Is Luka Modric the greatest midfielder of the 21st century?

I don't understand how you are coming to these conclusions. Your chart shows Pirlo had the second most volume passes in Europe, even above Xavi, and 10 more per game than Seedorf that season. He also topped Serie A in passes played and accurate passes for 02/03 and 03/04. Pirlo was the team's volume passer and the focal point of the midfield. Seedorf made many passes too, approximately 86% as many as Pirlo. But that doesn't take away that Pirlo was the volume passer in the team and among the most in all of Europe.

And how does Pirlo not have an edge in SofaScore in the UCL? I just showed his ratings are generally higher (and no, I don't downplay Seedorf's 03/04, just that data is nearly meaningless with a sample size of 4 games were rated from SofaScore and is hardly anything to base a serious appraisal of a campaign on).

More, I just showed how Iniesta has a clear advantage in DBS over Xavi, and how Kroos has a clear advantage over Modric in SofaScore. So how Xavi and Modric are somehow consensus best in the team midfield, even by your own criteria, and Pirlo is not, is really not making sense to me...

And please, I am not trying to downplay Seedorf, so don't downplay Pirlo by saying he wasn't a starter in 02/03. I just made long posts detailing his Milan career. He missed games in Serie A and UCL due to injury and recovering to full fitness. As well, why are we bringing 10/11 into the discussion when 1) it's not relevant and 2) you probably know Pirlo had a serious injury that season which is why Seedorf was "better", obviously. And if we're going to say Iniesta was a more advanced player, the same must apply to Seedorf as they actually played very similar roles on the left side of a midfield three.

I'm not knocking Seedorf - it's probably fair to say he was more instrumental in both 03 and 07 UCL wins (Pirlo being injured and absent for a stretch of games in 03, and Seedorf having a purple patch in 07 being passed his prime with two very good performances) but I just don't see how there is any more uncertainty about who was better between him and Pirlo than is true for Xavi/Iniesta and Modric/Kroos.

 

To repeat: the point is that unlike Modric or Xavi there is not a (relevant) level where Pirlo is dominant. Only in the corrupted Ballon d'Or, yes. I give you that (9th in 2006, 5th in 2007; Seedorf 19th in 2007).

You said Pirlo was "more important" and then you mentioned the 2005 final run. I tend to agree he was more important there.

You don't mention all those other achievements. Excuses are almost irrelevant; if someone does not play because of injury he is just not important (in the decisive stages). In the 2003 CL final kicker and gazzetta had a higher grade for Seedorf.

I don't know exactly about the supercups, nor do I care, but for the main trophies and achievements it is like this:

"More important" at trophies and main achievements

Pirlo: 2004 scudetto, 2005 CL runners-up
Seedorf: 2003 Coppa Italia, 2003 Champions League, 2007 Champions League, 2007 Club World Cup, 2011 scudetto
Don't know: 2003 Intercontinental Cup


Let's repeat it all again:

Passing Volume

In that October 2002 thing both players are in the top 5 across all leagues. Seedorf had indeed 85% the passes of Pirlo.

But then compare that to Xavi vs Iniesta; in the 2008-09 CL Iniesta had 66% of the passes of Xavi (to take also for them the first CL win where both played consistently together).

Again here we see the same sort of thing (Pirlo played 144 minutes more in the league)
https://web.archive.org/web/2006051...e/classifiche/giocatori/passaggi_attacco.html

There is no difference!

ESM

Both have three for Milan. Pirlo has one (2007-08) when Seedorf was past the age of 30.

Seedorf has more in his entire career than Pirlo in his entire career, and this even excludes everything from 1994-95 and before (ESM voted only a team of the season for 1994-95; Seedorf received votes but didn't make the final team).

DBScalcio

Pirlo is playing a home match here. The golden boy of youth football, later demigod.

2002-03: Seedorf (3rd in league, 0.05)
2003-04: Pirlo (scudetto, 0.28)
2004-05: Pirlo (2nd, 0.13)
2005-06: Seedorf (3rd, 0.11)
2006-07: Seedorf (4th, 0.07)
2007-08: Pirlo (5th, 0.07)
2008-09: Seedorf (3rd, 0.00 but more rated games, 33 vs 26)
2009-10: Pirlo (3rd, 0.22)
2010-11: Seedorf (scudetto, 0.20)

No clear advantage for Pirlo, even for the period he was in a favorable age and Seedorf was 34-35 years old. Behind Zlatan the non-defender and non-goalkeeper with the most minutes played in the whole 2010-11 season.

Sofascore

When both are in prime years (not the excuse of injuries, like you do above for the final years at Milan)

2003-04: Seedorf (0.13)
2004-05: Pirlo (0.43) - both are in top 50, Gattuso ahead of both
2005-06: Seedorf (0.04)
2006-07: Pirlo (0.04)

-------------------------------------------------

My observation: for Modric, Xavi (and others) you can point to something where they are dominant. Pirlo you can't (Serie A was btw at a low point around 2013). Pirlo wasn't an as dominant passer as Xavi was, in contrast to popular perception. He wasn't a metronome.

 

Really LOL how people are repping this malicious and inane crap while I give the hard facts and evidence.

It is you who is knocking down the other player, not me.

With your "Pirlo was more important" and then specifically mentioning the 2005 finalist run and nothing else. That Pirlo was injured for a part in 2003 and 2011 does not matter.

Pirlo was playing a home match at DBScalcio. He doesn't win there.

 

Ok, I see the direction this convo has taken. I was preparing a response, because you are dragging Pirlo to uplift Seedorf instead of just presenting a balanced, unbiased appraisal to perhaps complicate an established narrative around the two players, but I'd rather not get into something disingenuous with you. I'll just leave with this: Pirlo, so obviously behind teammate Seedorf in importance, played 6 international finals with Milan (3 UCL, 2 club world cup/intercontinental, 1 UEFA Super Cup) and assisted goals in 4 of those Finals. Seedorf meanwhile, has no goals or assists in those 6 finals; to stretch, he has one pre-assist (4th goal against Boca 2007). Pirlo has 4 more pre-assists (all from a deeper position than Seedorf) and an official MOTM award, as well as significantly better ratings in both UCL Finals rated on SofaScore (something you selectively value until it no longer suits your narrative).

And to say "il metrenomo" is not a metronome is borderline trolling behaviour. Check the WC stats I posted in this thread and see that Pirlo is above his peers, Xavi, Kroos, and Modric, in percentage of team passes and team passes in opposition half. You may say this is Italy and not Milan, but what we do know is that Pirlo comfortably led the team is passes, often the league in passes, was near leading Europe in passes on at least one occassion, and was literally nicknamed "the metronome" by teammates and fans.

 

Thank you. WhoScored I believe has Pirlo as top volume Serie A passer in 09/10 (in not even one of his better seasons) and I believe though haven't confirmed again for 11/12 and 12/13. I don't know about 05/06 to 08/09, but wouldn't be surprised if he topped a couple of those seasons too for Serie A.

 

Most final third passes in the last 3 LaLiga seasons:

1. Toni Kroos (2,032)
2. Fede Valverde (1,862)

Madrid's old and new number 8. pic.twitter.com/h6fknpSwkv

— StatMuse FC (@statmusefc) August 5, 2024

 

In this list I will only rank central midfielders so this excludes traditional 10s like Zidane and Kaka.

1. Xavi Hernandez
2. Luka Modric
3. Andres Iniesta
4. Andrea Pirlo
5. Toni Kroos
6. Steven Gerrard
7. Frank Lampard
8. Clarence Seedorf
9. Michael Ballack
10. Paul Scholes

This is based on a combination of achievement and ability.

 

very good list, Lampard > Gerrard imo
There are some contenders for 10th spot tho, like Pogba & Schweinsteiger

 

Why Kroos in 5th and not 2nd?

 

Kroos is one of the best ever at pure passing and technique, as well as orchestrating plays but let's not forget he is not amongst the best creators, dribblers and is often a defensive liability.

 

Kroos is the best of his generation in the combination of game vision, precise passing, tactical intelligence and calm under pressure. Those 4 traits combined make him even a top 1 contender for best central midfielder of the century even if he lacks dribbling and final ball playmaking since these characteristics are more important for wingers and attacking midfielders than to central midfielders

 

He is literally the player with the most final third passes, progressive passes, long balls, etc... Of his generation. Also he retain possession by almost never missing a pass

 

Vision and creativity is a very broad aspect of football. There are as many visions of the game as there are players. Kroos is not amongst the best creators of his generation. I think this is a clear area where he lacks in his game compared to likes of De Bruyne, Ozil, Messi. These are just 3 obvious examples.. he lacks in final third creativity compared to some midielders on the lost as well.

Finnese, reliability and orchestration are the words to describe Kroos. Creativity is not one..

Also tactical intelligence and composure, although you are right in saying that, only extends to his intelligence in possession in central areas (orchestration part) rather than defensively or inside/around penalty box.

Making final third passes, or even key passes to some extent, are not a product of creativity.

 

The three players you mentioned are attacking midfielders. Final third creativity is more important for attacking midfielders than to central midfielders. Central midfielder main task is to connect the defense to attack and build up

 

There is not much positionally that separates Kroos in early days and De Bruyne in some seasons in which he was quite deep. These were obvious examples to prove the point conceptually..

You said "game vision and passing".. if he had those two things better than others how come someone like De Bruyne is leaps and bounds ahead of Kroos in creating?

It doesnt make sense unless his game vision isnt that great or is great in a very limited sense.

Also roles do not limit players from demonstrating abilities on the pitch it only limits them in how frequently they find themselfs in such situations. Kroos simply doesnt have remarkable creative ability, which is why he was moved centrally in the first place (and modric for example has more freedom to go forward and do stuff like assist for ronaldo in ucl 2017 final)

 

Were comparing an deep lying playmaker with a advanced playmaker.

As you said previously, There are many types of vision. Kroos's vision is focused on maintaining possession and control of the game with short to medium range of passes. De Bruyne's vision is focused on direct goal-scoring opportunities. The former is the main role of the central midfielder. The later is the main role of the attacking midfielder.

 

Modric's ratings on Sofascore are nothing short of impressive. I'm skeptical about sofascore ratings, but I try to understand them.

I think Modric is penalized for having too few key passes, compared to Xavi, Kroos and Pirlo. Although he is a better defender than Kroos and Xavi. Which shows that depending on the criteria you choose, the grade can go up a bit or down a bit.

 

Because the four ahead were fundamentally more talented footballers.

 

And what's your definition of "talent"?