Donkai Havertz | Arsenal Watch

I have to admit Havertz's role as a central midfielder is the strangest I've seen. I've never seen a central midfielder average less passes attempted per 90 than the goalkeeper (33.9 for Havertz vs 34.0 for Raya).

It was confusing to see him play there at the start because it was clear he was being ignored in the buildup of play, which made you think why he was there. It seems more clear now that he is playing primiarly as a second striker to add their threat up front, with Arteta playing the box midfield and Zinchenko coming into central midfield from LB. Zinchenko coming in means they aren't missing any control in midfield even if Havertz isn't involved in buildup.

It was working better recently, as mentioned with his player of the month award in November, but overall there has been a decline in the team, and he ofcourse is being made the scapegoat for it.
Mason Mount in his first 2 games for us. His replacement Eriksen (halfway through the 2nd half ) had a pretty similar number of passes/touches in 1/3 the time.

Both are laughably poor transfers, and it's embarrassing to compare which is worse.
 
Last edited:
Surely that makes it worse though? We spent £55m on a player who has barely played and who - if we had waited - would either cost a lot less right now, or be completely free in 6 months time.
Only with the gift of hindsight, and not in the real world, no. It's not like Mount's career at Utd is going to be defined by his first 4 months here, in a team in turmoil and with injury. If his overall time here is more of the same, then sure, the transfer will be deemed a failure. But even with that in mind, this transfer and Havertz's are not comparable - which is the initial point I was replying to (and to which in fairness the poster recognised he hadn't followed closely enough).
 
Only with the gift of hindsight, and not in the real world, no. It's not like Mount's career at Utd is going to be defined by his first 4 months here, in a team in turmoil and with injury. If his overall time here is more of the same, then sure, the transfer will be deemed a failure. But even with that in mind, this transfer and Havertz's are not comparable - which is the initial point I was replying to (and to which in fairness the poster recognised he hadn't followed closely enough).
What hindsight? He was available for free this summer and we managed to waste nearly £60m, maybe half that OK. He also had one good season at Chelsea.
 
Only with the gift of hindsight, and not in the real world, no. It's not like Mount's career at Utd is going to be defined by his first 4 months here, in a team in turmoil and with injury. If his overall time here is more of the same, then sure, the transfer will be deemed a failure. But even with that in mind, this transfer and Havertz's are not comparable - which is the initial point I was replying to (and to which in fairness the poster recognised he hadn't followed closely enough).

I don't think thats true - many people were scratching their heads over the Mount transfer at the time, in terms of a) The Fee, especially when he was in the last year of contract b) The fact that Chelsea probably wanted to sell c) The quality of player and d) Us actually needing a player like him in the squad (or at least some combinations of these factors)
 
What hindsight? He was available for free this summer and we managed to waste nearly £60m, maybe half that OK. He also had one good season at Chelsea.
He had 2, but let's rewrite history. Him "being available on a free" this summer is nonsense though. He probably would have been signed by Arsenal or Liverpool who were both interested last summer (this has been clearly reported by Laurie Whitwell, and was the reason why we went fast with that transfer). The nonsense and revisionism around the Mount transfer is frankly tiring.
 
I don't think thats true - many people were scratching their heads over the Mount transfer at the time, in terms of a) The Fee, especially when he was in the last year of contract b) The fact that Chelsea probably wanted to sell c) The quality of player and d) Us actually needing a player like him in the squad (or at least some combinations of these factors)
I don't know why anyone was scratching their head at the fee - with 2 other top clubs interested, and Mount's career to date, it was a perfectly reasonable fee in today's market. It hasn't worked out so far, whether or not he does in the future is another question but from a financial perspective at the time, it made sense. It definitely wasn't ludicrous.

He also absolutely couldn't have been available on a free in a few months which a lot of people are peddling, btw.
 
I don't know why anyone was scratching their head at the fee - with 2 other top clubs interested, and Mount's career to date, it was a perfectly reasonable fee in today's market. It hasn't worked out so far, whether or not he does in the future is another question but from a financial perspective at the time, it made sense. It definitely wasn't ludicrous.

He also absolutely couldn't have been available on a free in a few months which a lot of people are peddling, btw.

Of course he could? It was well reported he wasn't going to sign an extension with Chelsea, Arsenal pivoted away from him and signed Kai Havertz before we bought Mount - so they literally couldn't have bought Mount even if they wanted to at that point because of FFP. Liverpool were never going to spend £55m on Mount which is why they pulled out.

At that point his price would have come down to around £35m/£40m (which I think is probably the most likely scenario) or nobody would sign him and he'd currently have 6 months left on his deal, and it that case it would be in his own best interest to wait until the summer and leave on a free.

£55m for a fairly average player in the last year of his contract is also in no way a reasonable fee. Find me an example of a similar stature of playing moving for as much in the last year of their contract.
 
He had 2, but let's rewrite history. Him "being available on a free" this summer is nonsense though. He probably would have been signed by Arsenal or Liverpool who were both interested last summer (this has been clearly reported by Laurie Whitwell, and was the reason why we went fast with that transfer). The nonsense and revisionism around the Mount transfer is frankly tiring.
Nope a large minority (at the very least) were displeased with the transfer. The entire transfer was tiring because of how split the fans were.

Kovacic was the right player to sign for the CM role.
 
Of course he could? It was well reported he wasn't going to sign an extension with Chelsea, Arsenal pivoted away from him and signed Kai Havertz before we bought Mount - so they literally couldn't have bought Mount even if they wanted to at that point because of FFP. Liverpool were never going to spend £55m on Mount which is why they pulled out.

At that point his price would have come down to around £40m (which I think is probably the most likely scenario) or nobody would sign him and he'd currently have 6 months left on his deal, and it that case it would be in his own best interest to wait until the summer and leave on a free.

£55m for a fairly average player in the last year of his contract is also in no way a reasonable fee. Find me an example of a similar stature of playing moving for as much in the last year of their contract.
That's fine and we disagree on this. With regards to Havertz, it was like a week apart and you know fair well that negotiations would have started well before then - it's likely that we sped up our process when we saw interest from other clubs and Arsenal withdrew. I meant it's not even likely, it's what was reported by Whitwell who's anything but a click merchant.

The rest of your post is mainly football fiction, maybe the price could've been lower, maybe not, in the context within which we signed him, considering all circumstances, it was a fairly reasonable deal.

But again, that wasn't even the point I was replying to at first so not sure why you're bringing this up? Why does it matter?
 
Nope a large minority (at the very least) were displeased with the transfer. The entire transfer was tiring because of how split the fans were.

Kovacic was the right player to sign for the CM role.
We were never signing Kovacic, so what's the point in bringing that up?
 
That's fine and we disagree on this. With regards to Havertz, it was like a week apart and you know fair well that negotiations would have started well before then - it's likely that we sped up our process when we saw interest from other clubs and Arsenal withdrew. I meant it's not even likely, it's what was reported by Whitwell who's anything but a click merchant.

The rest of your post is mainly football fiction, maybe the price could've been lower, maybe not, in the context within which we signed him, considering all circumstances, it was a fairly reasonable deal.

But again, that wasn't even the point I was replying to at first so not sure why you're bringing this up? Why does it matter?

Well the original point was that Chelsea fleeced us for Mount much like they've fleeced Arsenal for Havertz... and you can clearly make a resonable argument that they have done just that (even if the jury is still out on him as player for us)
 
Well the original point was that Chelsea fleeced us for Mount much like they've fleeced Arsenal for Havertz... and you can clearly make a resonable argument that they have done just that (even if the jury is still out on him as player for us)
No, that was Suheilsworld's point, what I was replying to was
I actually like Mount and wanted him at Liverpool at the time. But you’re right, he hasn’t turned out well so far.
It was just about Mount as a player for us. I actually have very little interest in transfer debates in general because it's clouded by hindsight, lack of information (for the major, major part), and fan fiction.
 
I thought he grew into the game last night. His hold up play was good, showed good work rate and he always made himself open. So, he has a good mentality. He didn't hide.
But there are still aspects of his game that he really needs to improve upon. For one, he's clearly not a natural finisher, even though his movement in the area is actually ok. We knew that with his time at Chelsea. And he displayed a clear lack of confidence in his finishing, as did the majority of the Arsenal players. The heavy touches in the area were a real flaw in his game. But I still think he has something about him. I'm not going to totally write him off atm. But a striker he is not. Has the potential in being a good number 10.Good not amazing.
 
It was my impression at Leverkusen that he was strictly a 10, maybe an SS, which is where he excelled. Yet at Chelsea and Arsenal since it feels like they play him everywhere but there then wonder why he isn't that effective.

It feels exactly as we did with Shinji Kagawa.
 
Personally feel the pass he received was pretty rubbish.

It was, it was too slow and behind him as well. Many strikers would end up doing what Havertz did and no one would bat much of an eye, but one it's Havertz who people are looking for moments to ridicule and also he looks gangly as hell trying to control the ball.
 
It was, it was too slow and behind him as well. Many strikers would end up doing what Havertz did and no one would bat much of an eye, but one it's Havertz who people are looking for moments to ridicule and also he looks gangly as hell trying to control the ball.
Agree.
Also, Odegaard is getting Bruno levels of annoying. Such a whinger .
 
In one transfer window Chelsea ripped both Arsenal and Man Utd by selling them two transfer listed players as hot market actives.
 


It's so clear that he's having confidence issues since moving to Prem, or that simply the lights are too bright for him (which was something people mentioned before his transfer as well). You wouldn't imagine him even attempting some of these passes right now.

He would have likely suffered a similar drop in form had he moved to Bayern.
 
Havertz is wank. He'll be at some no mark German club in a season or 2.
 
That’s not a nice way to speak about Dortmund.
Nah, he aged out of the "young exciting baller" category and doesn’t fit the "experienced mentality player" category either. Dortmund won't be interested in signing him.

Some club like Frankfurt (like Götze did and maybe succeding him) could be more like it.
 
It was my impression at Leverkusen that he was strictly a 10, maybe an SS, which is where he excelled. Yet at Chelsea and Arsenal since it feels like they play him everywhere but there then wonder why he isn't that effective.

It feels exactly as we did with Shinji Kagawa.


It is actually the other way round. That's Havertz' heatmap in his last season for us:

IP0RXlg.png


All his heatmaps look like that. So playing him in midfield is actually a good idea. What @hasanejaz88 said about his role is a bit weird though, he was highly involved in the build up back then. He had 65 touches per 90 for us, at Arsenal it is 32
 
It is actually the other way round. That's Havertz' heatmap in his last season for us:

IP0RXlg.png


All his heatmaps look like that. So playing him in midfield is actually a good idea. What @hasanejaz88 said about his role is a bit weird though, he was highly involved in the build up back then. He had 65 touches per 90 for us, at Arsenal it is 32

What did I say about Havertz at Leverkusen? I was mentioning his role at Arsenal being very limited in terms of build up. Havertz at Leverkusen was much more involved in build-up compared to Arsenal, of course.

How did you get the overall heatmap of the season btw, which website?
 
What did I say about Havertz at Leverkusen? I was mentioning his role at Arsenal being very limited in terms of build up. Havertz at Leverkusen was much more involved in build-up compared to Arsenal, of course.

How did you get the overall heatmap of the season btw, which website?

I think I phrased that a bit stupidly :D What I meant was: I think it is very weird that he's partaking so little in the build up because this was one of his strengthes for us.

I got the heatmap from Sofascore.
 
I think I phrased that a bit stupidly :D What I meant was: I think it is very weird that he's partaking so little in the build up because this was one of his strengthes for us.

I got the heatmap from Sofascore.

I can understand Arsenal's hesitancy because he has been quite poor in recent seasons on the ball, don't know if it's just confidence or acclimatising to the league, plus they already have Odegaard who is clearly a better player than him as a number 10.

Havertz's best position is clearly as a number 10 and while I understand he hasn't looked good on the ball, it is still strange to see clubs buying him and playing him in every other position than that, maybe giving him an extended run in the number 10 role would help.
 
It is actually the other way round. That's Havertz' heatmap in his last season for us:

All his heatmaps look like that. So playing him in midfield is actually a good idea. What @hasanejaz88 said about his role is a bit weird though, he was highly involved in the build up back then. He had 65 touches per 90 for us, at Arsenal it is 32

Still talking about positions like it matters like he plays any different.
 
Nah, he aged out of the "young exciting baller" category and doesn’t fit the "experienced mentality player" category either. Dortmund won't be interested in signing him.

This is the Dortmund that are currently signing Jadon Sancho on loan right? Which category does he fit in?
 
This is the Dortmund that are currently signing Jadon Sancho on loan right? Which category does he fit in?
Oh right, I forgot their third category "return of former players who will never reach their level again "
 
Still talking about positions like it matters like he plays any different.

I think it matters and I like discussions about tactical stuff. If you don't, it's fine, nobody's forcing you to partake ;)
 
Great signing, we're seeing a new breed of goal scoring #10s as the position is having a rebirth with more modern managers switching from 4-3-3 to 4-2-3-1.
:mad:

what a transfer, lucky bastards. In a couple of years, we will all ask ourselves how did he end up at Chelsea without competition. I know because of Covid, but still, more top clubs should have been in for him.
It's been a mad window when I can't quite decide which signing excites me the most.


Rent boys making a push improving their team. Whereas we are dithering again
Great player and great signing
Cracking signing and fair play to Chelsea. Some outstanding business this summer. Lampard has to get very close to second or he's done
So I’m gonna say normally he would be a guaranteed starter but given how the fixture list is so congested, I think he will rotate with Mount during this season.

ST:Werner/Giroud/Abraha
LW: Pulisic/CHO/werner/Mount/RLC
RW: Ziyech/CHO/Havertz
AM: Mount/Havertz/Ziyech
CM: Kante/Kovacic/RLC/Jorginho/Barkley/Gilmour/Ampadu

I think he will actually go 4-2-3-1 given how the shape of the squad is now looking. Ziyech is definitely the key buy out of everyone, his passing will be used to break down the Brighton’s and the burnleys of the league who want 10 men behind the ball.
At first glance £71M looks a good deal since I saw reports Leverkusen wanted at least €100M.

Hopefully he flops.
Hats of to Chelsea this summer, some amazing transfers done swiftly.
Im amazed how they managed to get so much quality for decent money, Havertz for 80M, Werner for 50M, Ziyech for 40M, Sarr and Thiago Silva for free. All really good price vs quality signings. Chilwell for 50M is a little excesive but considering he's english the fee is pretty decent as well.
Killer signing, no two ways about it. Maybe Germany's most talented player at the moment, and still so young.
Pretty reliable German reports are saying 80m€ + 20m€ as bonuses, which are bonuses only on paper, because they're extremely likely (kicker: "Bonuses will be paid judging by human discretion with probability bordering certainty") to get triggered. Which would make the upfront demanded 100m€ in total. I personally find it absolutely believable that the whole deal will bring Leverkusen those quoted 100m€, as its a fair price for one of the biggest talents currently around. I just don't understand why he went to Chelsea, it's an underachievement for him but I guess being so young and signing a 5 year deal there's still lots of room to go to an elite club later on. Great player, he can improve Chelsea quite a bit.


Kicker Havertz to Chelsea article

And then this guy knew!

I'm actually not getting all that hype about Chelsea's signings. Of course they've improved, but it's not like they instantly turned into an elite team with those signings.

Let me explain it by focusing on their two biggest transfers (since I've seen them quite often as a Bundesliga watcher):

Werner is a solid striker, but even in his Leipzig days I've never been a fan of him. He's no world-class striker like Suarez, Lewandowski etc. and most likely he'll never be one. There is a reason Bayern didn't want him. He's good when he has a lot of space, but subpar against teams that sit back deep. Take away his speed and he's always had big problems. His technique and link-up play just aren't special at all.

Havertz is a great talent and I actually rate him highly. However, I always thought that the Premier League is the one big league that fits his playing style the least. He's just not very physical and can get bullied by stronger players. Just watch the German Cup final for example. The Bayern CB's and Goretzka bullied him all game long and he was almost invisible until that last minute pen. I thought La Liga would be a better fit for him, since he's more of a technician. It's also not like he already played at a world-class level last year. He was actually really underwhelming during the first half of the season.

Those are the two signings with the biggest hype, I for one just don't see them being instant homerun hits though. Could also turn out to be wrong of course.

This season is too early for them to compete anyway. You don't win titles with a team full of kids.

Anyway, shit quoting aside it’s quite intriguing looking back to see all the praise being heaped on Havertz when he arrived, and Chelsea actually with the signings they made that summer, then looking at how it’s turned out. Only the free transfer of Thiago Silva has stood the test of time from that batch and that’s not even mentioning the Lukaku deal in its glory.

Chelsea really have been as bad, maybe even worse, in the market than United in recent years.

As for Havertz I do think the position discussion from @Zehner is an interesting one especially when you look at the players pre PL heat map. It certainly seems like he was bought at a key developmental period and misused somewhat. That can’t of helped.

On the flip side he’s played under a number of different coaches now so they can’t all be wrong can then? There’s obviously a bit more too it, especially when you consider him hardly tearing up trees internationally either. Perhaps the damage is done.
 
Anyway, shit quoting aside it’s quite intriguing looking back to see all the praise being heaped on Havertz when he arrived, and Chelsea actually with the signings they made that summer, then looking at how it’s turned out. Only the free transfer of Thiago Silva has stood the test of time from that batch and that’s not even mentioning the Lukaku deal in its glory.

Chelsea really have been as bad, maybe even worse, in the market than United in recent years.

As for Havertz I do think the position discussion from @Zehner is an interesting one especially when you look at the players pre PL heat map. It certainly seems like he was bought at a key developmental period and misused somewhat. That can’t of helped.

On the flip side he’s played under a number of different coaches now so they can’t all be wrong can then? There’s obviously a bit more too it, especially when you consider him hardly tearing up trees internationally either. Perhaps the damage is done.

Is it crack cocaine? I mean this is a post you included in whatever exercise you’re engaged in right now:

At first glance £71M looks a good deal since I saw reports Leverkusen wanted at least €100M.

Hopefully he flops.
 
Last edited:
In one transfer window Chelsea ripped both Arsenal and Man Utd by selling them two transfer listed players as hot market actives.

Half of our CL winning team is riding the bench at other clubs. Makes what Tuchel did with that team even more remarkable.
 
Is it CTE or crack cocaine? I mean this is a post you included in whatever exercise you’re engaged in right now:

Making jokes about CTE after the recent passing of Sir Bobby Charlton is poor form.

Anyway your quote was captured by mistake. Apologies.
 
I'm actually not getting all that hype about Chelsea's signings. Of course they've improved, but it's not like they instantly turned into an elite team with those signings.

Let me explain it by focusing on their two biggest transfers (since I've seen them quite often as a Bundesliga watcher):

Werner is a solid striker, but even in his Leipzig days I've never been a fan of him. He's no world-class striker like Suarez, Lewandowski etc. and most likely he'll never be one. There is a reason Bayern didn't want him. He's good when he has a lot of space, but subpar against teams that sit back deep. Take away his speed and he's always had big problems. His technique and link-up play just aren't special at all.

Havertz is a great talent and I actually rate him highly. However, I always thought that the Premier League is the one big league that fits his playing style the least. He's just not very physical and can get bullied by stronger players. Just watch the German Cup final for example. The Bayern CB's and Goretzka bullied him all game long and he was almost invisible until that last minute pen. I thought La Liga would be a better fit for him, since he's more of a technician. It's also not like he already played at a world-class level last year. He was actually really underwhelming during the first half of the season.

Those are the two signings with the biggest hype, I for one just don't see them being instant homerun hits though. Could also turn out to be wrong of course.

This season is too early for them to compete anyway. You don't win titles with a team full of kids.

@LuckyScout78 you have competition.