Why not?
How much would you pay for a striker who consistently nets 20+ goals a season in the Premier league for 5 seasons running before he's in the peak of his career?
Álvaro Morata | Performances
- Thread starter Brwned
- Start date
Why not?
How much would you pay for a striker who consistently nets 20+ goals a season in the Premier league for 5 seasons running before he's in the peak of his career?
If there is ever a player that deserves to be called a fraud, its Morata.
No more than 50m. Turns out we would've been no less better off if we simply kept Zlatan and relied more on Martial and Rashford.
No chance Lukaku would have been worth 50 at fair value. You had less established players in less prolific roles going for same prices. In fact Luiz went for 50m to PSG a few years before that and Higuain went for what 90m eur a year before that?
One of the best strikers in the league would have been comfortably above that.
As for Zlatan, his knee was pretty much gone. Would have been far too risky to just keep him and rely on Martial and Rashford.
How much do you think we can get for him now?
He has hit 20 goals once. Jamie Vardy is as good as him
He's better.
Europa League's on Thursday lads. Morata definitely isn't playing tonight.
Morata to Chelsea is like Torres to Chelsea all over again.
Vardy is one of the best strikers in the league though.
Yeah i agree, Vardy is quality.
Juventus bought Higuain for 90 millions because he scored 36 goals in 35 matches in Serie A. This is the record in the history of Serie A, where usually strikers score much less than in other countries. I wouldn't say he was a "less established player" than Lukaku.
He's came into a bit of form, took his two goals today really well and looks like he's getting used to the physicality of the PL now, should have had a hat-trick though, way too cocky with that lazy chip attempt.
His embarrassing attempt at football also resulted in Crystal palace's only goal
David Luiz’s embarrassing attempt at football also resulted in Crystal Palace’s only goal*
He's a good footballer but he won't get you 20-25+ goals a season. I'd honestly take him over Lukaku at the moment.
thats nonsense
Doesn't matter how good you paint him: he's not worth 85M € (don't know how much it was in pounds
)You could get similar numbers in goals with a less expensive striker. He only scored 16 league goals last season, for crying out loud. That's quite underwhelming, tbh.
Took his goals well yesterday but he still looks very half-arsed a lot of the time. Was at the Derby Carabao Cup game last mid-week and he just didn't move off the ball. Or would lay it off wide and then amble at a very pedestrian pace towards the goal with no desire to work to affect the game.
Yes Vardy is a better than most striker. But his speed and tenaciousness that scares any defence.
For me he lacks presence at times (Lukaku for all his faults certainly has that) but I've always thought he's an intelligent striker who makes superb runs off the forward. You saw that yesterday when for his first he realised a slip second earlier than the defenders the cross would come back into the box and moved forward.
The goal v Man. United when he peeled off the defenders and guide an excellent header into the far corner was another great Strikers goal. He just dosen't have the consistancy.
I agree and you can actually play free flowing football with him in your team.
Doesn't matter how good you paint him: he's not worth 85M € (don't know how much it was in pounds
You could get similar numbers in goals with a less expensive striker. He only scored 16 league goals last season, for crying out loud. That's quite underwhelming, tbh.
16 league goals last year is actually really good considering he's being compared to Torres and Shevchenko in a Chelsea shirt. They were only managing 4-5 league goals a season.
Edit: It was 12 league goals, 16 for the season.
Big problem is he's followed Costa who was all action forward the Chelsea fans adored.
Just out of interest Giroud has only scored 5 goals for Chelsea in nearly a year being there.
Indeed. He'd be perfect in a team with two goal scoring wide forwards. His hold up play and strength will improve when he finally adapts and stops being a sissy.
The amount of times our attack breaks down because Lukuku can't control the ball or hold up his man is shocking..
We've been better than Chelsea going forward this year though
I was also talking about Lukaku, not only Morata
This is almost truth for every league (bar few exceptions): a team that wins the title needs to have a player that scores 20+ league goals and at least another two who score 30+ goals between themselves.A good defense can only give you the league if you have someone who will give you an edge. Otherwise you will have a lot of dead-end games.
Are you a United fan? Because there is no way United have been better than us going forward.
Your striker and right side have been non existent and are stupidly reliant on Hazard.
Our defence is so bad that we have to blitz teams to get anything out of games. We pen teams back because we have to.
With our lack of striker, amateur defence and a habit of missing chances, it has created a perfect storm of throwing wave upon wave of attacks until the 90th minute.
Plus I simply haven't as been impressed with you every time you're on tv. Theres that little forward pressure through the middle that youre missing ( its why Barkley stands out)
We have not. We have been a lot better in recent weeks, but our attacking play hasn't been good most of the season. Chelsea have been pretty decent going forward and have been getting better throughout the season even without Hazard (as demonstrated last week)
I doubt we would look good if we took Martial out of the side
Wheres the great Chelsea games? They're more of a midfield control side than an attacking threat.
They simply don't overwhelm sides and even if you think differently there wouldn't be much in it.
They've had to go direct with Giroud many times for a reason.
Who said anything about great, or are you trying to make out that United have been great this season going forward?
First game of the season. (No Hazard)
Arsenal (Very good attacking, absolutely trash at defending)
Southampton
Burnley (No Hazard)
There have been games where they haven't been great and there have been games where they have played some very nice attacking football.
The thing is though I wasn't even arguing they have been fantastic attacking wise, the point was better than us because if you really think we have been great (bar the last 2/3 games when Martial has hit form) then you are mistaken. Even then we were not great
I mean... 3 games? We blitzed Burnley away ourselves yet somhow only won 2-0 and thats whats blinding posters. They're efficient.
Id put our halves v Bournemouth, Burnley, Newcastle, Spurs, Watford, Young boys and Chelsea against anything Chelsea have done this year.
Don't confuse our defensive shambles with how we're forced to attack
I listed 4 games btw, those were the games I have watched apart from West Ham which I also saw but tbh they were pretty rubbish.
Seriously we haven't been great, yes we played well vs Burnley, we were not that great vs Watford if thats the level of which you call great attack then ok. The combination play that Chelsea have produced in some games is a level above anything we have produced most of this season.
Also I'm only picking games I watched, I'm no Chelsea fan but I've watched all United games and only watched some Chelsea games.
Why would anyone put the Newcastle 2nd half up there when we have like 1 actually defender on the pitch and threw the kitchen sink.
Anyway lets just agree to disagree here.
His movement off the ball is arguably his strong point, it's why he gets so many chances.
Nonsense. Chelsea have the second highest xG in the league and have produced ~20% more xG than United this year (23.63 vs. 19.55). In terms of actual goals it's even starker - 27 vs. 19. So yes, United have (slightly) underperformed in xG while Chelsea have overperformed, but there is still a very significant gap in terms of attacking output.
Can't believe I've actually just read that United have been better attacking than Chelsea this season. A team with a goal difference of 1 vs a team who have scored more goals than sides that go all out attack like Liverpool and Arsenal.
United need to repeatedly get punched in the mouth before you react in desperation and throw the kitchen sink at the opponent in second halves.
We've been the next best attacking side after City, imo. We've been carving through teams with ease.
United need to repeatedly get punched in the mouth before you react in desperation and throw the kitchen sink at the opponent in second halves.
We've been the next best attacking side after City, imo. We've been carving through teams with ease.
Thats a bit of a stretch for even the most blinkered of fans!! We havent even been as good as Bournemouth.
Wait, what?
Chelsea have been hit and miss going forward and seem to rely on spells / moments
. They keep the ball well in midfield and play through Hazard but are otherwise inconsistent across the line.
Unless the criticisms of Morata and laughter at Willian have been a figment of my imagination!
Seriously, go through their match day threads on here. Wheres this attack? Theres nothing coming through the middle.
Why are they impressive? Theres nothing being presented other than vague overviews for a reason.
Well, first of all who cares if every attack goes through Hazard or not? He is part of the team, you know?
And secondly, I'm not a fan of bringing up stats, but if you just look at the goal difference and position it would really surprise me that United have been better in attack.