Who is better: Sanchez or Hazard

Who is better?

  • Total voters
    767
Hazard, he is probably best player in the league alongside Kane. When I see that Chelsea team Hazard just seems to me to be a level above others. Same with Kane at Tottenham (except Eriksen).

We're still getting a fantastic player in Sanchez though.
 
I’m honestly disappointed in Hazard. I feel like he’s wasting his career away at Chelsea. His raw ability is unbelievable, but he lacks hunger.

A player with Hazard’s talent should be on a team that competes for the CL every season.
 
Massive Spanner said:
g/a never tell the whole story. Hazard tends to terrorize oppo defenses for 90 minutes when on form. I'd say most defenders would rather face Sanchez than Hazard, he looks like a fecking nightmare to defend against.
Click to expand...
Hazard tends to terrorize opponents - when on form. Also, he is playing for a Conte team with about 7 defensive players and he's the main creative outlet (only one in midfield you could argue, at times). Sanchez on the other hand played for a far more open team - and an inferior one - where he also carried a goalscoring burden, knowing nobody else could do what he could when it came to end product. He also did it consistently. Far more consistently than Hazard, you could argue. As a defender, no idea who I'd rather face, but I'd also argue that the probability of a 'mare against Sanchez is higher simply because he turns up far more!

Raees said:
If the question is who would I rather United buy? the answer is Sanchez. His mentality, his endeavour and tactically he's a better fit for us. Question is who is a better player and for me..

If you put Sanchez in those Chelsea sides, I genuinely don't think they'd be as good as they were with Hazard in the side in full flow and at his best. They'd still be title contenders but not as dominant as they were with Hazard in the side. Hazard has lower bottom levels, but he has that lazy genius mentality but at his best.. he's been different gravy to anyone in the league. Internationally he hasn't been able to cut it, but Belgium as a whole haven't and lack of a good coach/mentality has been an issue, whereas Chileans are fierce as feck, with a great football philosophy to back them up.

I don't think its impossible for Sanchez to prove he's the better player. Just saying right now, I'd give it to Hazard based on what I've seen from them playing week in week out in this league.
Click to expand...
You could also argue that if you put Hazard in the Arsenal side, they'd never have won the FA Cups or made Top 4. Hazard is just not consistent enough and I'm not sure he could "carry" a team like Sanchez has carried Arsenal. His goal output isn't great (he says he doesn't bother about that part) and for all his occasionally mesmerizing dribbling, he can be a no-show as often as he can be a game-changer. He's something of a "luxury player" I suppose - in that when he purrs, he delights, but his lows are awful and he won't muck in as much as a Sanchez.

You're right in saying that the preference would vary by team. Some teams will benefit more from a Hazard. I just feel though that there are probably more teams that would benefit from a Sanchez. Has he proven his worth? Well, he's won two Copa Americas (against Messi, at that) and also been PFA Fans' Player of the Year twice. He's also won La Liga (Barca) and two FA Cups. Apart from the La Liga with Barca, you could make a strong case that he's been the main man for the other trophies. Wouldn't quite call that "unproven", to be fair. If you take only PLs or CLs, well, there's a lot that would miss out and David May would make a case to really be a superstar!
 
fezzerUTD said:
I think Hazard on his day, but Sanchez turns up a lot more than Hazard does.
Click to expand...
Hazard very rarely has piss poor games, his very best is so good that even his excellent level is considered below par, that plus the general obsession with goal stats creates the myth that Hazard is inconsistent when he really isn't.

I have always said both together would compliment eachother perfectly because their strength's counters what the other isn't so great at, i wanted Alexis from Barca so badly for that very reason.
 
midnightmare said:
You could also argue that if you put Hazard in the Arsenal side, they'd never have won the FA Cups or made Top 4. Hazard is just not consistent enough and I'm not sure he could "carry" a team like Sanchez has carried Arsenal.
Click to expand...
Hazard showed up and did the business in both our title seasons during squeaky bum time when most of the squad (especially Diego Costa) were flaking.
 
Dancfc said:
Hazard showed up and did the business in both our title seasons during squeaky bum time when most of the squad (especially Diego Costa) were flaking.
Click to expand...
You'll note that I'm not contesting Hazard's quality or his fit for Chelsea or even his contributions to Chelsea. I was merely stating my opinion (opinion, mind) that Sanchez was more suited to what Arsenal needed - and will be more suited to what United need. Also, given that Hazard tends to blow hot and cold, am not sure he would be the best person to handle the pressure that Sanchez faced at Arsenal where - Ozil aside - he was creator and finisher carrying the burden in virtually every game. He didn't have a Costa to help him out (Giroud? Welbeck?) either with goal-scoring or sh*thousery.
 
midnightmare said:
You'll note that I'm not contesting Hazard's quality or his fit for Chelsea or even his contributions to Chelsea. I was merely stating my opinion (opinion, mind) that Sanchez was more suited to what Arsenal needed - and will be more suited to what United need. Also, given that Hazard tends to blow hot and cold, am not sure he would be the best person to handle the pressure that Sanchez faced at Arsenal where - Ozil aside - he was creator and finisher carrying the burden in virtually every game. He didn't have a Costa to help him out (Giroud? Welbeck?) either with goal-scoring or sh*thousery.
Click to expand...
The thing is, he didn't really have Diego Costa at the business end of both title season's as the Brazilian/Spaniard fell off a cliff form wise, especially last season. I can understand arguments for Alexis's being more suited/better to certain sides but i can't agree that Hazard blows hot and cold (i alluded to why above in my response to @fezzerUTD ) or that he hasn't carried a team, he doesn't and he has.
 
Hazard is the best player in the Premier League as well as the most naturally gifted one out there.
I would say that only Messi and neymar in all of football are more naturally gifted than he is right now.

He's the most fouled player in the league, he's statistically the best dribbler in the world, he doesn't score or assist as much as others players but what he brings is worth far more than that, he's an absolute genius with the ball at his feet
 
I think Hazard is better, but it's very close.

Sanchez is a better match winner though.
 
Think Hazard is a tad overrated. I'm not sure he's consistent enough to be top tier. Not saying Sanchez is, but he affects games more often.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
This appears to be a very one sided view on the comparison which doesn't appreciate the qualities of both players and especially the things Sanchez is better at.

Yes, we all know that Hazard is the better playmaker and more precise with his dribbling and passing in the buildup. But surely another one of the 'big differences' between them is that Sanchez is far more decisive and impactful in the final third and physically more imposing? He's stronger, has a lethal shot, finishes well and gets more assists. It's not everything but doesn't find a mention in your post.

I agree that not everything should be defined by the entire goals and assists statistic but it cant be discarded entirely either.

And the point about their respective mentalities is a valid one. Hazard isn't nearly as bad mentally as made out to be but Alexis has him beat in this regard. Leaving your heart out on the pitch is a quality to be praised. Having one or the worst seasons an elite footballer has ever had definitely isn't.

I think Hazard will be remembered and rated higher because he's got more left in the tank, will achieve more and has a higher ceiling/potential. But Sanchez has matched him or even out performed him so far.
Click to expand...

I didn't offer a view on the comparison in that post, I was just discussing Hazard and inconsistent tag. Prior to that I was just talking about two specific themes in the thread: the consistency and mentality comparisons. The post above is basically the same point 50% of the people in here have been making: Hazard's inconsistent, Sánchez effects games more. There's nothing in support of either of those two things, unless people really can't see past goals and assists.

Let's pick up on your point about Hazard's worst season. If you were to compare Chelsea fans' rating of Hazard in 15/16 with Barcelona fans' rating of Sánchez in 12/13, who do you think would be worse off? To me it's pretty obvious that Sánchez would be rated lower by their respective fans. In lieu of easy access to that data, we could look at WhoScored's flawed but indicative ratings. In 12/13 Sánchez was rated the 68th best player in La Liga with an average rating of 7.03, worse than the likes of Manucho. In 15/16 Hazard was rated the 63rd best player in the Premier League with a rating of 7.11.

Now you might quibble about the details but it makes a pretty clear point: Hazard was nowhere near as bad as is being portrayed, and Sánchez has been far worse than people are willing to acknowledge. Both of those are pretty easily corroborated by the fans who watched them week in, week out. You might wonder if somehow WhoScored's scoring system is underweighting Sánchez's best qualities and overweighting Hazard's in some way, but that doesn't quite stack up. In Sánchez's last season at Barca he jumped up to being the 6th best player in the league. In the two seasons either side of Hazard's low point, Sánchez and Hazard were rated the two best players in the league. I think that fits with most people's eyeball test too.

Chelsea were awful in 15/16 but it seems like most people are putting that almost entirely at Hazard's feet, ignoring just how bad the rest of them were. Hazard was very bad but most of them were worse. WhoScored puts only Willian and Fabregas ahead of him in that Chelsea side. They actually scored 10 goals more than us that season - it was the goals against column that really hurt them. They defended comically and they couldn't control the midfield, neither of which are in Hazard's remit.

Personally I prefer Sánchez's style, he's a much better fit for United and I don't think there's that much between them. I just think people come up with some really ridiculous points about Hazard.
 
Lot of people also ignoring their international careers where Sanchez sh!ts all over Hazard, despite the latter playing in a much superior team in terms of individual talent.
 
Hazard is overrated in my opinion. Fantastic ability, but lacks something in terms of mentality to become as good as he can.

I can’t help seeing an Arsenal player when I look at him, although Arsenal have gotten so bad now that Nathan probably doesn’t even apply anymore.
 
AshRK said:
Considering I always find you a bit anti-united but that is a fair fair reasoning.
Click to expand...

I love the club (bit too much sometimes which can come across as being harsh or overcritical when we're not doing well) .. but one thing I can't tolerate is bias

midnightmare said:
Hazard tends to terrorize opponents - when on form. Also, he is playing for a Conte team with about 7 defensive players and he's the main creative outlet (only one in midfield you could argue, at times). Sanchez on the other hand played for a far more open team - and an inferior one - where he also carried a goalscoring burden, knowing nobody else could do what he could when it came to end product. He also did it consistently. Far more consistently than Hazard, you could argue. As a defender, no idea who I'd rather face, but I'd also argue that the probability of a 'mare against Sanchez is higher simply because he turns up far more!


You could also argue that if you put Hazard in the Arsenal side, they'd never have won the FA Cups or made Top 4. Hazard is just not consistent enough and I'm not sure he could "carry" a team like Sanchez has carried Arsenal. His goal output isn't great (he says he doesn't bother about that part) and for all his occasionally mesmerizing dribbling, he can be a no-show as often as he can be a game-changer. He's something of a "luxury player" I suppose - in that when he purrs, he delights, but his lows are awful and he won't muck in as much as a Sanchez.

You're right in saying that the preference would vary by team. Some teams will benefit more from a Hazard. I just feel though that there are probably more teams that would benefit from a Sanchez. Has he proven his worth? Well, he's won two Copa Americas (against Messi, at that) and also been PFA Fans' Player of the Year twice. He's also won La Liga (Barca) and two FA Cups. Apart from the La Liga with Barca, you could make a strong case that he's been the main man for the other trophies. Wouldn't quite call that "unproven", to be fair. If you take only PLs or CLs, well, there's a lot that would miss out and David May would make a case to really be a superstar!
Click to expand...

I think this narrative of Hazard rarely turning up is quite absurd. Him in his prime, with full focus and motivated failing to lead them to an FA Cup (which is a knockout - so not guaranteed but arguing he wouldn't be able to lead them to one) is also absurd. Also using goals and assists is not quite right as Sanchez is more goalscoring orientated and Hazard is more playmaker orientated.

Look I'm as happy as anyone that we have signed Sanchez and I would much prefer Sanchez at this moment in time than Hazard as I think Sanchez has the better mentality for what we need at this moment in time (he's been my dream signing for a long time) but generally even in games in which they're up against each other Hazard has generally looked the superior player despite Sanchez playing in the more attacking side. Hazard for being such a lazy player has to do an awful lot of heavy lifting for Chelseas attack and that is not being recognised by alot of fans in this thread.

Yes Sanchez has lesser team mates but he plays in a more attacking system and even at Barca. Even Chile are pretty much on the front foot whereas one could argue Hazard hasn't quite had that opportunity at Chelsea and that to expect him to also run around and contribute defensively in what is already a defensive set up under Jose and Conte is abit much. For Belgium he hasn't really pulled any trees nor do I envisage him doing so.. something is abit off about that entire set up, whereas the Chileans take genuine pride in turning out for their nation and are extra motivated.

Bottom line is I have an issue with people looking at comparing players as a binary concept all the time.. whereas in some situations a more nuanced approach is needed. At this moment in time, if both players were to say suffer a career threatening injury tomorrow and retire and Sanchez had just signed for City, who would be remembered as having been the better player or contributed more to the game at the highest level.

For me winning the EPL twice and being at the forefront of those sides, trumps winning the Copa America. If there was a coefficient for rating these triumphs, I'd rate winning the english league higher. That said, Hazard has had the benefit (although one could argue by being the better player thus far) of having a top side built around him whereas someone like Sanchez was a side dish at Barca (though anyone competing with Messi would be) and only managed to secure a move to Arsenal in his prime.. if Hazard was moving, Arsenal would have been blown out of the water.

Now however, Sanchez has a golden opportunity to kick on and show everyone he is on the same level as a Hazard. Hell, he could prove he's even better and that is the thing. The opinion Hazard is better isn't fixed in stone, Sanchez has brilliant work rate, better goalscorer and superior mentality I would argue.. sort of guy who fights when the chips are down. So there is no reason why in a couple of seasons, the situation can't be reversed. However right here right now.. for me Hazard has done more in his career to be remembered as the better player.

Look at recent games v Chelsea, and tell me you weren't more fearful of facing Hazard then we have been when facing Sanchez.
 
Infordin said:
I’m honestly disappointed in Hazard. I feel like he’s wasting his career away at Chelsea. His raw ability is unbelievable, but he lacks hunger.

A player with Hazard’s talent should be on a team that competes for the CL every season.
Click to expand...

We were competing for the CL every season for around 10 years, we've just had a temporary dip while rebuilding. Let's see how fecking cocky you cnuts are after Messi retires/declines and you have to actually run a club again instead of just riding off his back. Good to see Neymar decided not to waste his career with you lot though.
 
Hazard is on the way up still

if this poll was on RAWK it would be 85% Sanchez
 
At their devastating best, probably Hazard, but just about. But I love the absolute drive and desire for Winning mentality of Sanchez. But again, very different players though who will thrive in different settings. I think Sanchez is a better fit to United than Hazard. Hazard almost exclusively plays on the left or in a free role whereas Sanchez is comfortable in any attacking position.
 
Jamie Shawcross said:
You regard DDG as "a bit hyped"? He is easily the very best goalkeeper in the world, if thats not world class, i dont know what is?
Click to expand...

You did read the part were I defined A Bit Hyped as ‘Possibly the worlds best player in any position bar the one inhabited by Neymessinaldo’? That definition fits DDG to a tee, don’t you think? Do you disagree with the definition itself?
 
Since Sanchez joined Arsenal in 14/15. Stats based on European football and League.

Sanchez: 70 goals 34 assists.
Hazard: 48 goals 25 assists.

Make of that what you will.
 
Trizy said:
Since Sanchez joined Arsenal in 14/15. Stats based on European football and League.

Sanchez: 70 goals 34 assists.
Hazard: 48 goals 25 assists.

Make of that what you will.
Click to expand...
Back around 2010 people were going down this route to claim Lampard and Gerrard were better than Iniesta and Xavi.
 
If this question had been asked had Sanchez signed for City, 95% of the posts in this thread would say Hazard.

How many goals they've scored is irrelevant. If you put Messi into the Burnley squad then he wouldn't be the premier league top scorer, yet he'd still be the best player in the premier league by far. It takes a lot more than skill to score a goal or get an assist, it takes the rest of your team being in position to get on the end of through balls and crosses, it takes great through balls from team mates to assist your goals, the team working together as a unit etc. All those stats show is that they were able to get on the end of their teams attack, it doesn't say much at all about their individual skill levels. If you put Sanchez in a team where he never got a decent through ball he probably wouldn't be in the top 10 league scorers, but that wouldn't say a thing about how good a player he was. There's a lot more nuance to it than just flat numbers. Hazard is comfortable the better player imo who has shown pure brilliance many more times and at one point was talked about as a future WPOTY. That doesn't mean that Sanchez is bad, because of course he isn't.
 
Dancfc said:
Back around 2010 people were going down this route to claim Lampard and Gerrard were better than Iniesta and Xavi.
Click to expand...

Lampard was a second striker and Gerrard was a CAM. Would be silly to compare them to the Iniestas and Xavis. Both Xavi and Iniesta could dictate the game's tempo. Whereas Sanchez and Harzard are LW/CAMs.

Either way I don't care who is better, I'm delighted we signed Sanchez. He's our missing piece.
 
I'm still not convinced Hazard is a better attacking playmaker than Alexis. Better in midfield, for sure, but in the final third? I don't think so

He's phenomenal at bringing the ball into the final third, carrying it in transition, and beating his man on the wing and put in low crosses. Beyond that, he dribbles a lot and does feck all with it most of then time. He often creates great opportunities with his dribbling only to throw them away by making one dribble too many.

Alexis tries a lot more and makes more mistakes, but what he does is more direct and decisive. Alexis is constantly trying to create goals. Hazard is constantly ruining what he creates

The fact of the matter is Hazard really should be way better than Sanchez, but he isn't, it's a close thing, and that's down to his mentality
 
I think there's a good argument that when Sanchez is on form he can be better than Hazard, or perhaps he's on form more often, and this gives that impression?

It really is a difficult question, they are both unstoppable in full flow.

imo Hazard has it in him to step it up to another level. He's only a couple of years younger but entering his peak years now, so perhaps in a couple of years the answer will be far more obvious.

Right now there's not much in it, it would be like swapping your sports car for one that is pretty much exactly the same, but is a different colour or perhaps has a different interior.

It's not obvious so it comes down to a mixture of taste and preference.
 
I fink it's obvious Hazard is more talented but he's still overrated. I also don't like him and would certainly take Alexis instead, who is probably more effective.
 
Have to go with Hazard. They are on similar level, but Eden is a better player.
 
This thread is nostalgic. 11-12 years back playing Football Manager, in my second or third off-season playing as United, signed a relatively unknown 20 year old Chilean called Alexis Sanchez from Udinese, and an unknown 17 year old with insane potential called Eden Hazard from Lille, one on the right and the other left, how they complemented each other perfectly.

And today one is really a Red now, and we're discussing which of them is a better player, whether their styles could be complementary. They are! And if there's ever a chance to add Hazard to our attack, I truly believe we'd run riot week-in-week-out against most teams.
 
Andy_Cole said:
Now that Sanchez is a United player no doubt the Caf will massively under rate him and say Hazard is miles better.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. Some caftards have a real tendency to underrate our players while overrating players from other clubs just to appear more "unbiased" or "neutral". This evaluation disorder should be named as "Garry Neville syndrome" in psychological literature.
 
Trizy said:
Since Sanchez joined Arsenal in 14/15. Stats based on European football and League.

Sanchez: 70 goals 34 assists.
Hazard: 48 goals 25 assists.

Make of that what you will.
Click to expand...

Not even debatable for me when factoring in those numbers. Sanchez is just plain better. This notion that Hazard is a play maker is completely irrelevant because Sanchez is better at it anyway.

There was this idea that Hazard would take the next step and be one of the best players in the world; but it's actually Sanchez that has done this. He has dragged Arsenal to 3 FA cups with some help from Ozil; he is Arsenal's 'Suarez' player.
 
Rozay said:
Hazard is overrated in my opinion. Fantastic ability, but lacks something in terms of mentality to become as good as he can.

I can’t help seeing an Arsenal player when I look at him, although Arsenal have gotten so bad now that Nathan probably doesn’t even apply anymore.
Click to expand...

How can you say that when he has been the best and most influential player in a team that has won 2 premier league titles in 3 years.

There's absolutely no logic in that post.
 
fezzerUTD said:
I think Hazard on his day, but Sanchez turns up a lot more than Hazard does.
Click to expand...
This here about sums it up. Hazard is a bit better but he doesn't do it nearly often enough. Id rather have sanchez for a 38 game season but hazard for any single game
 
I have to say I agree with Rozay, if Hazard truly wanted to be the best in the world then he would be performing at his best far more often. The true elites do not take a whole season off, I don’t recall anyone of Hazard’s ability doing that. Hazard is undoubtedly the better dribbler, and on his day is unplayable, but he doesn’t do it enough for me. I feel Sanchez is far more consistent, and is more of a winner.
 
arnie_ni said:
This here about sums it up. Hazard is a bit better but he doesn't do it nearly often enough. Id rather have sanchez for a 38 game season but hazard for any single game
Click to expand...
See this confuses me. Hazard was the best player in 2 title winning campaigns. Effectively sometimes having to run the whole attacking aspect of the Chelsea team himself.

It seems weird to say he is not as consistent as Sanchez when he is the reason Chelsea even won those titles.
 
Basically, Hazard won two PL trophies with a mediocre squad. Alexis never did that.

There you go.
 
Hazard probably, he was the standout player last season and Sanchez hasn’t done anything this season to surpass that. But it’s close when both are on song. They’ve both been excellent. Sanchez has lost a touch of his explosiveness but has adapted and will continue to be class, whether Hazard will be able to do the same when it happens to him we’ll see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.