Honestly most Arsenal fans have also written this off in the sense we have very low expectation from him to start with. At this point him and Viera can only pleasantly surprise us. Combined that 100m.
Donkai Havertz | Arsenal Watch
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Yeah, no one will, but you have to forget the transfer fee...he will be fine in 90% of your home games and if he can grab a few goals at 0-0 or 1-0 then no worries.
This you?
My posts have nothing to do with us signing him. I'm sceptical and only hold out some hope because it seems like he will be allowed to play his natural position with us, in a better side. But that opens up other balance-related questions that I don't need to go into here.
My point was to simply refute your claim in the quoted post above. As I said, one club would do that transfer all over again and the other wouldn't, therefore your quote is wrong.
Lets be honest, no one can justify the fee and wages for Havertz. Only Arteta can - and it remains to be seen what position he will play in.
One group here will be right, lets see in January if he lives up to the high expectations Arsenal have put on him.
I've noted that we can't keep pissing money away on a regular basis, for all the hard we've done, half a step back (at least) has been taken in signing players that have left us scratching our heads. I wont include Havertz obviously, but previous Arteta signings include:
-Vieira
-Kiwior (needs more game time)
-Lokonga
-Mari
-Tavares
-Marquinhos
-Runarsson
-Cedric
-Willian
For me that's too many duds within the acceptable limit, or signings we made for "depth", but realized they're not good enough and shipped out for loan. We need less of this going forward.
One group here will be right, lets see in January if he lives up to the high expectations Arsenal have put on him.
I've noted that we can't keep pissing money away on a regular basis, for all the hard we've done, half a step back (at least) has been taken in signing players that have left us scratching our heads. I wont include Havertz obviously, but previous Arteta signings include:
-Vieira
-Kiwior (needs more game time)
-Lokonga
-Mari
-Tavares
-Marquinhos
-Runarsson
-Cedric
-Willian
For me that's too many duds within the acceptable limit, or signings we made for "depth", but realized they're not good enough and shipped out for loan. We need less of this going forward.
That was ‘top bantz’ as the kids call it these days.
No, one club would do that transfer all over again if they had a guarantee that any other signing that they could have made as an alternative would not have scored a relatively straightforward finish in one game...that's a big caveat. I can't believe that anyone would look at his 3 years at Chelsea and consider him a success, just like nobody would consider Sancho to have been a success here if another PL club allowed us to recoup his transfer fee and paid his wages this summer.
He may go on to be a massive success at Arsenal, but to an ordinary football pleb like myself it seems like a bizarre transfer because you are signing a flop. He has it all to prove.
Lakaikai Havertz
Most of the signings mentioned are punts and while most have not worked some have
Odegaard was a punt was not expected to be this good
Ramsdale was a punt
Tomiyasu was a punt although has injury concerns but otherwise is good.
Tavares/Lokonge/Marquinous/Runarasson/Trusty were low cost and mostly we will get what we paid for back. Tavares/Trusty mostly would get more maybe even Marquinous.
Kiwior I actually like.
Havertz/Viera jury is still out but I don't understand especially at that price point.
Mari has been a costly miss.
And the big ones William/Cedric the KIA guys have been free but costly on salary and did not make sense.
How exactly is Odegaard a punt ? You can be honest when having a healthy debate.
This is the one that baffles me. Rice and Timber make perfect sense and imo are great transfers but I've had hard time seeing the vision here. I thought at first hed be a false 9 to spell Jesus but then I read someone mention he's for the modern WM Arteta is working towards. Makes a little more sense but still feels like a lot of money for Havertz. I'll have to trust that Arteta knows what he's doing.
Vieira £35m
Kiwior - £20m
Lokonga - £17m
Mari - £8m
Tavares - £7m
Marquinhos - £2m
Runarsson - 2m
Cedric - Free
Willian - Free
Vieira aside, none of them are huge fees and we'll likely make a small profit on them. Also, Kiwior is looking decent after his shaky debut.
No team has a 100% hit rate on transfers. We marvel at Brighton when they continuously find gems that are worth 10 times more within a season... but ignore all the bets they made that didn't pay off. Not all of their signings are Caicedo.
I think he's saying £30m signings aren't make or break for big clubs. Which they aren't.
Yep, Havertz and Vieira are our two recent signings that I don't fully get. Hopefully I've missed something that Arteta's seen.
I'm not convinced he will be a success at Arsenal but I can already see him being an unfair scapegoat for Arsenal. Arteta's comments after his first game and these clips going round of his volleys add to it but it seems unfair that people are already questioning his transfer in jest or not. A few bad early performances in the PL and I think the media/fans might get onto him.
Donny > Havertz
What are you on about? Havertz scored that goal, this has happened in real life. I'm talking about repeating history here, knowing what we know and not some fantasy hypothetical scenario you've made up.
Of course they would do that trade all over again as the same outcomes would occur.
Again, one club would do the trade all over again and the other club wouldn't. It's that simple.
Sigh. OK, you win. Contrary to Sancho here, he was a resounding success, completely lived up to expectations, should probably have won the Balon D'Or repeatedly at Chelsea, and is a bargain for the mere £330K per week Arsenal are allegedly paying him. In fact, he was so brilliant that comparatively mediocre talents like Saka and Saliba will have no problem whatsoever with him out-earning them. Watch out Man City, the guy who scored....a straightforward goal.... once... is a Gunner now!
I’m fairly certain it’ll be the role Xhaka played for you guys last season. Functioning as a pseudo CAM alongside Odegaard while Zinchenko steps into CM. He’s a good fit for it, and his versatility in other positions will be handy. Like you said though it’s a lot of money for him, and more importantly than the transfer fee are his reported wages, which considering he didn’t set the world alight at Chelsea are really high.
Sorry to pile in but that’s terrible logic. Bad signings can score important goals. That doesn’t make them not a bad signing. And no fan would realistically want to sign a bad signing all over again.
Donny > Donkai
Really?! Xhaka always did a lot of defensive work whenever I watched Arsenal. I don’t think Havertz had that in his locker.
Nowadays people attribute being good at pressing = being good defensively. The same has happened with Mount. They still lack a general defensive awareness and positioning a player like Xhaka would have when the opponent is set in possession.
I haven't claimed he was a good signing though, I'm just arguing with what the other guy said - which was that Havertz is Chelsea's Sancho.
Given what has happened Chelsea fans would do it all again. Two have already agreed in this thread. I bet there aren't any United fans that would do the Sancho trade again, given what they now know. I think that's a clear differentiating factor.
If Sancho played crap again this season, but ended up scoring the winner in the CL Final - then I bet every United fan would change their tune and say they'd do the trade all over again.
Dig up mate.
Like I said, your logic is terrible. If Sancho had scored a cup final winning goal that wouldn’t change the opinion of anyone with half a brain about whether he‘s been a good signing overall. It’s possible to isolate a specific single moment from a player’s overall contribution. Just like Lingard’s role in winning us an FA Cup didn’t change his status as a United player.
Xhaka wasn't a good defender, but I still believe he would be a better defender in midfield than Havertz. I don't think Havertz has the passing range of Xhaka too.
He may be better at closing down the opposition, but that only takes you so far.
Odegaard works really hard defensively (number one AM at winning the ball back I believe), but ideally we'd free him up from that a little. I think having Havertz play next to him would mean he's likely going to have to shoulder more defensive responsibilities.
I really question how defensively solid we will be through the middle without possession. Rice was one of the leading ball recoverers, so if he's anchoring the midfield he will have a lot of work to do.
No way ramsdale was a punt with Leno leaving. Same applies to Odegaard who had a shaky loan, but was effectively tried and tested in the PL. Apart from that you're right, however the above mentioned have had a fair share of games between them in which most have had a negative impact or stood out as by far the weakest in the first team XI.
Regardless, hopefully we can shift them out and keep these punts to a minimum going forward as the team evolves and becomes better.
I disagree, the logic isn't terrible.
Lingard was an Academy product that wasn't bought for big money, he doesn't really fit into this. And regardless, his status, or the status of Havertz / Sancho doesn't need to change as I'm not arguing about their respective statuses.
I'm not saying Havertz wasn't underwhelming, especially for the price. Just like Sancho. But I am saying that if a straw pole was done asking United or Chelsea fans if they'd do the trades again you'd have completely different answers. Therefore Havertz isn't Chelsea's Sancho. One team would do it again and the other wouldn't.
There's no point taking this any further, I was arguing over semantics anyway.
Yep not necessarily a good defender but still has more natural defensive instincts. A good example of an attacker with genuine defensive instincts is Griezmann. Think Havertz might be a player where we won't see him much throughout the match but will pop up with a goal here and there. I suspect you will use that midfield trio in easier home matches, with Havertz moving forward far more creating an overload with Saka, and a fullback drifting into the midfield.
Zinchenko would be that player, but I don't rate him defensively either. He's a smart player of course, but he's got no physical presence and can be attacked. He'll have Havertz in front of him too which doesn't give me much confidence.
Still, it will be exciting to see how it plays out as it's a big unknown. Hopefully Partey stays, so if we have to then we could just play a midfield trio of Odegaard, Partey and Rice.
This is the Havertz thats going to be playing for Arsenal:
People are far too quick in writing players off. Sancho, Havertz and Felix were probably the three standout talents of their age group a few years ago and all three failed at their first big club because they were - at least initially - misused. Sancho was a leftsided playmaker wanting the ball to be played into his feet, excelling between the lines with his great close control, body feints and one twos and was used as if he was an explosive and physical one on one attacker that should receive through balls. Havertz played as a 8/10 hybrid in a possession oriented system, drifting into the box to finish off the occasional attack he himself initiated and was used as a striker who received the ball a lot with his back to the opponent's goal. Joao Felix was a technically incredible playmaker with great finishing ability and was wasted in the most negative team on the planet.
All three transfers were done without a clear plan in mind but all three are still in an age in which they can turn it around and all three still are extremely gifted. Seemingly, Havertz made the move to a team that wants to use him to his strengthes even if most EPL fans don't even know that the midfield role Arteta sees him in is where he excelled in. He even said that Arteta's plan for him was why he chose Arsenal, showing that he also identified being played out of position as a problem. I hope the other two follow suit. Even though I'd still have hopes for Sancho if he doesn't find a new club as Ten Hag seems to be a much better fit for him playing style wise than Sancho. The question is rather if things were already beyond repair when he arrived.
All three transfers were done without a clear plan in mind but all three are still in an age in which they can turn it around and all three still are extremely gifted. Seemingly, Havertz made the move to a team that wants to use him to his strengthes even if most EPL fans don't even know that the midfield role Arteta sees him in is where he excelled in. He even said that Arteta's plan for him was why he chose Arsenal, showing that he also identified being played out of position as a problem. I hope the other two follow suit. Even though I'd still have hopes for Sancho if he doesn't find a new club as Ten Hag seems to be a much better fit for him playing style wise than Sancho. The question is rather if things were already beyond repair when he arrived.
He was. Not in terms of price but his first 6 months loan were not that great but Arteta went all in. There was chance to get Maddison and/or other more established players to commit basically the no 10 role. It was a risky move with high upside which we are seeing now.
To give an comparison Gabi Viega has done equal (mabe more) than Odegaard had when we signed him.
There is some nonsense going around about his wages being 330k but the more reliable reports - as well as common sense if you know the club, its wage structure, etc - are that he is on around 200k base going up to maybe 230-250k if bonuses are achieved. That puts him in the same bracket as Jesus, Partey, Rice and probably where Odegaard will end up as well.
In terms of his role, I think you have it right with the caveat that I expect the biggest change from Arsenal this year to be less reliance on a set first XI, with more rotation and lineup switching based on matchups.
Havertz seems likely to get most of his time as the top left of the four man midfield box when in possession in that 3-2-2-3 shape, then to be one of the advanced central pressing players (along with the CF) in a 4-4-2 shape out of possession.
But I think Arsenal will also have matches where we play Rice in that role and Partey as the 6. And while Zinchenko will sometimes be the LB who inverts into center midfield and plays as the bottom left of the midfield box, we'll also have a lot of games where its either Kiwior doing that or Timber doing it from the right side.
Overall, Havertz provides a much more potent attacking option than Xhaka in that role and I think the idea is to then strengthen defensively behind him by (a) having Rice the most common 6, rather than Partey and (b) having Zinchenko become more of a rotational player for certain matches, rather than an automatic starter. So overall the front five become more attack minded and the back five become more defensively sturdy but there are many different configurations possible based on the opponent and the game state.
Yeah I don't think he has the same capabilities in that sense either, but last season Xhaka was given a lot more freedom from a defensive perspective, his defensive stats are fairly similar to the ones Havertz put up last season. Xhaka's defensive numbers were a lot lower last season than in past seasons, and I think that was because of the tactical change for his role, where he was often contributing high up the pitch, Xhaka's heat map for last season is identical to Odegaard's (left and right though obviously) . So in this player swap they'll miss out somewhat on Xhaka's defensive contribution and defensive experience, someone else mentioned his passing range and that'll be another miss, but they'll gain on stuff like playing in the half spaces and general work in the final third. I think as well Arteta will be hoping that Havertz pressing game will be a positive addition, he's really good at that aspect and while Xhaka was always willing in that sense he was a bit of a snail, and they often rely on a collective pressing approach.
Of course this isn't to say it will necessarily work! But I thought when they were linked with him that would be the plan, in part because of the role Xhaka played last season and in part because Havertz was a bit shit when it came to leading the line at Chelsea and I always felt that role negated some of his strengths. When he came on in their friendly the other night that's where he played too apparently (and he was apparently a bit shit as well
). Overall I think he'll be a success, but you know how I'm like when it comes to Arteta so take it with a grain of salt obviously @Powderfinger I replied just as you posted so I'll edit it in
Gotcha about the wages! The way they're reported is always confusing for me.
And yeah that makes sense to me, I think less reliance on the first XI would be important and a step in the right direction. Do you think Partey will stay? It looked like he was sure to leave a couple weeks ago which I thought was a little confusing (for on the field reasons, for off the field stuff it would make sense to me), I know his form dropped off but he's a good player and Rice aside I don't think you have much depth there do you? When you mention Zinchenko being more of a rotational player for certain matches would that be because of his defensive frailties? I'm a big fan of fullbacks who can function in the way he can, and technically he's great, but I can absolutely see the logic of swapping him out in certain select matches because of the way he can be exposed.
Last edited:
Yeah, that seems to be the consensus and I can see that working for breaking teams that just sit back and defend. If the club keeps Party then I can see Rice filling that role against say City where the opposition will have a lot of possession. The reported wages are a concern if he is indeed now the highest paid player which doesn't seem fair for players like Saka or even Odegaard.
True for last season but Xhaka still was impulsive and for me is still too card prone but I guess Rice can fill in there if Party stays, which I have mixed feelings about.
highlight videos are all well and good, but weather you actually get that havertz is a bit of a gamble. He has been a massive flop. i don't know what fee was paid, but if it was over £40 million, arsenal have been done up the chutney.
Yeah I saw that range quoted by Chelsea affiliated media too, who reported that we just matched Chelsea's contract.
Having said that I want to believe it.
65m allowed us to get the deal done quickly. Arteta can take a good look at him in pre season and if he's not what he wanted, then he can bin him. Better than haggling for him just to see him underwhelm costing us vital points.
Don't think he took a pay cut to sign for Arsenal. He was already on 300K per week at Chelsea.