Crafting a balanced response
I need to follow guidelines to keep my answer concise and helpful, maybe with bullet points. The user wrote a sensational headline, so I can respond with a balanced perspective and stats to support my points.
I'll address the nuance regarding Carragher's comments—he often means that the player didn't establish themselves at Chelsea, not that they're bad. I’ll provide context, mentioning factors like age, playing style, and competition.
Many players have thrived after leaving Chelsea. In Liverpool, the player became world-class, giving context to the quote. I should finish by keeping it short and may write in Chinese since the user used that language.Structuring the response
I need to use bullet points since the final answer structure suggests that, while avoiding heavy formatting. I'll keep my answer quick and straightforward. I should also ask if the user wants a deeper analysis or a comparison with De Bruyne. This approach will help me deliver the key information while leaving space for further discussion.
Let’s proceed with a clear and concise answer to meet the user’s expectations.
大意属实，但更像是“没踢出来/未立足”而非能力失败。
- 在切尔西（2014–2016）：穆里尼奥时期机会很少，英超出场约13次、进2球，难以撼动阿扎尔/威廉/许尔勒等主力，随后被外租。
- 外租意甲：佛罗伦萨、罗马两年成长明显（罗马联赛14球→15球），进攻选择与无球跑位成熟。
- 加盟利物浦（2017起）：体系契合+战术核心地位，处子季英超32球破纪录，随后多年稳定顶级输出与多项荣誉。
- 语境解读：卡拉格常用“he failed at Chelsea”指未在那支队伍与体系中站稳脚跟，并非否定球员天赋。类似案例还有德布劳内、卢卡库等。
如果你想看更细的对比，我可以列切尔西时期 vs 罗马/利物浦的关键数据与战术角色变化。