.
Many teams had not adjusted to Barca's tactics from 2008-09-11/12. Inter and Chelsea paved the way, as did Mourinho's madrid. Better, more compact defending, more conservatie pressing tactics in the middle of the park to maintain limited space between defensive lines, crowding the box and giving up the right wing. Messi always cuts in predictably, by crowding the zones where he plays, he is rendered ineffective against the best teams (think Chelsea even in his prime).

 

No my friend, he has a few "excuses" saved for you like:
1) Madrid winning in UCL is a "small sample size" and "Statistical randomness". As in fluke of the universe combination of good luck, easy opponents, off form opponents, referee decisions conspired to get them 4 UCLs (now 5 without Ronaldo).

Thank me for writing it succintly, because your data is about to get BURIED with essays.

 

Okay, so let’s assume you’re right that they’re “equals on that regard” (Messi is more closely marked, but Ronaldo moves a bit more). That means that Ronaldo isn’t providing more value than Messi in terms of space creation. So that’s not an area you can point to where Ronaldo is superior outside of things stats account for.

Yes, that’s right! As I’ve said a million times, there is a trade off! The trade off is that Messi creates a midfield overload but in doing so has to take himself away from more optimal areas for him to score goals from. But goalscoring is something that’s accounted for in stats, and indeed you’re already dinging him for lesser goalscoring in certain situations. What I’m saying is that there’s this trade off you agree exists and in exchange for making himself less likely to score (something that gets accounted for in stats), Messi is providing substantial value by creating a midfield overload (something that largely doesn’t get accounted for in stats). It’s a trade off where the stats take into account the downside of the tradeoff and not the upside! It’s somewhere that Messi is providing immense value that stats don’t account for!

Ronaldo’s most major strength is goalscoring, which I assure you is recognized by WhoScored. And one of Messi’s biggest strengths is creating midfield overloads and being involved in build-up play, which isn’t really recognized much by WhoScored. Just because Messi is better overall at things WhoScored measures doesn’t mean Ronaldo must be better overall at the stuff WhoScored doesn’t measure. It only means that if you start at the assumption that Ronaldo is superior to Messi.

Where was the “hairy lie”? I actually did make a slight mistake in my reporting of Ronaldo’s numbers in non-away matches in that time period. It should’ve been 1.37 G+A per match (compared to 1.64 for Messi) and a 8.19 average WhoScored rating (compared to 9.38 for Messi). Very slightly different numbers than what I had reported in the prior post, and I very much doubt that’s what was causing you to call it a “hairy lie.” I think you were instead saying I was lying because I presented data that you didn’t like or simply wanted to be combined with other data, which is not lying and saying it is is not a very friendly way of posting.

Also, that data you provided doesn’t use the correct timeframes. You included the 2007-2008 KO-stage for Messi. The actual numbers for the Guardiola era for Messi compared to the 2013-2014 to 2017-2018 era for Ronaldo are as follows;

Messi CL KO-Stage Matches in Guardiola Era (2009-2012)

Goals: 24
Assists: 6
Games: 26
77.90 minutes per G+A
Average WhoScored Rating: 8.85

Ronaldo CL KO-Stage Matches in 2014-2018 Era

Goals: 34
Assists: 8
Games: 32
70.05 minutes per G+A
Average WhoScored Rating: 8.08

I’m pretty comfortable with Messi looking like the superior player overall in those matches, though I guess you’d just look at raw G+A numbers and say otherwise.

 

Ronaldo played 6 more KO games than Messi, while Messi got repeatedly eliminated. No human can look at those numbers and think Messi performed better. Unless you think a 0.85 WS rating difference that you qualified as "arbitrary" is more impressive than a 10 goal and 2 assist difference.

 

No, it is not a goalscoring trade-off for Messi. Dropping deep is HOW Messi scores. He needs space to accelerate and create combinations for himself.

Can Messi occupy CB in the box?
No.
Can Messi offer penalty box presence?
No.
Can Messi head the ball?
No.
Can Messi play back to goal with CBs?
No.

So the only space Messi CAN occupy is deeper. That is HOW he scores. He does not score in SPITE of dropping deep. He scores BECAUSE he drops deeper.

Let's stop acting how Messi's goalscoring profile is somehow deleterious to his goalscoring.

 

I've never said "Guardiola Era". I said "Messi and Barcelona 08/12" which is the prime of Xavi and the Spanish golden generation and corresponds to the years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 with Messi winning 4 Ballon d'Ors in a row.

I'm still waiting for you to choose one of the three alternatives. If not, I will assume that you consider them all correct

 

And this for instance is why xAG is not as good a stat as xA (something I’ve discussed recently in a different context)—there’s a difference between how good a chance is when someone received the ball and how good it was when they shot the ball. We know that Messi received the ball in less dangerous areas overall in later years, because we know his net possession value received was substantially lower. If he nevertheless converted that to fairly similar xG in the league, then it’s obviously because he happened to do a better job of taking the passes he received and turning them into high xG chances. In other words, in context with the other concrete data we have, this doesn’t suggest Messi was receiving as good of opportunities to score, but rather just suggests he happened to have done a better job at making chances from what he received. Which definitely doesn’t support your argument.

Lol, no. As with any player, though, Messi will be *more* effective and win more the better his team is. Anyways, the idea that “he does not win” without peak Barcelona is just willfully ignoring that he won many titles after that—including league titles in a league with peak Real Madrid. The Champions League is not the only competition (and even there, he almost carried a pretty mediocre Barcelona team to the Champions League in 2019).

His “engine” clearly was doing something else, as he was definitely progressing the ball more (unless you think that in later years Barcelona was progressing the ball to dangerous areas less than half as much as before, and progressing from deep areas like only around a quarter as much—which is just obviously silly).

Yeah, yeah, we get that you think all this stuff. You can shout it into the void as much as you want. But you yourself have also said that most goals these days are scored with through-balls. And there’s just no argument against the fact that Messi is extremely capable of scoring from through balls. The idea that Messi is somehow not suited to scoring while positioned in more forward areas is nonsense. The reason teams have Messi drop deep is because playing him in forward areas like that would dramatically reduce the utilization of some other skills he has that are GOAT-level (dribbling, final ball passing, etc.). It’s not because it actually maximizes his scoring. It just maximizes him overall as a player.

Okay, so first of all you’re just deciding to look at an obviously pre-prime year for Messi, for no real reason (the 2007-2008 season itself wasn’t even a particularly great one for Xavi—Xavi’s peak time period started with Euro 2008).

In any event, I’ve already discussed this with you. What I already said is that peak Barcelona was a better team than 2014-2018 Real Madrid overall but wasn’t necessarily a better team in the Champions League—or at least definitely not better in the relatively small number of ties where Messi/Ronaldo weren’t so amazing that it would’ve been really difficult to lose. I suppose that corresponds to your Option B, but it’s something we’ve already discussed.

 

This isn’t a black or white thing where WhoScored must either be the absolute gospel or be completely useless. Nor is it a question of something being “false.” We can recognize that measures like WhoScored aren’t the gospel, while also recognizing that they account for a lot more information than mere G+A stats do, and that they’re generally a pretty decent (albeit definitely not perfect) measure of overall performance.

These are silly and not analogous. You’re criticizing at a high level of generality without actually thinking critically about whether there’s any real inconsistency in my stated positions. There’s not.

My issue with the xG chart for Ronaldo is that the chart itself just has blatant mistakes that make it hard to even interpret (different numbers of red and grey dots, mislabeled, etc.). That’s not an issue with OPTA data, but rather is an issue with whatever ESPN intern made the chart. To the extent I raised an actual issue with OPTA data, it was based on OPTA itself saying it does not have “concrete” xG data going back as far as the chart goes, so obviously the chart was not using concrete data for some years. OPTA has not cast doubt on its World Cup passing data so there’s no analogy to that here.

And as for the dribbling thing, that’s actually a legitimate potential issue with OPTA (they seem to change how they measure “dribbles” over the years), but is not implicated in the discussions about OPTA/Castrol, because “dribbles” is a concept with a strong subjective element, while numbers of passes really isn’t (and to the extent there’s grey area where counts might differ in certain systematic ways on the margins, the discrepancies with OPTA are quite large and aren’t consistent since they’re sometimes in passes attempted and sometimes in passes completed). If Castrol’s data had merely listed different “dribbles” numbers than OPTA did, then I can assure you I’d not have raised that as an issue with Castrol’s underlying data, because obviously that’s something where counts can wildly differ without being wrong. There’s no analogy between that and the large and inconsistent discrepancies with OPTA’s WC passing data. And that’s not even getting into the fact that Castrol’s passing data also is demonstrably internally inconsistent with itself.

 

Except that the gravitational effect of defenders marking them more closely just for their mere presence is one thing (and they are equivalent on that regard), Ronaldo making penetrative runs into the box is another thing. And Ronaldo is far superior than Messi in that regard, and we don't have a number of penetrative runs accouning for WhoScored algorithm.

I wasn't talking about a trade off in the sense of Messi being far from the goal. I was talking in the sense of Messi making things easier for the midfielders and harder for the forwards since he is leaving 2 forwards instead of 3 having to face 4 defenders

Yes, goalscoring is ONE of Ronaldo's major strengths and I already talked some others in my previous post. And Messi is getting more number of touches and passes by dropping deep and creating a midfield overload participating in build-up and the number of touches and passes is highly regarded on WhoScored ratings.

I sincerely apologize for the "hairy lie". That were a misinterpretation by me lol. I thought you meant the numbers in all games in K.O. but re reading your post I noticied that you were talking only home matches in K.O. So again I apologize for being so rude with that words. You know I don't usually talk like that especially to you

 

Just quoting this in the case of you edit this post further.