Who's the Better Striker: Defoe or Owen?

[Max_Junglie]

Interesting article by that bellend Cascarino in today's Times - arguing in favour of Defoe starting against Croatia. He says, amongst other things:

So how good can Defoe be for England?
As a finisher, he's better than Michael Owen was at his best. In many ways he is a much more natural goal scorer than Owen. He can score a greater variety of goals than Owen: curling shots into the top corner from distance, close range tap-ins and everything else in between, he's got the lot.
When you look at the natural ability Defoe has got you would have to say he has underachieved. Maybe it is because of what happened with his half-brother, or that he has just matured, but he looks like he is finally capable of fulfilling his potential this season
Defoe can be England's answer to David Villa. I know they have slightly different qualities, but Defoe has the same finishing ability and can do the same job for England that Villa does for Spain.

Which got me thinking - who is the better striker (not at this moment, but as demonstrated by their form over their respective careers) - Defoe, who is arguably at the top of his game right now, or the good Michael Owen in his pomp and glory, when he used to play for Liverpool and before he got broken. When both are on top form, who would you rather have in your team?

:shrug:

 

[Luka Lennon]

at present Defoe without a doubt he's sharper, hungier, match fit, and scoring freely

Owen is still a good striker but anyone with any sense will tell you he's way past his sell by date

 

[sidford]

owen in his prime, no argument or doubt in my mind.

as much as defoe has excelled since hes come back to spurs hes not up to the standard of owen who was a top quality striker.

 

[mil1lion]

I compare him somewhat to Samuel Eto'o. Not on the same level obviously, but similar type of player. I think the biggest difference has simply been that he's now a regular. His move to Pompey made a lot of difference as far as him getting back on form. He's always been a confident player, but he always needed to play week in week out in order to start getting the goals flowing. Its been the same problem for England because he has rarely had a full game to impress in. But his regular starts for Spurs have helped him get his shooting boots in full effect again and now he can score for England in less than 90mins.

For me Defoe is the best English finisher since Alan Shearer in his prime. Owen was great in his day but Defoe just shades it for me. He scores more variety of goals and is more explosive.

 

[lilywhitecurtis]

Owen in his pomp i'm afraid. He was faster, had more awareness of the offside trap, and a better finisher. But who knows, whats to say that Defoe doesn't peak at 29? whereas Owen peaked at around 22ish.

 

[Hoowl]

Owen, at the moment (based on their whole careers but with the decision taken at the moment). Two examples of Owens brilliance that spring to mind are the Liverpool victory over Arsenal in the FA Cup final when Owen grabbed two late goals and the 3 - 2 England victory over Argentina when he did the same. Stats wise, he got 160 goals in 300 games for Liverpool (0.53 pg) whereas Defoe only has 50 in 151 for us (0.33). Defoes best season so far has seen him hit 22 goals in 44 games, and that's the only time he's topped the 20 mark. Owen got 20+ goals in 5 out of 7 seasons for Liverpool including a 30 and 28 in consequtive years.

 

[scat1620]

Owen in his pomp (i.e. before he lost his pace) was better than the best we've yet seen from Defoe one million times out of one million. He had better finishing, especially one-on-one; he was better in the air; he had better movement off the ball; he was nearly as skillful and he was quicker (which made up for the slight deficit on JD's skill).

Nowadays, Owen's lost all of that (including his finishing) except maybe his movement off the ball and his aerial ability... and even then, he's merely good in the air for someone his size, not good in the air on an absolute basis, like Shearer or Riedle. So these days I'd take Defoe a million times out of a million.

However, there's still a chance that there's even MORE to come from Defoe, and if he could improve his finishing for chances where a more subtle/delicate/gentle finish is required (rather than a blast), or maybe his vision/awareness/teamwork etc, then I think Defoe could go on to become as good as Owen in his pomp.

But as things stand, even the Defoe we're seeing (who's in great form) at the moment isn't as good as Owen was at his best.

All IMO, obviously.

 

[Luka Lennon]

Owen in his prime for sure but Owen will never reach those heights again and Defoe will keep getting better

 

[Legend10]

Defoe's career has been affected by playing for poor managers at both club and international level.

Michael Owen in his prime was a class player and a great finisher, Defoe to this point hasn't reached the level of Owen at his peak and he would be lucky to do so at this relatively late stage of his career. However I think he could have done so if his career had panned out differently.

 

[Koba]

I didn't used to be much of a fan of Defoe, but since he has come back he has shown he has improved beyond all recognition. That said, I would still take Owen at his best.

 

[EmperorKabir]

at first i wasn't sure whether this is a poll about both players at their peaks.... because to compare defoe to owen now is just laughable...

 

[FITZ]

Owen in his prime was better, but maybe this will change by the end of this season??

 

[paul_1979yid]

JD. But thats my heart speaking!

 

[double0]

Owen's a better goal scorer IMO Defoe's a better footballer... I personally believe both would make a good partnership. Defoe can actually play off Owen and isnt given enough credit when he drops off.

 

[Green Valley]

Owen's stats

Defoe's stats

 

[dontcallme]

I didn't read it properly and voted Defoe as I took it as in this moment in time.

Owen was a phenomenon and terrified defences when he was young. He adapted well to losing his pace and kept a good strike rate but wasn't the same.

Defoe was sort of the opposite. Showed a lot of potential but hasn't put it together until his mid-twenties. As a result I think Defoe will have more solid career as peaking too early causes many problems.

 

[worcestersauce]

If Defoe ever starts making the kind of inteligent runs into space that are the stock in trade of Michael Owen then with his natural abilty he would be the better of the two until then it's got to be Owen.

 

[johnmc]

In his prime it has to be Owen I'm afraid, no question for me.

 

[Bulletspur]

My head says Owen my heart says Defoe.

Giving credit where its due, Owen at his best is better. The thing is, his best is gone so Defoe now at his best is currently better! Makes sense?

We have also to remember the teams they both played for and the supplies and service they got from their respective midfield. Goals that Owen scored for Liverpool and England could easily be scored by defoe if he had been given the opporunity to benfit from these services. Remember Owen like Shearer was undroppable and was given a very extended run even when he was not scoring, Defoe the hottest striker at the moment has to sit on the bench!

If we were to compare both when they were both at their best, it would be hard to do as in my opinion Defoe has not peaked.

 

[mattdefoe]

owen in his hey day. Now defoe as an all round player defoe, he is quick but not lightining like defoe, If defoe did lose his pace he has other aspects greater than owens, although despite owens lack of pace he still makes good runs and can position himself well, He can still finish and is good in the air so all isnt lost with him. He also plays for a better club. So owen is better. But il compare them more when there both retired.