Castiel said:Last season Mata was running the attack of a Chelsea team completely depleted of creativity and talent, relying almost entirely on Drogba in big games to make something happen and he managed to produce stats comparable to Silva. (6 goals & 13 assists to Silva's 6 goals & 17)LoveCity said:Silva is better but Mata is great. Remember Mata has help from Oscar and Hazard, Silva is in many games the only source of creativity so is targeted by our opponents who know that. If we had Silva, Oscar, and Hazard for example the other team would not focus so much on reducing Silva's space and freedom because there would be two other creative players who would need equal attention. It's a joke how few creative sources we have at this point and Silva suffers for that but make no mistake he is still a class player.
So far this season, with team mates more on par with Silva's, Mata has outperformed his countryman in every single department. He's looked a cut above even with the likes of Hazard and Oscar beside him; and while his midfield partners may be more talented than yours, the strike-force he feeds (Torres) is vastly inferior to Silva's.
I don't personally feel there is much between them on a level of talent, but I do feel that Mata is far more consistent (has been in good form for 2 seasons now with only sporadic dips of a game or two). This, for me, makes him the more valuable player. He produces a lot of results and he does it consistently.
Here is a post that speaketh nothing but the truth. I love Silva coz he plays for City, but Mata has been the better player in England so far. And both are class players, so the claim that Silva is class cannot be used to undermine Mata's performance. Seeing as Mata too is class. We could have had Silva Mata and Carzola, and really not have to worry who was the classiest :(