Christopher Nkunku

WeePat said:
He's not really though. He's been almost completely injury free coming up to a full year now. His lack of minutes this season has nothing to do with his fitness. He's been sat on the bench every game and only featured in the conference league and early round cup games.
Click to expand...
I had not realised he was available and actually 'fit', kind of assumed he was rebuilding fitness still after such a long lay off. That makes me even more suspicious of him if he's believed to be match fit.
 
diarm said:
This isn't a relevant comparison though is it?

Garnacho has double the number of top flight appearances Colwill does, and Gabriel is an established, top class defender without Nkunku's awful injury record. Gabriel + £50m for Colwill would be a ridiculously stupid offer on Arsenal's part and ye would be mad not to take it.
Click to expand...

My point was thinking £50m + Nkunku for Garnacho is a bad deal only makes sense if you really don't want to lose Garnacho. It would be a stupid overpay by Chelsea if we offered that.
 
WeePat said:
He's not really though. He's been almost completely injury free coming up to a full year now. His lack of minutes this season has nothing to do with his fitness. He's been sat on the bench every game and only featured in the conference league and early round cup games.
Click to expand...

How do we know this? If he played 2 EPL games in a row are we sure he will not breakdown? Basically we don’t know if his minutes are being managed.

Malacia is fully fit now but we know he’s not capable of playing to this standard week in week out. That’s due to his injury even though right now he’s fully fit.
 
WeePat said:
My point was thinking £50m + Nkunku for Garnacho is a bad deal only makes sense if you really don't want to lose Garnacho. It would be a stupid overpay by Chelsea if we offered that.
Click to expand...

It depends what you value Nkunku at. I want us to keep him, but would be furious if we sold Garnacho to anybody for less than £70m. For a rival like Chelsea I would want a lot more than that.

What value would you put on Nkunku given what's happened during his time at your club?
 
Uncle Mainoo said:
How do we know this? If he played 2 EPL games in a row are we sure he will not breakdown? Basically we don’t know if his minutes are being managed.

Malacia is fully fit now but we know he’s not capable of playing to this standard week in week out. That’s due to his injury even though right now he’s fully fit.
Click to expand...

Malacia has about 300 minutes this season. Nkunku has 1200 minutes. They're not PL minutes, but nearly half of them are. I don't think they're comparable situations imo.
 
diarm said:
It depends what you value Nkunku at. I want us to keep him, but would be furious if we sold Garnacho to anybody for less than £70m. For a rival like Chelsea I would want a lot more than that.

What value would you put on Nkunku given what's happened during his time at your club?
Click to expand...

Well, full disclosure, I don't want Garnacho at Chelsea. I'm just saying this to provide some context for my posts in here.

I wouldn't pay £70m for Garnacho, so maybe that is where the disagreement comes from. I don't value him as highly as that. For Nkunku, I think his value today is around £30-35m, but I think anyone who gets him for that would be getting kind of a steal because in the right system he's probably better than every attacker we have not named Palmer.
 
WeePat said:
Nkunku has more minutes this season alone than Mount has this season and last season combined.
Click to expand...
Yeah, obviously. How about mounts last season? 22/23 after which we bought him?
 
How good is Nkunku at this state? At Leipzig he was really good, then the injuries at Chelsea happened. Does he still have pace after all this?
Some Chelsea-fans claim his lack of playing-time is only due his position/Palmer.
 
VP89 said:
Yeah, obviously. How about mounts last season? 22/23 after which we bought him?
Click to expand...

Just over 2100 minutes. He played less than 45 minutes the final 3 months of the season though, due to injury.
 
WeePat said:
Just over 2100 minutes. He played less than 45 minutes the final 3 months of the season though, due to injury.
Click to expand...
I think this is my issue, has Nkunku played these type of minutes yet?
 
hellhunter said:
Don't you think there might be a correlation between him playing less in the PL and being less injured?
Click to expand...

How would that work? His 18 months of almost non-stop injuries started before joining Chelsea, and his worst Chelsea injury happened in his first pre season.

He is playing more PL football than he has ever done before.
 
VP89 said:
I think this is my issue, has Nkunku played these type of minutes yet?
Click to expand...

He's a 1000 short of that number right now but could reach it by the end of the season. I think the clear difference is that Mount ended the season injured and has carried that on in the 18 months he's been at United. Nkunku hasn't been injured since the back end of last season. I'm not saying don't be wary of his injury history, btw.
 
WeePat said:
He's a 1000 short of that number right now but could reach it by the end of the season. I think the clear difference is that Mount ended the season injured and has carried that on in the 18 months he's been at United. Nkunku hasn't been injured since the back end of last season. I'm not saying don't be wary of his injury history, btw.
Click to expand...
The thing with Nkunku is he hasn't had a single run of games since he came back from that terrible injury. It was a knee ligament surgery too so I would actually think it's more likely he's a crock than someone who can stay fit if we tested it.
 
VP89 said:
The thing with Nkunku is he hasn't had a single run of games since he came back from that terrible injury. It was a knee ligament surgery too so I would actually think it's more likely he's a crock than someone who can stay fit if we tested it.
Click to expand...

He was playing about once a week during the conference league groups and he's come off the bench in every game bar I think 3-4 league games. He also featured a lot for France the last 2 international breaks. I guess I can accept that POV. I'm not sure it's right but we can only know for sure if he gets a move to play regular football.
 
If it's a loan with buy option, and is unrelated to Garnacho (who should stay or move somewhere else), it would be a good deal as a return for Sancho.
 
Injuries can be weird in football. Most United fans were dreading Mazraoui signing due to his awful injury record and he’s played just about every game for us, whereas Mason Mount was almost the polar opposite.

Nkunku would definitely be worth a punt on loan, as long as it’s not an obligation to buy.
 
WeePat said:
He was playing about once a week during the conference league groups and he's come off the bench in every game bar I think 3-4 league games. He also featured a lot for France the last 2 international breaks. I guess I can accept that POV. I'm not sure it's right but we can only know for sure if he gets a move to play regular football.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's just a different level, conference league. Intensity is not going to be the same and Chelsea will control every game there.

We can't be in a position to take risks given how poorly we bought and how unfortunate Mounts story has been for us. I'm fine with a loan but I'd never swap a highly talented 20 year old who's gaps can be bridged with experience for Nkunku without getting good cash with it.
 
Rockets Redglare said:
Injuries can be weird in football. Most United fans were dreading Mazraoui signing due to his awful injury record and he’s played just about every game for us, whereas Mason Mount was almost the polar opposite.

Nkunku would definitely be worth a punt on loan, as long as it’s not an obligation to buy.
Click to expand...
Would be a decent loan option. But if it’s to replace Garnacho then it’s a no go. We should loan him and keep Garnacho. Nkunku for the ST position with Amad and Garnacho behind.
 
Can see I am one of the few who really likes him. He got something special and could fit into our system. Not for Garnacho but a loan + option to buy is a no brainer in my world
 
caughtoffside the source.
might as well ask me nan what she thinks, and she passed away years ago.
 
I like Nkunku and would be quite pleased if we could get him on loan on decent terms. He's a natural fit as one of the two #10s in Amorim's system and I'd expect him to give us a little more goal threat from that position than our current options, which is badly needed.

Whether we can find terms all parties agree with, I have my doubts - he's reportedly on £195k p/w and Chelsea will surely want most of that covered and/or a substantial loan fee.
 
If we get him on loan I’d play him upfront with Garnacho and Amad behind. Should be a more exciting front 3.
 
Highly rate him, but it's a huge question mark whether he's stagnated during his time at Chelsea on top of his recent injury record.

Still not a proper no. 9 though. He'd be better as one of the 10s.
 
Worth about half what is being touted as a fee for him. He's done little at Chelsea so still has it all to prove in the Prem, although I am sure he's score a boat load back in the Bundesliga or in Ligue 1.
 
MattofManchester said:
Highly rate him, but it's a huge question mark whether he's stagnated during his time at Chelsea on top of his recent injury record.

Still not a proper no. 9 though. He'd be better as one of the 10s.
Click to expand...

Which is more important out of second number 10 or a proper number 9 right now
 
I would take him on loan. Fantastic footballer . But the injuries is a concern . We have enough sick notes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.