@PDG1978 Thank you and for the most part I’d say our interactions have been cordial and insightful going back almost 10 years now. If I have ever come across as being overzealous or rude in any of our discussions related to Ronaldo (or any other footballer for that matter) than I’d like to sincerely apologise I haven’t been following this thread except for what has been posted on 11 Maybe the new(?) poster could clarify here for everyone what he means by elite In any given generation there really can’t be more than 3 elite players in any given position IMO Otherwise It just becomes too inclusive and it just dilutes the significance of what it means to be truly elite. Was Gary lineker world class or was he elite in your opinion? And even if he was elite at a point of his career than how elite can a striker truly be if he is playing in Japan less than 12 months after the season you referenced? Maradona 1985/86 is the exact same version of Maradona who won the World Cup Is there a better version of Maradona than this? When Gary lineker was arguably an elite goalscorer in 1986 he outscored Diego Maradona And he did this despite Maradona having the added advantage of participating in two extra games and being allowed to score with his hand.
Thanks mate. Despite my start to the day, I might not be around posting much for the rest of it, but I think Lineker was arguably 'elite' (as Sexy Beast said maybe that can be a high bar and questionable though) at aspects of scoring, like speed, off the ball runs, instinctive finishes, going round goalkeepers etc. And as the 1991 Ballon d'Or voting and 1991/92 FWA Player of the Year award indicates he did have a good period in general at Tottenham (I'd have to refresh my memory about the exact reasons for going to Japan, though for sure age will have played a part). Of course the 1st Division wasn't the only competition he was playing in in 1990/91 so goal stats that weren't league-only would look different. Maradona I think was better (according to eye tests and player ratings) in 1984/85 than 1985/86, or in 1985 compared to early 1986, but found a peak level again at the 1986 World Cup I would say. But yeah Lineker was more of a scorer (as opposed to shooter) in role and attributes, and Maradona more a playmaker/general attacking threat I would say.
I am not sure about that. I might be late to the party or I might have not seen information that makes this conclusive, but all of you did. Maradona was a FK specialist. He was technically gifted beyond belief. There are recordings of bunch of spectucular goals of his.. BUT we know ..there are FK specialists for whom ball-striking abilities in dead ball situations do not translate onto a moving ball and vice versa. ..there are technically gifted players who are not great at striking the ball because of not being good at non-technical part of ball-striking. I would argue ball-striking is more than just muscle memory and mechanics of swing. It is almost inseparable to finishing abilities as a whole. ..there are a bunch of players who have scored a bunch of spectacular long range goals that we wouldnt be associated with great ball-striking. At least for me, It is difficult to tell how frequent these goals are when watching a prime-long video on Maradona's best goals. There are sources that suggest Maradona was shoting more often than any other player in serie A. If he was racking up great volume of shots and spectacular efforts which resulted in having fewer more spectacular goals than someone else, how highly do we think of that? So it is unclear to me that Maradona is extra-ordinary ball-striker.
GOAT level goalscorers ferenc Puskas Pele Eusebio Gerd muller Cristiano Ronaldo Lionel Messi Elite goalscorers 1950s Alfredo di stefano Telmo Zarra Sandor Kocsis 1960s Jimmy greaves jose altafini Gianni Riva 1970s Carlos bianchi josip skoblar Roberto dinamite 1980s Marco van basten Hugo Sanchez Ian rush 1990s Romario Ronaldo nazario Gabriel Batistuta 2000s Andriy shevchenco Ruud van nistelrooy Thierry Henry 2010s Robert lewandowski Luis Suarez Zlatan ibrahimovic 2020s Kylian mbappe Erling Haaland Harry Kane outside of this you are either at best world class or in the upper echelons of being world class in goalscoring Just from Maradonas own era I would not place Maradonas goalscoring ability above any of the following Marco van basten Ian rush Hugo Sanchez Careca John Aldridge gary lineker Rudi voller Gheorghe Hagi Roberto baggio Zico Michel platini Karl heinz Rummenigge Jean Pierre papin Lothar Matthäus
You're right, highlights showcase a player's best moments, they don't represent the entirety of their performance. They omit missed chances, poor decision-making in finishing situations, and the overall frequency of those opportunities so it helps my point, not yours. Maradona "does it at a reliable rate" compared to whom? Without comparing his finishing to other elite finishers or analyzing his finishing across entire seasons, the claim remains unsubstantiated. And no, the burden of proof doesn't lies with those who disagree with the "elite finisher" label. The burden typically falls on the person making the initial claim. Here, it's on you to demonstrate Maradona's finishing prowess compared to other elite attackers. The "any theory is plausible until disproven" is a false equivalence. Unproven theories may exist but their validity depends on supporting evidence. Highlights alone don't validate the claim of elite finishing. You should compare Maradona's goalscoring rate analyzing the difficulty and frequency of the finishing opportunities to established elite finishers from his era but in this case you lower the cutoff "for players of his position" and doesn't apply the same standard for Messi's playmaking. The bottom line is that highlights are insufficient evidence to definitively declare him an "elite finisher." Well, I don't think Gerd were as good as Messi at playmaking. I was just using the same logic you're using to say Maradona were an elite finisher. Anyone can create highlights of Gerd's passes and say that he were an elite playmaker. In fact that can be done with literally any player in history. That's the whole point. Maradona were a good finisher compared to Lampard and Charlton but they weren't elite finishers also so comparing him to them is pointless.
For me, great ball-striking involves a player being totally in-balance, planting his non-shooting foot securely onto the ground, and then swinging his leg for a well struck shot. This would be best rewarded in a set-pieces scenario. I think Maradona is indeed extra-ordinary in this regard, as somebody who has minimal familiarity with his game. Being fantastic at this particular aspect of the game by itself, cannot guarantee high goal counts, because the number of scenarios where your ball-striking technique can be fully displayed without being disturbed is rather low in number, and even when it is allowed to happen, they tend to be lower in expected goal values, because of the distance from goal. I am not sure how many of Maradona's shots on goal were outside of the box and unlikely hit the back of the net, no matter who struck the ball. Shooting whilst trying to sprint ahead of your marker, or doing so when off-balance as you quickly turn inside the box, starts involving things that go beyond your mere shooting technique (aspects such as balance, strength, and speed come into play). For example, from my limited viewings of him, I personally would label Gerd Muller as a great finisher, but I do not think he was in possession of the greatest ball-striking technique. His really low centre-of-gravity seemed to help him a lot. Being totally in control of your balance and compsure, in tighter areas of the pitch is a separate skill in my opinion. A lot of midfield players who lack overall goal-scoring abilities of forwards often have cleaner ball-striking techniques than forwards, but scoring en-masse requires a vast array of talents that go beyond mere clean ball-striking abilities in my opinion. I'm finding it difficult to stop the concept of goal-scoring and finishing mixing up into one, but I'll try to define finishing as this: The ability of a player to increase his odds of scoring, limited to actions that occur milliseconds before the ball is struck, examples including: 1) The ability to strike the ball accurately and with sufficient strength, preferably without much wind-up time. 2) The ability to stay balanced as the ball is struck, even if under pressure. 3) The ability to finish regardless of angle towards the goal, by being both-footed or through other, more difficult means. 4) The ability to react to the body position of the keeper and surrounding defenders. 5) The ability to finish more difficult aerial balls by whatever means maximizes the odds, whether it is through headers, volleys, or acrobatic shots (but not as important since they make up less than 20% of all goals). Stuff like positional awareness, short-bursts of pace to get away from the marker, having the stamina to keep running into appropriate space are all aspects that maximizes the goal count without being finishing abilities in my opinion.
I think better and perhaps more intuitive example would be Harry Kane. It is like saying that Kane is elite playmaker just that he was a striker and cant compare to actual playmakers. Kane amongst strikers is indeed an elite playmaker, but we know that calling him elite playmaker overall compared to KDB would be quite a stretch. Perhaps it is similar with Maradona and finishing.
These are good finds! In terms of those graphics, I guess I wonder how functionally different Maradona’s role was in those sorts of formations than Messi’s role was. For instance, when he was a false 9, Messi’s role was basically to be lined up as the most central player on the front line, but to frequently withdraw from that space and allow the other two forwards to make diagonal runs into that central area. With formations like these, I can definitely see Maradona’s role being similar to that, but I’d obviously want to delve more into footage to really know, since it could also be very different (formations can only tell us so much). The video you provided of Maradona against Roma from 1988 does seem to me to show Maradona playing a role that’s deeper than what Messi generally played (except maybe at PSG). I think that’s consistent with my general inclination to think that Maradona played a deeper role later in his career, and also with your conclusion above in the sentence right before you linked to the videos. I do think it’s informative in this regard, though, because the 1987-1988 season is on the border between middle and late in his career. Anyways, there’s other videos out there, and I’ll eventually try to watch more of them with the aim of getting a better sense of how he was usually playing (after all, tactics do change game to game, so we need to watch a decent number of games to get a good overall sense of how someone was usually played).
It seems to me, most people here disagree that both: Maradona's finishing and Messi's playmaking are in the same category (in this case, elite). So yes, mizohammer's "side of the coin requires a substantially greater weight of evidence than the opposite position".
I was just making a point about Messi relative to his own era. I agree, stats without context are misleading. I forgot to add that Messi is an outlier in xA at domestic leagues since 14/15 with only KDB coming close to him who is arguably another goat tier playmaker.
Yeah, I guess Messi in the 2010 World Cup arguably played pretty much a similar role/position to Maradona in the late 80s too.... I wouldn't completely say that I'd line up Messi's false 9 role as equivalent to Maradona in early Napoli years role-wise I don't think, though I see what you mean to some extent in terms of overlap between areas operated in, and functions. I'd possibly see Messi's false right wing role as a closer comparison I guess (while not the same as Maradona at Napoli, as opposed to sometimes at Barcelona I think, didn't really play predominantly/nominally from the right), for Barcelona or for Argentina in the Copa America occasionally (maybe then it was more outright AM/supporting forward and not really false right wing so much anyway I think wasn't it?). I guess you could say the false 9 role was similar, with him dropping deep into space behind wing forwards, in effect, just with some different conditions (the way opposition defences lined up, the rules on fouls/offsides and suchlike) but I suppose in essence like I hinted at before I'd feel Messi was still lined up in a way that could make him the primary scorer of the team when he returned into those central attacking areas, and there wasn't any other real CF in the Barcelona team (albeit Villa from the left when he played with him still operated like one in some respects I suppose). Maybe Roberto Baggio at Juventus could sometimes/often be a bit more of an apt comparison for early-Napoli Maradona in terms of position/role. Without verifying them all, I'll post a few Juventus line-ups from Transfermarkt: Juventus FC - Atalanta BC, Sep 13, 1992 - Serie A - Match sheet | Transfermarkt Juventus FC - SSC Napoli, Mar 7, 1993 - Serie A - Match sheet | Transfermarkt Juventus FC - SSC Napoli, Dec 5, 1993 - Serie A - Match sheet | Transfermarkt Udinese Calcio - Juventus FC, Jan 2, 1994 - Serie A - Match sheet | Transfermarkt Baggio as 2nd/3rd forward you could say I guess in games like that (possibly/arguably a little more akin to a second striker than Maradona, given Moller was more midfielder than striker, and not playing in the same system as Maradona at Napoli as such, but still in a kind of free supporting attacking role - with some variation though as indicated by some other line-ups from those seasons where he did play more as a second striker sometimes and some other times as a sole AM in a midfield 5, if the line-ups are accurate - the page below labels him as SS sometimes as you can see but as AM in the position he's placed in for the games I linked above) Roberto Baggio - Detailed stats | Transfermarkt Roberto Baggio - Detailed stats | Transfermarkt I didn't search thoroughly to find games where he lined up in the same team as both Vialli and Ravanelli, but there should be a few of those on there (making him more the 3rd forward indeed, with them both being strikers). This page does refer to him playing from behind both of those after returning from injury during 1994/95 (sometimes, like Del Piero, he will have erred more towards the left I think when alongside Ravanelli and Vialli though too, maybe even after substitutions happened but I don't have a completely clear idea about how often, when etc, so it's just an idea about a player playing in a kind of similar role to mid 80s Maradona at Napoli): Juventus 1994/95: Marcello Lippi’s finest side - (gentlemanultra.com) I did stumble on this when I was searching, so I'll post it although it's going off topic - Ravanelli's 'Perfect XI' in FourFourTwo (actually using 4-2-3-1 for the line-up): We asked Fabrizio Ravenelli for his all-time team-mate XI – and it's pure nostalgia | FourFourTwo
I don't know why I said 'other thread' lol - I guess I thought my alert was for a different one at first! Anyway, I suppose like I said it's just one season and I would say already 1986/87 is less of a contender for equivalence to Messi's false 9 role. That being said Maradona did register the most shots (also the most on target but not most off target so to some degree that could be argued to be in line with Mizohammer's idea perhaps but yeah not totally maybe given the amount of shots taken overall - what we don't have is a video or chart showing where all the shots were taken from though and how many were from outside the box if I'm right in thinking the other stat was for shots off target). It amounts to 95 over 29 games so 3.27 per game; Messi in 2011/12 in La Liga for example though did take 5.5 per game according to WhoScored (being one of two outliers as would be expected - 3rd highest shot rate in La Liga belonging to Radamal Falcao with not a huge gap between his rate and Maradona's 1986/87 one though).
Diego Maradona Serie A 1986/87 Overall 10 goals+4 assists 95 shots 41 team goals 2568 minutes played Per 90 0.49 goals+assists per 90 3.33 shots on goal per 90 34% direct involvement https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986–87_Serie_A https://www.transfermarkt.com/diego-maradona/leistungsdaten/spieler/8024/saison/1986/wettbewerb/IT1 Riyad mahrez Premier League 2015/16 Overall 17 goals+10 assists 86 shots on goal 68 team goals 3050 minutes played Per 90 0.80 goals+assists per 90 2.3 shots on goal per 90 40% direct involvement https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015–16_Premier_League https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/riy...ten/spieler/171424/saison/2015/wettbewerb/GB1 There are really not many players you could make a 45 minute seasonal comp for Certainly not with this level of quality And truth be told Riyad mahrez is also one of the few players of the last 15 years who’s technique(ball control specifically) can compare to practically any player I’ve ever seen. Leicester City 2015/16 was the modern day of equivalent of Napoli in the 1980s arguably even worse(playing in the lower divisions few years prior) I don’t know what fans of goal involvement statistics can do with this
Looking at per 90 minutes, using Transfermarkt: Maradona - 95 shots in 2568 minutes = 3.33 per 90 minutes Giordano (2089 minutes) - 3.32 per 90 minutes Carnevale (1782 minutes) - 2.42 per 90 minutes Gianluca Vialli (2518 minutes) - 2.93 per 90 minutes Guerin Sportivo's Team of the Season did place Maradona behind the strikers, in a 4-2-2-2 formation (not the most common system of the teams in reality though I suppose): https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/s...-player-ratings.2085771/page-44#post-37109404
Having lots of shot attempts does not always mean the most number of shot attempts specifically inside the penalty box area. Gareth Bale registered the most shots-on-target for the 2012/2013 EPL season, with 73 shots-on-target. However, out of his 165 total shot-attempts, 98 were shot from outside-the-box (59% of his total shot attempts), and his entire expected goal value for the entire season according to TheAthletic was merely 12.6 xG (he ended up scoring 21, meaning he had an xG over-performance of around 167%). Lionel Messi had 63 shots from outside-the-box (31% of his total shot attempts) out of his 202 total shot-attempts, during the 2011/2012 La Liga season, amounting to roughly 39.4 xG (127% xG over-performance), so I do think it is possible to have a completely different profile of shot-taking in general across the season, even if your overall shot-attempts run into the triple digits. Because I do not have any statistics for Maradona's shot tendencies outside of the World Cup, I'll bring his statistics from his four World Cups (1982, 1986, 1990, 1994): Overall shots attempts: 59 Shots from outside-the-box: 31 (53% of his overall shot attempts) I personally think that it is fine to label Maradona as an elite striker of the ball, as in being able to convert low percentage shots in terms of expected goal values, in select scenarios such as taking direct freekicks. The profile of his goals, and the distribution of his shot-taking from World Cup games seems to suggest that. I personally feel like there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that he was an elite finisher inside the penalty-box.
Okay. But for me then we are talking about different aspects - finishing abilities and pure ball-striking ability. I see it like this: 1. Goalscoring Off the ball + mentality - that puts player in goalscoring chances Finishing abilities - that determines the rate at which player finishes chances 2. Finishing ability Decision making part - includes set ups, timing of shots, shot selection, etc. Pure ball-striking ability - technique including basic examples and when off-balance. Non-finishing aspect of goalscoring is everything that puts player in a promising chance, while for me, finishing ability starts at the moment player recieves pass in the promising chance. Problem with equating ball-striking with finishing overall is that ball-striking is not the most improtant factor that determines whether player will finish a chance or not. Decision making part plays a greater and that is much more subtle and overlooked part of finishing. If you define finishing as ball-striking ability than you cant use stats like big chances scored/missed to evaluate ball-striking ability because, if you look at the chances missed in question, you will see thta often it doesnt come bad shot, bad rather poor decision like hesitating too much, poor shot selection, dribbling when player shouldnt, etc. For example, for me when R9 goes one on one which would be something like 0,3 xG and dribbles past gk and generates xG of 0,85 and scores an easy goal, for me that jump in xG belongs to his finishing ability. Therefore finishing can be seen as a rate of scoring various chances and half chances, while ball-striking is a tool which players use (along side other decision making tools) to finish those chances. In that sense xG is not a direct demonstration of all of finishing ability but of ball-striking ability with some decision making part. It makes sense to me to look at finishing ability in terms of rate of finishing chances. Getting to those chances is a non-finishing aspect of goalscoring. ... But even when we are talking about pure ball-striking ability alone, there is a lot to say regarding Maradona. As you've mentioned, there is a whole landscape of different variations of striking. For example, ball can have no motion, cam be moving on the ground, can bounce or can be floating in the air all at various speeds. Then ball in each of these scenarios can be hit with many different techniques with left, right, head, other,... with power or spin or normal. This leaves us with many different ball-striking scenarios that one can be great at and what you say about the landing foot is correct. It is a part of this. However, when we are talking about scenarios that matter on the pitch, we have to refer to the ones that are the most common. These are the most useful oens and hold the most value. For example, player who is the best overhead kick player of all time, but average at any other ball-striking scenario, he can not be deemed a great ball-striking player regardless the fact that overhead technique is extremely difficult itself. Why? Because, regardless if the technique is difficult and low-probability shot, it is so rare that it doesnt hold much value. This element of how frequent a certain type of ball-strike is in-game scenarios is very important. Being great at a niche aspects of ball-striking (off-balance shots, etc.) Is not correlated with how well player compares to others in more basic, common types. After watching this video of Maradona: I think it is undeniable that he is great at certain type of low-probability, technically difficult shots, which is not a surprise given he might be the most etechnically gifted player ever, but for me that doesnt prove consistency in more basic types of ball strikes, let alone finishing ability overall. Finally to add, watching his best goals I get the sense that he has a proclivity to overcomplicate things and go for spectacular shots when it is not necessary. It looks great when scored, but I would say one of the most important trait of great finishers is that they have ability to make things look simple in a sense that they make decisions and set themselfs up in a way that they dont have to use low-probability, off-balance shots, but can rely on more basic, easier shots that align with their strengths. ... Btw I like the way you think! I would really appreciate if you could give a feedback to me in this thread: https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/i...-historical-2012-13-la-liga-campaign.2127132/ Where I am trying to categorize goalscoring and finishing in as much depth as possible.
Yeah. I think 3 is too small of a number for elite. It just doesnt sound to me as such a big deal.. plus it is kind of unfair to some players who have played in era of many great finishers and vice versa. For that, I think just putting a number on the word elite like top 3, top 5 is not the best way.
Another way to measure finishing ability is to compare the xG with the xGOT but this is an even newer stat that lacks even for most of Messi's career unfortunately
Yeah. In some ideal scenario, finishing in a sense that I described above could be calculated as xGoT - xA (the moment player recieves a pass), but unfortunately I think it will not be plausible to accurately measure xA and xGoT with all the nuance. On average as an approximation sure, but eye test remains superior for any given case. Plus, even xG doesnt consider the cost of shoting when actually there are better passing options therefore it will always favor players who shot rather than pass.
I think that’s probably the best way to measure finishing ability over smaller samples. That said, I think the added value of looking at xGOT gets lower the higher the sample size of shots is. That’s because, over a large sample, the xGOT and actual number of goals scored would surely converge to be virtually exactly the same (after all, over a large sample, someone isn’t likely to be systematically lucky or unlucky in how well GKs save his shots). And, to the extent there’s a difference between xGOT and goals over a large sample, it has as much a chance of reflecting a failure of the model (i.e. something about the player’s shots being easier or harder to save that the xGOT model isn’t catching) as it does of actually reflecting some real finishing difference that goals-above-xG doesn’t catch. Which is to say that, while we don’t have xGOT for Messi’s career, I think we can almost certainly assume that over the course of his career, his xGOT and his goals scored are very similar, such that looking at his goals above xG is probably essentially the same as looking at his xGOT above xG. Where xGOT-above-xG would be useful is if we were trying to look at a smaller sample (for instance, a single season). In a single season, goals-above-xG and xGOT-above-xG might actually differ by a good bit, and I’d trust xGOT-above-xG more. In other words, if we had xGOT for Messi, I think we might find some differences in his season-by-season xGOT-above-xG compared to his goals-above-xG (and I think the xGOT-above-xG would be better data in that case), but I think the two stats would almost certainly be extremely similar over the course of his career (or a very lengthy portion of his career), and if they weren’t super similar then I’d be inclined to trust goals-above-xG more than xGOT-above-xG in that kind of large sample.
Not sure if eye test is superior. For example, I have a view based on my eyetest that Haaland is a player who can receive a bad ball and still turn it into a goal. That's because I've seen him finish with the sole of the foot at chest height, among other difficult finishes. But I would rely more on looking at his xGOT compared to xG numbers to make sure it wasn't just me seeing the games in which he did this
I remain unconvinced that these probabilistic models are as useful as we often credit them in the way they are being applied for various reasons. For one, the complexity of a "finishing situation" is far greater than the variables it is being reduced to - so there is a fundamental issue with the datasets and models - and as a matter of fact, xG just doesn't have that great of a predictive use in the scenarios we are discussing. I mean, you have no idea of the ball's velocity, trajectory, height, one-time finish vs. control. Is it a chip, a curler, etc.? Is it a weak foot shot or not (these models make no distinction)? I am almost sure that shot conversion and shot volume over a large enough sample size are just as good at prediction.
I agree with many of the assertions but the fundamental flaw in the argument is the supposition that tactical roles and context of the 80s is similar to the 2020s. Maradona's role and positiom does not have a direct equivalent in the modern game, so the idea of clustering him with certain players (or not) is grossly anachronistic. Anothet matter, for example, is the concept of shot selection simply wasn't as developed or relevant back then as it is today. Naturally, players took a higher volume of improbable shots. So again, too many confounders, and the very real danger of interpreting the past through the biased lens of your experience of the modern game needs to be accounted for.
I don’t think this says what you’re suggesting. It indicates Maradona used his weak foot more than Messi for passing, but that Messi used his weak foot more than Maradona for shooting. I don’t think that really leads to any conclusion one way or the other about which one “is in fact more one-footed.” If anything, given that that data indicates Messi is not nearly as one-footed in passing as Maradona is in shooting, it actually suggests the opposite of what you are saying (and that’s even more true when we recognize that Messi’s pass volume was likely higher, so the raw number of weak-foot passes per game is probably not very different). In any event, personally, if I had to choose, I’d take a player being less one-footed in shooting over being less one-footed in passing, because I think it’s more common for a decisive action to only be possible by taking a weak-foot shot than it is for a weak-foot pass (though that is subjective, and does depend on a player’s role, of course).