Donkai Havertz | Arsenal Watch

[CannonBalls]

I actually rated his shift in midfield. Very intelligent player, has the physicality needed as well. Always nice to have the versatility in midfield.

However if he's going to play at the 9 he needs more than indirectly "making his teammates better"; you have Jesus for that already. Last few games says he has the goal threat, can he do it over a season though

There is a BIG difference between him and Jesus
1. He is not good at finishing but remotely not as bad as Jesus.
2. He is a space monster. Jesus hogs the ball and we have players better than him for that (Odegaard/Saka). Also you dont want you 9 or psuedo 9 to hog ball unless he is Kane. You want him to make runs and stretch defences which Havertz does.
3. He is a physical beast.
4. He is always available.

Had Arteta not insisted on getting Jesus less than 2 years back he would have binned him which he still should.

(Jesus and White have the same number of PL goals for Arsenal this season)

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Gabriel was very raw when he first came. You could see the physical attributes and aggression that Arteta wanted (especially considering our CBs at the time who were physically poor), but he had a rashness about him too. Was also a bit error prone. All probably understandable for a 22 year old defender. He's cut most of that out of his game and him and Saliba complement each other very well. I think of them like fire and ice, it's such a perfect partnership.

Personally I never found him raw. I found his partners dreadful and him too eager to please. Which could easily be confated for rashness because it made him more aggressive than neccesary. I think finally getting a partner at Saliba's level calmed him down some what into more controlled aggression.

 

[Changeisgood]

There is a BIG difference between him and Jesus
1. He is not good at finishing but remotely not as bad as Jesus.
2. He is a space monster. Jesus hogs the ball and we have players better than him for that (Odegaard/Saka). Also you dont want you 9 or psuedo 9 to hog ball unless he is Kane. You want him to make runs and stretch defences which Havertz does.
3. He is a physical beast.
4. He is always available.

Had Arteta not insisted on getting Jesus less than 2 years back he would have binned him which he still should.

(Jesus and White have the same number of PL goals for Arsenal this season)

Jesus of the first half of last year was bringing something fresh to the equation. He was actually raising the level of the players around him, and being a constant nuisance to oppositions. His finishing is even worse than Havertz though so that was always a glaring problem. Nowadays, Jesus is a rather frustrated and frustrating figure for us to watch. There isn't a whole lot that he brings every game. He can still have some good moments but in general we are underwhelmed with what he brings in an entire game.

I would let Jesus go in the summer and send Zinny with him as well. There is a reason why City let them go while in their prime. They're not bad players but they have significant limitations. When we bought them, we were many levels below City, so it makes sense. But we are now just below them, and we are making that same evaluation Ciry made before us....they are simply not good enough to take us to the next level.

 

[jakko]

Some of the waffle in this thread

"He is a physical beast"
"Incredible value for money"

Literally the same player at Chelsea with a sympathy penalty and 2 more open plays goals.

 

[Shark]

Some of the waffle in this thread

"He is a physical beast"
"Incredible value for money"

Literally the same player at Chelsea with a sympathy penalty and 2 more open plays goals.

It does go to show though, that being in a consistently winning team helps how fans generally view a player. You take Bruno at United and every move he makes is judged even more so because barely anybody else steps up.

 

[Donaldo]

Some of the waffle in this thread

"He is a physical beast"
"Incredible value for money"

Literally the same player at Chelsea with a sympathy penalty and 2 more open plays goals.

It could be that the truth is somewhere in the middle. A good to very good addition to our squad and Chelsea are happier where they belong without him.

 

[jakko]

It does go to show though, that being in a consistently winning team helps how fans generally view a player. You take Bruno at United and every move he makes is judged even more so because barely anybody else steps up.

100% agreed.

 

[Donaldo]

It does go to show though, that being in a consistently winning team helps how fans generally view a player. You take Bruno at United and every move he makes is judged even more so because barely anybody else steps up.

I doubt there's ever been a debate about how good Bruno is. It's largely been around his role as a leader in your team and whether he can be someone you can build your next team around.

 

[jakko]

It could be that the truth is somewhere in the middle. A good to very good addition to our squad and Chelsea are happier where they belong without him.

True, but if you buy a CF in the summer where does that leave him? backup CF on the highest wages or back to LCM where he isn't very good?.

 

[Daydreamer]

True, but if you buy a CF in the summer where does that leave him? backup CF on the highest wages or back to LCM where he isn't very good?.

Competing with the new CF for game time.

 

[SilentWitness]

Competing with the new CF for game time.

That's probably why people think 65m isn't exactly good value for money.

 

[Daydreamer]

That's probably why people think 65m isn't exactly good value for money.

He got 6 goals and 5 assists from his 9 PL games up front. How much should a player like that cost?

 

[stefan92]

He got 6 goals and 5 assists from his 9 PL games up front. How much should a player like that cost?

This. When you want to rate him as a striker, look at the matches he actually played as a striker.

 

[SilentWitness]

He got 6 goals and 5 assists from his 9 PL games up front. How much should a player like that cost?

This. When you want to rate him as a striker, look at the matches he actually played as a striker.

It's not really a this. A player competing for game time in a position shouldn't be 65m. That's the type of fee you should be spending on certified starters. You also don't base those types of fees based on 9 games. If he maintains that kind of form in that position and is the undisputed starter then you could say it's good value for money but for now I don't think that's a label you can really give the transfer since he's underwhelmed like at Chelsea for large portions of the season.

 

[Daydreamer]

It's not really a this. A player competing for game time in a position shouldn't be 65m. That's the type of fee you should be spending on certified starters. You also don't base those types of fees based on 9 games. If he maintains that kind of form in that position and is the undisputed starter then you could say it's good value for money but for now I don't think that's a label you can really give the transfer since he's underwhelmed like at Chelsea for large portions of the season.

You didn’t answer the question, though. Havertz is keeping Jesus out of the team during a title run in. So how much should a player that’s competing for game time as a CF for the team topping the league cost?

 

[SilentWitness]

You didn’t answer the question, though. Havertz is keeping Jesus out of the team during a title run in. So how much should a player that’s competing for game time as a CF for the team topping the league cost?

Well City have one called Alvarez that cost 14-20m. Liverpool have Jota who was around 40-45m. Havertz at 60-65m.

I'd say around that 30-50m bracket is about fair for a competing player.

 

[ThierryHenry14]

It is interesting to see that Arsenal fans are happy with Havertz and don't bother by his price tag anymore, but other football fans do not.

 

[Donaldo]

Do love how we're supposed to be justifying price tags as if the football market isn't completely bonkers and 40 fecking MILLION is acceptable vs say, 65.

 

[SilentWitness]

It is interesting to see that Arsenal fans are happy with Havertz and don't bother by his price tag anymore, but other football fans do not.

I just don't think you can argue it is value for money based on 9 games and ignore the first half of the season where they were completely underwhelming? Just go back c. 10 pages to January and pretty much nobody considered it a good transfer or a good fee.

 

[SilentWitness]

Do love how we're supposed to be justifying price tags as if the football market isn't completely bonkers and 40 fecking MILLION is acceptable vs say, 65.

I'm just arguing the point about value for money bud. I too think the transfer market is crazy. Ultimately it depends on if he keeps this form up.

 

[Powderfinger]

It's not really a this. A player competing for game time in a position shouldn't be 65m. That's the type of fee you should be spending on certified starters. You also don't base those types of fees based on 9 games. If he maintains that kind of form in that position and is the undisputed starter then you could say it's good value for money but for now I don't think that's a label you can really give the transfer since he's underwhelmed like at Chelsea for large portions of the season.

Havertz has been one of the first names on the team sheet all season, he hasn't really been competing for game time.

And I think you're just wrong about what ~60m buys you these days for top clubs in general.

Here are the 25 players who cost 50m or more in the PL since summer 2022: Havertz, Rice, Nkunku, Lavia, Caicedo, Mount, Hojlund, Tonali, Johnson, Nunes, Doku, Gvardiol, Szoboslai, Enzo, Fofana, Mudryk, Cucurella, Sterling, Nunez, Haaland, Antony, Casemiro, Lisandro, Isak, Richarlison.

The only guys who have been nearly automatic starters for their clubs and been able to stay consistently available are Havertz, Rice, Caicedo, Hojlund, Enzo, Szoboslai, and Haaland.

A few others would almost certainly be starters but haven't been able to stay available: Nkunku, Tonali, Lisandro, Casemiro, Isak.

But the biggest group are guys that are competing for game time even when fit: Lavia, Mount, Johnson, Nunes, Doku, Gvardiol, Fofana, Mudryk, Cucurella, Sterling, Nunez, Antony, Richarlison.

 

[ThierryHenry14]

I just don't think you can argue it is value for money based on 9 games and ignore the first half of the season where they were completely underwhelming? Just go back c. 10 pages to January and pretty much nobody considered it a good transfer or a good fee.

First I doubt anyone really say he is "value for money", same for Ben White and Rice. They are more in the "justify their transfer fee" category now. Second, it also means Havertz turned the corner and started contributing to the team since January, thus changed Arsenal fans opinion on him.

The players who can say that is value for money transfer in the current Arsenal team are probably Martinelli, Odegaard, Saliba, Gabriel, and Raya. They were all under 30m and are starters for the team.

 

[SilentWitness]

Havertz has been one of the first names on the team sheet all season, he hasn't really been competing for game time.

The initial comment I responded to was this:

Competing with the new CF for game time.

 

[SilentWitness]

First I doubt anyone really say he is "value for money", same for Ben White and Rice. They are more in the "justify their transfer fee" category now. Second, it also means Havertz turned the corner and started contributing to the team since January, thus changed Arsenal fans opinion on him.

This I would agree with.

 

[Daydreamer]

The initial comment I responded to was this:

Ok... so how much should a striker competing for game time as CF at a top club cost? It feels like you wanna do everything but answer the question.

EDIT Ah wait - I've just seen that you did answer. My bad.

 

[Daydreamer]

Well City have one called Alvarez that cost 14-20m. Liverpool have Jota who was around 40-45m. Havertz at 60-65m.

I'd say around that 30-50m bracket is about fair for a competing player.

Fair enough. Alvarez was bought in Jan 2022 from River Plate and immedietely loaned back. He wasn't ready to compete for a place straight away. Jota was bought from Wolves in Sept 2020 (and he's triggered his add-ons to cost £50m).

If you had try to buy either of those players from a club like Chelsea in 2023, they would have cost in excess of £60m. We paid up in order to buy someone that could hit the ground running and contribute to a title charge this season. Which Havertz has done. For a team in our position, paying £40m for someone that risks not moving the needle isn't saving money - it's wasting it.

 

[Changeisgood]

At the moment he looks like an ok buy to be honest. I thought it was way over the top at the time but he is gladly proving myself and many other Arsenal fans wrong.

Still remains to be seen if he was a great buy, but he is hopefully on that path. A few more goals before the end of the season would help!

 

[DrRodo]

Some of the waffle in this thread

"He is a physical beast"
"Incredible value for money"

Literally the same player at Chelsea with a sympathy penalty and 2 more open plays goals.

And a CL final goal. You guys owe him an statue

 

[Powderfinger]

Some of the waffle in this thread

"He is a physical beast"
"Incredible value for money"

Literally the same player at Chelsea with a sympathy penalty and 2 more open plays goals.

He has 16 league G+A after having 7, 11, 8 in his three years at Chelsea.

It's a small sample but his finishing has been more confident than at Chelsea, although not quite as good as his Leverkusen days. For seasons/comps with available data...

Leverkusen - 33 non-penalty goals on 26.5 npxg
Chelsea - 23 non-penalty goals on 33.2 npxg
Arsenal - 11 non-penalty goals on 10.6 npxg.

 

[GoonerBear]

How does his non penalty goals compare to Cole Palmer, who we all accept has had a great season?

 

[Lyng]

How does his non penalty goals compare to Cole Palmer, who we all accept has had a great season?

10 to Palmers 11. His non penalty goals per 90 stat is actually slightly better than Palmers.
Has to be said that Palmer plays in a highly dysfunctional team though.

 

[GoonerBear]

10 to Palmers 11. His non penalty goals per 90 stat is actually slightly better than Palmers.
Has to be said that Palmer plays in a highly dysfunctional team though.

Didn’t realise so many of Palmers goals were penalties.

Was probably a silly comparison for me to make, different players, different positions etc. Plus like you say, one is carrying his team, the other is more a cog in a well functioning team.

 

[Rnd898]

He has 16 league G+A after having 7, 11, 8 in his three years at Chelsea.

It's a small sample but his finishing has been more confident than at Chelsea, although not quite as good as his Leverkusen days. For seasons/comps with available data...

Leverkusen - 33 non-penalty goals on 26.5 npxg
Chelsea - 23 non-penalty goals on 33.2 npxg
Arsenal - 11 non-penalty goals on 10.6 npxg.

Havertz had a lot more goal contributions in other competitions outside EPL for us than he does for Arsenal though.

First season: 9G + 6A in 45 games
Second season: 14G + 5A in 47 games
Third season: 9G + 1A in 47 games

At Arsenal this season he has 12G+5A in 47 games so largely the same as the first two seasons at Chelsea. Of course you Arsenal lot will point out to only EPL stats because he keeps firing blanks everywhere else so the stats look better when you include only PL.