Romelu Lukaku vs Alvaro Morata 2017/18

JPRouve said:
Why did you try to sign Lukaku then? Did you only discovered that he was Lukaku's agent after your last minute offer?
Click to expand...

What do you mean why? Because Lukaku was the club's transfer target. Maybe they were confident of landing him so they didn't bother to move quicker, hoping to negotiate a better deal, who knows. Perhaps they were under the impression that Lukaku's choice was Chelsea so both Everton and Raiola would eventually lower their demands.

It's up to the player in question whether to accept the deal or not, agent works for him. If in fact, Chelsea did match United's offer, that means Lukaku had to choose between the two clubs and he went with United. He could have easily gone to Chelsea and if his agent wasn't happy about it he could have fired him and got another.
 
Last edited:
Brwned said:
I'd have preferred Morata but if Lukaku didn't outscore him it would have to mean thar Lukaku's had a terrible season or Morata's had an incredible one. All things being equal, Lukaku will always outscore Morata.

I think they've probably ended up at the right clubs too. Morata is the closest thing to a direct replacement for Costa as you'll find. He doesn't have the same aggression but everything else is very similar.
Click to expand...

But isn't Costa's aggression one of his plus points? I mean I haven't watched Morata much but I don't think he's got too much in common with him, although you've seen him more than I've so I might be wrong.
 
Is it just me that thinks both clubs got the right player suited for their needs? We struggle to score goals all over the team, it's become obvious since SAF left, Ibra last season was good but is he not the only player to score more than 20 since Fergie left? My point is with Zlatan gone we had to replace his goals and even imrpove at least, so bringing a proven goalscorer like Lukaku was the right choice. On the other hand Chelsea have more than few players who contribute with goals, then don't have a serious goalscoring problem like we do, so bringing Morata who is i think as good technical player as Costa but maybe a bit worse goalscorer is the right choice for them also. I mean they don't depend on his finishing and can afford to take a risk on a guy who's 25 and scored 60 goals in his career.
 
antihenry said:
What do you mean why? Because Lukaku was the club's transfer target. Maybe they were confident of landing him so they didn't bother to move quicker, hoping to negotiate a better deal, who knows. Perhaps they were under the impression that Lukaku's choice was Chelsea so both Everton and Raiola would eventually lower their demands.

It's up to the player in question whether to accept the deal or not, agent works for him. If in fact, Chelsea did match United's offer, that means Lukaku had to choose between two clubs and he went with United. He could have easily gone to Chelsea and if his agent wasn't happy about it he could fire him and find another.
Click to expand...

If his agent was such a problem why did you moved from him in the first place and why did you insist until the last minute? Translation, your "We didn't want to pay Raiola" is complete rubbish.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Oh I'm not disputing that. There was palpable discord within Chelsea's hierarchy this summer; it's not a coincidence that Conte signed his new contract within 48 hours of the Morata signing. Emenalo and the board definitely pushed for Lukaku and had to convince Conte he would fit but Conte's first choice has always been Morata dating back to his time at Juventus.
Click to expand...

Conte preferred Morata but Chelsea matched United's offer for Lukaku at the last minute. Makes sense.
 
JPRouve said:
In the best clubs, because they have the best finishers.
Click to expand...

Nah, that's bollox. If a striker has really fantastic movement they may sniff out chances that lesser strikers don't (not sure why you mention finishing though?) but it's the quality of the other players around them that will make a much bigger difference when it comes to how many chances they get.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Oh I'm not disputing that. There was palpable discord within Chelsea's hierarchy this summer; it's not a coincidence that Conte signed his new contract within 48 hours of the Morata signing. Emenalo and the board definitely pushed for Lukaku and had to convince Conte he would fit but Conte's first choice has always been Morata dating back to his time at Juventus.
Click to expand...

Pure speculation. And, like I said, all these rumours have only come out after Chelsea missed out on Lukakau. Quite the coincidence, right?
 
Contes first choice has always been Morata dating back to Juventus, where he wasn't first choice....
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Nah, that's bollox. If a striker has really fantastic movement they may sniff out chances that lesser strikers don't (not sure why you mention finishing though?) but it's the quality of the other players around them that will make a much bigger difference when it comes to how many chances they get.
Click to expand...

We were talking about goals not chances, a striker won't score more because he joined a better team. He will score more if he has the tools(technical and mental) to exploit those chances.
 
JPRouve said:
We were talking about goals not chances, a striker won't score more because he joined a better team. He will score more if he has the tools(technical and mental) to exploit those chances.
Click to expand...

There's a direct correlation between chances and goals.

Take the same striker and make him play 38 games for a strong team, then 38 games for a mediocre team. He will absolutely score more goals in the first scenario. To argue otherwise is pure pig-headedness.

Mind you, I'm defining "strong" as a team that scores a lot of goals. So the United team we watched last season doesn't really tick that box. Although we did create more chances than Everton. We've a way to go before we dominate in the same way that Madrid and Juventus did when Morata played for them.

EDIT: Just checked. Madrid scored twice as many goals as we did last season. Fecking hell.
 
Last edited:
Add Lacazette to the thread title too. Let's make this a threesome, the Arsenal lot must feel left out
 
AdNani said:
Contes first choice has always been Morata dating back to Juventus, where he wasn't first choice....
Click to expand...
I imagine that would've been difficult since they worked together for a month before Conte joined the national team.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
There's a direct correlation between chances and goals.

Take the same striker and make him play 38 games for a strong team, then 38 games for a mediocre team. He will absolutely score more goals in the first scenario. To argue otherwise is pure pig-headedness.
Click to expand...

Only if he gets the chances, in a better team you might play for someone else. While the correlation should be true if the player is given the same role and the same status but surrounded by better players, it's sometimes not the case, Real Madrid is an example of that, PSG is another example of that with Cavani vs Ibrahimovic.
And on topic, it's best for a young striker to play for Everton than Real Madrid, for Everton you will be the focal point, you will be the player that every targets, at Real Madrid you are one of Ronaldo's minions.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Pure speculation. And, like I said, all these rumours have only come out after Chelsea missed out on Lukakau. Quite the coincidence, right?
Click to expand...

That's not strictly true, these rumours have been swirling all summer. There have been questions as to why Conte wouldn't put pen to paper on a new contract considering how underpaid he was relative to the rest of the top managers in England; the consensus was that he was unhappy with the transfer targets the club had selected.
 
JPRouve said:
Only if he gets the chances, in a better team you might play for someone else. While the correlation should be true if the player is given the same role and the same status but surrounded by better players, it's sometimes not the case, Real Madrid is an example of that, PSG is another example of that with Cavani vs Ibrahimovic.
And on topic, it's best for a young striker to play for Everton than Real Madrid, for Everton you will be the focal point, you will be the player that every targets, at Real Madrid you are one of Ronaldo's minions.
Click to expand...

When one team scores 100+ goals and the other just over half that then a young striker will get much more joy in front of goal playing for the former team than he will the latter.

Another factor which can bias Morata's stats is the super sub factor. Coming on against tired, already defeated defenders with fresh legs and a point to prove. That's a great way to boost your goals/minute stats.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
That's not strictly true, these rumours have been swirling all summer. There have been questions as to why Conte wouldn't put pen to paper on a new contract considering how underpaid he was relative to the rest of the top managers in England; the consensus was that he was unhappy with the transfer targets the club had selected.
Click to expand...

The consensus was actually that he was unhappy about the lack of progress in signing them.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
When one team scores 100+ goals and the other just over half that then a young striker will get much more joy in front of goal playing for the former team than he will the latter.

Another factor which can bias Morata's stats is the super sub factor. Coming on against tired, already defeated defenders with fresh legs and a point to prove. That's a great way to boost your goals/minute stats.
Click to expand...

It depends, it's not automatic which is the only thing I'm saying. I'm not putting Morata over Lukaku. As for the sub part, it works both ways, it's not easy to play with the right intensity when you come out of the bench, it's not easy to maintain the rhythm throughout the season but it's true that less games will increase your ratio.
 
cyberman said:
You're all over the place here. When Arsenal signed Wright, when Leicester signed Vardy and we signed Forlan, we signed proven and consistent goal scorers. If they could bring that through to a higher level is a different argument but they scored goals. They scored goals before their mid twenties and carried it on. They weren't struggling for goals and suddenly developed it as they got older as you seem to be saying Morata would.
Morata isn't in that mold. You're talking about a player who has a worse tgoal scoring record that Mata had at his age.
The players you mentioned carried their goalscoring record through their careers, Morata hasn't. He stopped scoring goals when he broke into first team football and its only goals last season v literal scrubs that makes his record look somewhat passable.
Click to expand...

You saying I'm all over the place doesn't make it true, quit them nonsensical attempts at discrediting my posts. I'm speaking clearly. You said you couldn't think of a single player who wasn't a goalscorer until their mid 20s, I gave you a list of said players, you then proceeded to argue that some of those players had decent records before their mid 20s and I said that even if some of them did, it doesn't negate the fact that those players that weren't proven goalscorer til their mid 20s and developed into such, exist. And this is with you cherry picking some of the players in the list I provided. What are you not grasping here? Where's the all over the p

Then I went on to highlight that Morata's record actually trumps some of the players' that you tried to argue had a decent/consistent goal scoring record, the numbers are there. You referenced Vardy's pre premier league record, I referenced Morata's. You mentioned Ian Wright having 90 for Palace but those were in 225 appearances, i mentioned Morata having 85 in 209. You can't dance around this.

Now you're moving the goal posts to Morata scoring against scrubs or that his record took a downward trend when he broke into the first team, that's besides the point, and no shit, he isn't a starter at Real and at Juve he had a versatile role, if we break down the goal scoring records of the players you argued in favour of I'm sure I'm gonna find plenty scrub teams, and please don't use this as a platform to move goals posts even further. What are we talking about?
 
Chelsea needed a direct Costa replacement and Morata will be a very good fit for them. They have players like Hazard and Pedro that are capable of scoring and Morata will help in that respect. We needed a striker who was clinical in front of goal and I believe Lukaku is a good fit. He has similar physical traits to Zlatan and I'm confident he will rack up the goals here.

It's all conjecture of course, but I firmly believe that Lukaku was the first choice for both clubs but I did find it strange that Chelsea were looking for a replacement for Costa and going for a player that was nothing like him. I posted the below in June in the Lukaku thread when I though Lukaku was a banker to go back to Chelsea:

Think he'll be better in front of goal than Costa but I think Costa's overall game is better, in all honesty.
Click to expand...

Anyhow, I think both players will be the right fit for both clubs.
 
Feed Me said:
It's implicit in the media's reporting of the story.

Even if you discount the age point, there is a chasm between the two players when it comes to goal scoring, despite Lukaku featuring for weaker sides.
Click to expand...
Morata scored a goal every 80 minutes or something this past season. Maybe he has improved his goal scoring nous. His technique and ability to link play is better. We shall see. But I fear that in 3 years time, Chelsea will be happier with their signing than we will be with ours.
 
Last edited:
@TsuWave
Your list is bullshit. Two out of the 4 I researched had near 100 goals by the time they were Moratas age while Vardy had almost a goal a game! Forlan averaged 1 in 2 throughtout his career if we discount his two year span at Utd. How did they only discover their goal scoring touch mid twenties when they were banging them in for fun before then? They were all bought because of their fecking goal records.
That list is full of shit. Don't even get me started on your Madrid B nonsense. The list of strikers who banged them in for fun then couldn't hack first team football for Barca / Madrid is extensive.
Shows how weak the argument is when Madrids reserve side is brought into it.
Feck it, lets buy Bojan as well
 
antihenry said:
Rooney was a sweetener to help broker the deal. It's not like he's finished, he's 31, experienced and a very capable striker. So you just gifted him to Everton, free of charge? Yeah, right.

Of course, Morata's agent gets a fee. But Raiola is well known for his astronomical fees because he specializes in the the biggest deals involving biggest names. Chelsea wouldn't pay it, United did.
Click to expand...

:lol:
 
Robbie Boy said:
Chelsea needed a direct Costa replacement and Morata will be a very good fit for them. They have players like Hazard and Pedro that are capable of scoring and Morata will help in that respect. We needed a striker who was clinical in front of goal and I believe Lukaku is a good fit. He has similar physical traits to Zlatan and I'm confident he will rack up the goals here.

It's all conjecture of course, but I firmly believe that Lukaku was the first choice for both clubs but I did find it strange that Chelsea were looking for a replacement for Costa and going for a player that was nothing like him. I posted the below in June in the Lukaku thread when I though Lukaku was a banker to go back to Chelsea:



Anyhow, I think both players will be the right fit for both clubs.
Click to expand...

Think this is spot on. Lukaku doesn't move laterally all that much, he'll stay in the middle of the park for the most part, which Mourinho prefers his strikers to do as he favours organization in the final third. Morata will move wide as he did at Madrid and interchange with Hazard and Pedro a lot more, so if Conte sticks to a 3-4-3 then he is the better fit as the front three have license to go anywhere and combine as they see fit.

I said it before but I think Lukaku has the higher ceiling of the two just because there isn't a striking prospect in the world with his physical talents; you can't train height or frame. In the end I would be very surprised if either team is disappointed with the player they've acquired.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
There's a direct correlation between chances and goals.

Take the same striker and make him play 38 games for a strong team, then 38 games for a mediocre team. He will absolutely score more goals in the first scenario. To argue otherwise is pure pig-headedness.

Mind you, I'm defining "strong" as a team that scores a lot of goals. So the United team we watched last season doesn't really tick that box. Although we did create more chances than Everton. We've a way to go before we dominate in the same way that Madrid and Juventus did when Morata played for them.

EDIT: Just checked. Madrid scored twice as many goals as we did last season. Fecking hell.
Click to expand...
Just like Lukaku's countryman Benteke has done afrer he moved from Aston Villa to Liverpool?
 
Lukaku is a beast, although I always preferred Morata. But I do think Lukaka has a higher chance of success here.
 
Z_Wolf said:
Just like Lukaku's countryman Benteke has done afrer he moved from Aston Villa to Liverpool?
Click to expand...

He did. His mins per goal at Liverpool was lower, except he didn't chances as he didn't the way they played.
 
Robbie Boy said:
Chelsea needed a direct Costa replacement and Morata will be a very good fit for them. They have players like Hazard and Pedro that are capable of scoring and Morata will help in that respect. We needed a striker who was clinical in front of goal and I believe Lukaku is a good fit. He has similar physical traits to Zlatan and I'm confident he will rack up the goals here.

It's all conjecture of course, but I firmly believe that Lukaku was the first choice for both clubs but I did find it strange that Chelsea were looking for a replacement for Costa and going for a player that was nothing like him. I posted the below in June in the Lukaku thread when I though Lukaku was a banker to go back to Chelsea:



Anyhow, I think both players will be the right fit for both clubs.
Click to expand...
Yep. Agree with all of this.

I also think it will be a good thing in terms of the style of our football to get a striker that's different to Costa.
 
Z_Wolf said:
Just like Lukaku's countryman Benteke has done afrer he moved from Aston Villa to Liverpool?
Click to expand...

Liverpool have a track record of turning prolific strikers into goal-shy donkeys. See also Robbie Keane. Not to mention that one season wonders like Benteke will always mess up my theory. Lukaku's scored in every season, for every club and has scored more at Everton than he did at WBA.
 
Last edited:
Are some Chelsea fans like @antihenry still trying to pretend they didn't want Big Rom?

That's why the club desperately came in and matched United's bid before snaking away for Morata (who United decided not to bother with) when they realised Lukaku wanted to join the biggest club in the country :smirk:
 
antihenry said:
Rooney was a sweetener to help broker the deal. It's not like he's finished, he's 31, experienced and a very capable striker. So you just gifted him to Everton, free of charge? Yeah, right.

Of course, Morata's agent gets a fee. But Raiola is well known for his astronomical fees because he specializes in the the biggest deals involving biggest names. Chelsea wouldn't pay it, United did.
Click to expand...
Are you kidding me? We wanted to shift Rooney out, that much was clear from the kind of minutes he got in the latter half of the season. And nothing about his play indicated he was very capable or not finished.

If you weren't interested in paying Raiola's fees you would never have bothered bidding for the player in the first place. Are you telling me Chelsea expected Lukaku to ditch his agent mid negotiations in order to join them?
 
MUFC OK said:
How many posts will this thread receive do we reckon? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well it’s 10 pages and they haven’t even kicked a ball yet for their respective clubs -competitively I mean.

I’ve created a monster.
 
TheReligion said:
Are some Chelsea fans like @antihenry still trying to pretend they didn't want Big Rom?

That's why the club desperately came in and matched United's bid before snaking away for Morata (who United decided not to bother with) when they realised Lukaku wanted to join the biggest club in the country :smirk:
Click to expand...
Have any of us disputed that we wanted him? The argument is whether he was Conte's top choice. Something we'll never know.
 
My humble opinion is that Morata have a higher ceiling due to better technique. But that doesn't mean he's more productive. There must also be some question marks why he still not a starter when he's nearly 25 years old.

Maybe his mentality isn't top notch, maybe his ambitions doesn't match his ability. I don't know. Another factor is his stats. Comparing a guy who starts every game against a part time player is problematic. A starter don't have any room for slack, every miss will be highlighted and at some point if your team starts to draw or lose your ability will be questioned. Only characters who're mentally strong survive in such a climate.

Scoring goals at the highest level is more about self confidence and cockiness then technique and ability. If you are capable of scoring 20+ goals for a couple of seasons then the ability is there, the rest is mental strength.

Alvaro Morata have what it takes to be a part time player, the question is if he has what it takes to be a starter with the spotlight on his back 24/7.
 
TheReligion said:
Are some Chelsea fans like @antihenry still trying to pretend they didn't want Big Rom?

That's why the club desperately came in and matched United's bid before snaking away for Morata (who United decided not to bother with) when they realised Lukaku wanted to join the biggest club in the country :smirk:
Click to expand...

Oh no I definitely wanted him, I think he has the most upside of any young striker in the world but I do think Morata fits better into a 3-4-3. If Chelsea had gotten Lukaku I think we might have seen a 3-5-2 with Hazard playing off Lukaku and Fabregas in midfield, but that's pure speculation.
 
Robbie Boy said:
Weird and baseless comment. I actually stuck up for him a fair bit when we were heavily linked following all the Spanish Welbeck (:lol:) comments on here. I'm actually a big fan, scrap that, a huge fan of his and happily would have had him here. I would rather Lukaku as I feel he's far more of a Mourinho player, but had we gotten Morata, I would have been happy. So yeah, he's certainly my cup of tea, so no idea where that came from.

But I mean, we aren't getting him and just because we were in for him this summer, doesn't mean the obsession needs to continue forever more (which I feel it will around here).

Oh and as for "Have I ever watched him play?", I'm sorry but :lol:
Click to expand...
I used to call him that. But if he continues scoring goals like he did last season I expect him be a top top striker and definitely better than Lukaku.

The question is whether he does that, or it was more due to RMs team and him being on a great run of form.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Conte bought Morata at Juventus and tried to buy him last summer as well. I think it's safe to say he's a big fan of Morata. Not sure why you wouldn't believe this when it's the third time he's been in for the lad...
Click to expand...
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Conte bought Morata at Juventus and tried to buy him last summer as well. I think it's safe to say he's a big fan of Morata. Not sure why you wouldn't believe this when it's the third time he's been in for the lad...
Click to expand...

Where did I say conte doesn't like morata. I just don't buy this crap that conte didn't want lukaku. If anything Chelsea were after lukaku since February so now we suddenly have to believe conte didn't rate lukaku or he was not his first choice. Well that doesn't make any sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.