Big bad Berta: Page 12 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One more in the Tolly

Big bad Berta

RowJimmy

So it's all a question of what you think of the player.
I think Havertz is an excellent player for us. I wish he had been injured less - we might have won a title earlier - but I think he's well worth his fee.
Madueke has been a disappointment. The problem is that he's not as good as our people thought he would be, not that we paid too much (because what we paid was the going rate for a back-up English winger who can soak up minutes).

JazzG

awooga83 It is a bit different to pay £50m for a £40m player than what I think are alluding we should have done with Rogers. _£45m-£55m was the market going rate for players like Madueke that window. He can provide cover on both wings and happy to play backup. He needs to do better though and I think he will. What about Rogers game justifies a £117m fee? I like Rogers, I said we should have signed him last summer instead of Eze but even at £80m-£90m that is pushing the upper limits.

awooga83 When we signed Havertz we also had injury problems in midfield, I can't remember for sure but I think Thomas Partey and Jorginho had spells out at the start of the season. Interesting to suggest Arteta didn't know what he was doing with him, do you think one day he just woke up and thought oh yes Havertz is also a CF, a position he has played for Chelsea and Leverkusen....

awooga83 Havertz works hard but I don't see him as critical to the team I think he's replaceable.

Who is available in the market right now that is a better CF than Havertz? The only player in the last year who has moved who can do a better job is Isak but he went for nearly £140m and his body seems to be falling apart.

Big Willie Champ

JazzG Who is available in the market right now that is a better CF than Havertz? The only player in the last year who has moved who can do a better job is Isak but he went for nearly £140m and his body seems to be falling apart.

I see this argument constantly but can't get behind it*.

Just because a player better than X (let's call him player Y) hasn't moved doesn't mean that player isn't transferable if we put in the groundwork with the player and make an offer that is worth it to the selling club.
We aren't scouts. Aside from a couple people here, the rest of us go by few minutes of youtube videos here and there when judging players, and that's mostly when we get linked to them. We don't watch tons of games in other leagues to see who is doing well beyond the headline figures of goals/assists and teams who are doing well.

There could be numerous players across Europe who could fit into our team that aren't that seasons flavour of the month but have the right mix of skills to blow up in the right environment/position.

It's also why I can't hate on the club for signing Madueke even though I thought he wasn't that great a player. They saw some mix of qualities that they thought would be able to flourish with us, and even though it hasn't, it may yet. Not convinced it will happen but not gonna write it off completely either

Before anyone comes for me, I'm not arguing Havertz is shit or that we need to replace him. It isn't even about any single player but rather the argument. I'd make the same counter argument even if we were talking about Martinelli who you guys know I like.

awooga83

JazzG I don't think he's 40m given his performance at Chelsea and their desperation it should have been 35. Now you might say that's not going to be accepted but that's how we are valuing other players. I don't think Madueke is a game changer that you can't just walk away. As your smaller fees if you overpay lots of times like that you can waste a good amount.Madueke didn't solve anything for us as a player and he's one I'd still be looking at as we probably need to upgrade him

On Rogers I don't disagree he's overpriced but that's the going rate for an English attacker who is seen with significant potential. He's on the up after a good season so clearly is going to be pushing valuation after the activity this summer as well. Madueke was on a low when we went in and Chelsea had to sell so I don't get why we didn't say nah that's crazy valuation as well. If we were as good as seems to have been suggested at getting deals that seems like a no brainer. I don't mind if that's our stance on Rogers I just cannot reconcile it with other deals we've done so it doesn't hold as the reason we do what we do.

On Arteta not knowing what he was doing with havertz earlier he commented at the time https://metro.co.uk/2024/04/06/mikel-arteta-explains-u-turned-plan-kai-havertz-20599941/

As a CF havertz is a fine squad player but does but consistently score enough to be the primary player. That's why I had a problem with what we paid as in particular the wages they are ridiculous.

Tam

JazzG Who is available in the market right now that is a better CF than Havertz? The only player in the last year who has moved who can do a better job is Isak but he went for nearly £140m and his body seems to be falling apart.

I don't know who's available in the market, but if you look at the squad list you'll find one who came into a new club with a lot of injuries surrounding him and still managed to score more with that going on than Havertz has ever managed in a season with our star players surrounding him. Turned it into a league win too.

Klaus

The fear at the time was that the outlay on Madueke would remove a big chunk of the transfer budget and make it impossible for us to get other transfers done that were needed more, but that turned out to be untrue. I don't know why people have any issues with his transfer fee beyond that; we won the league last season. We can probably palm him off on Everton or Newcastle next summer for close to what we bought him for if we want too.

Burnwinter

I watch Madueke and see plenty of potential, and that doesn't change. Feels as if there's one weird trick that would turn him into an end product machine. @Meatwad's hairline anxiety theory has merit because Noni is way more neurotic than he first appears, and tends to consciously limit his own unconscious brilliance. Adding Christianity or maybe BDSM could let him off his own hooks.

Bernard Woolley

Burnwinter At the risk of sounding bonkers, this is somewhat reminiscent of CR7 before 2006. I remember there being strong rumours in the light of his role in the Rooney red card that he would be sold in the summer and so on. Came back a different animal. Not to say that will happen here, but it was a transformation that just “happened”.

awooga83

Burnwinter yeah but he's had that potential since Chelsea that's why they brought him in there is nothing new there. Everything we've seen about him was already there. At the time we got linked I asked one of my Chelsea mates what he thought of him. His reply was he's quite good dribbling and can find his way through but his end product just isn't good enough and vee erratic. Now he's just a casual fan like me but that seems a pretty date summary of what Madueke is. Were we really not able to see that?

Coombs

Burnwinter The late action from Arsenal in the market is symptomatic of our bigger pull and power in the market …

I can't accept this, mostly because we're perennially late in the market at whatever level of perceived pull we might have, and our immediate situation always somehow rationalizes it. It's a corporate culture thing that we may never shake.

Burnwinter

Coombs If Chelsea's big and early move on Rogers and City's on Anderson were based on the idea these were the nearest players to Rice on the market, these signings echo our big and early move on Rice to beat City to signing him.

Spurs go big on the gettable player from Newcastle to avoid getting Eze'd again, but we wait to use the desire of the better but ungettable player from Newcastle to wedge him out for a margin less.

Vinicius would be another step in Arsenal's 800-pound gorilla era. Just to be in that conversation ...

Coombs

Burnwinter To clarify, I'm fine with waiting if it lands our targets. I'm not particularly anxious. I just reject that particular rationalization.

Claudius

Folks are getting anxious cos our rivals are spending Rice money on players. Yet while Rice is our best player, none of these recently acquired guys (Anderson, Rogers, Tonali) would start for us when team is healthy.

At the same time we are somehow consistently overplaying for Chelsea players who cost a third to a half of these transfers. The most cited being a forward who always starts for us when he’s healthy. It’s not making sense.

Asterix

Claudius this is a good point. Maybe, maybe, Rogers would, but certainly not Anderson or Tonali. They would start out as rotation players. Anderson could well evolve into a starting 6 over time but he's not a starting XI player now for us.

Burnwinter

Coombs Fair play. It's the best rationalisation I've got so if you're going to leave it, I'll sign it up. On the other hand, it doesn't seem likely we'll get Vinicius, so maybe I'll be trying to hijack your rationalisation with a big offer on deadline day.

Claudius

Asterix Anderson could well evolve into a starting 6 over time but he's not a starting XI player now for us.

Yup. And I have a massive issue with paying a king’s ransom for a developing player if he’s not a striker. Goals matter a ton. You’ll struggle to coach Vini and Dembele dribbling, or Haaland finishing. You can coach running, tackling, pressing. But not this.

Qwiss

Asterix right now as things are Rogers walks into our starting XI. That's why the club were willing to go to £90-£100m. They were never in for Anderson or Tonali because we don't need them and they wouldn't improve us. If we get a better left winger than Rogers everything is hunky dory. Lets see how the rest of the window plays out.

As for people claiming its what others have spent that has people getting frustrated, this time last year we'd already signed Zubi, Madueke and Gyokeres, Mosquera, Kepa and Norgaard. So far we've signed Meslier and replaced Trossard with Tzolis. Its natural people would be hoping for a bit more to push us on.

awooga83 the Madueke situation was obvious to everyone who watched him at Chelsea. People who read blogs and look at stats instead of watching matches convinced themselves it was some sort of 4D chess move but here we are. He's exactly what we said he'd be. His price is a side issue, we shouldn't have signed him at all.

JazzG

awooga83 He is homegrown, covers both wings, gives us a different type of attacking threat and willing to settle for a very reasonable salary compared to what a lot of players demand. I really don't know why Arsenal fans obsess over Madueke, yes the fee was slightly high but we have wasted millions on other players over the years. He is not a game changer, he was bought purely to give us depth on the wings and is happy to play that role in the squad.

Rogers price is the highest ever for a British player. if that is the going rate then we shouldn't buy any kind of British attacking player in this league.

Tam Gyokeres 14 league goals puts him right up there with legendary strikers like Danny Welbeck & Calvert-Lewin when it comes to league top scorers. I mean we probably could have got those two for a fraction of the price we paid for Gyokeres and got similar numbers.

When Havertz was fit, Gyokeres went on the bench. In fact Havertz coming back from injury is probably the push we need at the end of the season to get the job done.

DāftYoda

Regarding Madueke, I have a feeling his problem is mainly psychological, like low self-esteem or something ! He’s really top tier at taking players on, getting behind defenders and keeping control of the ball until he gets in a crossing or shooting position, then he fluffs it 9 times out of 10 ! The day he realises that the final move is just a continuation of what he consistently does up until then, he will become amazing… I hope it happens this season ! It could all start with a mini purple patch where during 3-4 games he finally gets a decent number of goal and assists, who knows ?!

Claudius

Qwiss the Madueke situation was obvious to everyone who watched him at Chelsea. People who read blogs and look at stats instead of watching matches convinced themselves it was some sort of 4D chess move but here we are. He's exactly what we said he'd be. His price is a side issue, we shouldn't have signed him at all.

it is said coaches everywhere love this guy. but something is not clicking. hopefully, he gets it together. 50m fee and 7.5m wages, and d given how badly we needed forwards, is not a big disaster

DiabyKungFu

Qwiss He's exactly what we said he'd be.

To be clear, this really isn't what happened.

At the moment of the deal, the anti-Madueke people said something like: "He has good underlying stats but look at how much he underperformed his xG. The underlying stats don't matter if he keeps underperforming his xG and everybody knows he's going to keep underperforming his xG. This is a big waste of time."
And the pro-Madueke people said something like: "G - xG is a random variable with mean 0. This is a stupid thing to get hung up on. Systematically under- or over-performing xG is not a thing for 99% of players."

Then what happened in reality is that Madueke outperformed his xG (vindicating the pro-Madueke argument) but his shot rate completely fell off a cliff (an anti-Madueke thing that absolutely no anti-Madueke person pre-registered as a hypothesis as far as I remember).

Either way, he's a perfectly cromulent backup right winger. If we can solve the mystery of what the hell happened to all of his missing shots, then he can be a legitimately really good player.

awooga83

JazzG He is homegrown, covers both wings, gives us a different type of attacking threat and willing to settle for a very reasonable salary compared to what a lot of players demand. I really don't know why Arsenal fans obsess over Madueke, yes the fee was slightly high but we have wasted millions on other players over the years. He is not a game changer, he was bought purely to give us depth on the wings and is happy to play that role in the squad.

It's because as @Qwiss points everybody could see what he was and we shouldn't have signed him but if we really wanted to do it we should have gone much lower because we could see he was nowhere near a good enough player for what Arsenal need. I'm blue sure he adds much attacking wise if he can't execute in the final third. Anyway the main think it highlights is we probably aren't the best at calling these things if we can make a decision like that for a player with known limitations.

Tam

JazzG When Havertz was fit

How many did he score from the physios table?

You asked who is available who could do a better job. I pointed one out. You've also helpfully pointed out two more middling players who had as a productive a year in 25/26 as Havertz has ever had in terms of goalscoring, that would have cost a lot less in an overall package.

And to be clear, I don't think 14 goals from Gyokeres is good enough for a club of our aspirations. Neither is what Havertz is producing, nor his availability.

JazzG

awooga83 Not every transfer is going to be a hit so we just have to accept some of them we will get wrong. He clearly needs to improve and I think he will.

Arteta and Tuchel both put their trust in him, but of course others clearly know better.

« Previous Page Next Page »