sullydnl
Ross Kemp's caf ID
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Messages
- 35,074
I'd be surprised if we didn't have some interest in him. But I'd also be very surprised if he chose us over Liverpool from a minutes perspective.
I don’t see the original report of this.
Lavia, 19, has emerged as Jürgen Klopp’s primary target to fill the No 6 role, and Liverpool have previously had bids of £38 million and £41 million turned down.
Southampton regard Lavia as the best young player in his position in the world, and there has also been interest in the midfielder from Manchester United, Chelsea and Paris Saint-Germain.
Disagree with this. Lavia's ceiling is so much higher than Amrabat's that its a no brainer if funds are available you take the long term option. If Mainoo is as good as he looks there will always be room in the midfield for him and it won't be long before both Casemiro and Bruno need replacing leaving us with a midfield of Mount plus battle hardened versions of Lavia and Mainoo which sounds very appealing to me as its more press resistant and posessionally secure than our existing midfield - although we'd be losing creativity.That does not mean he will live up to his potential.
Amrabat will be a squad player, but so would Lavia be. I think Amrabat is the better player now and has way more experience and seems like a tougher player, so he would probably be the better fit right now with his skillset.
We also have Mainoo coming up, so getting a young midfielder for £50m when they have similar skills would not be ideal.
Disagree with this. Lavia's ceiling is so much higher than Amrabat's that its a no brainer if funds are available you take the long term option. If Mainoo is as good as he looks there will always be room in the midfield for him and it won't be long before both Casemiro and Bruno need replacing leaving us with a midfield of Mount plus battle hardened versions of Lavia and Mainoo which sounds very appealing to me as its more press resistant and posessionally secure than our existing midfield - although we'd be losing creativity.
Disagree with this. Lavia's ceiling is so much higher than Amrabat's that its a no brainer if funds are available you take the long term option. If Mainoo is as good as he looks there will always be room in the midfield for him and it won't be long before both Casemiro and Bruno need replacing leaving us with a midfield of Mount plus battle hardened versions of Lavia and Mainoo which sounds very appealing to me as its more press resistant and posessionally secure than our existing midfield - although we'd be losing creativity.
Agreed. Why would anyone choose a journeyman like Amrabat over a top prospect like Lavia? The job spec is cover, a young player with already good experience is a perfectly acceptable profile for the job. I’d say even the ideal scenario and more symptomatic of the succession planning of this well run club that I read so much about. It’s not an urgent first XI need, and we already have am experienced world class player in the starting role. Lavia is a better fit for the job than Amrabat, who is a weighed and measured player who had a good World Cup. He’d be a better fit for a loan signing to cover the first XI.
Agreed. Why would anyone choose a journeyman like Amrabat over a top prospect like Lavia? The job spec is cover, a young player with already good experience is a perfectly acceptable profile for the job. I’d say even the ideal scenario and more symptomatic of the succession planning of this well run club that I read so much about. It’s not an urgent first XI need, and we already have am experienced world class player in the starting role. Lavia is a better fit for the job than Amrabat, who is a weighed and measured player who had a good World Cup. He’d be a better fit for a loan signing to cover the first XI.
Fred replacement is Mount. Amrabat takes Mctominay spot in deep midfield. Mainoo takes Dvb spot in the squad. I expect after this departures we go for Amrabat and a center back and call it a day.So with Fred and DvB being replaced my Amrabat. I wonder if a Mctominay sale would mean we would then look into buying Lavia. Honestly I think that would be a great move for us. It's odd for us to be linked with more midfielders unless we thought we were gonna get more. I wouldn't necessarily be against having Lavia play for Southampton until winter or next summer if it could drop the price a little and it would secure valuable playing time for him
It’s not proof but it’s good evidence. Relative experience (as measured by the football observatory) is an excellent judge of where a player is relative to peers of a similar age. Lavia’s minutes and League profile put him at 2.12 RE for context for his position these were the other players (data correct as of 26/04/23):His club did get relegated. I'm not saying that's his fault but the fact that he played a lot as a 19 year old isn't ipso facto proof that he's a great player.
Vermeeren has a lot of promise and I’d be delighted if we went in for him. £50m for Lavia or ~£20-30m for Vermeeren.I don't think Lavia is ready to be a starter for a top team and from what I saw last season, he made quite a lot of mistakes in midfield. And eventhough he's got good ability on the ball as far as resisting pressure is concerned, his longer range passing isn't of the required standard as yet, and he'd be more of a project signing imo.
I think it would make much more sense to sign Amrabat and also look to complete the signing of the young midfielder from Antwerp (Arthur Vermeeren), who we've been linked to and looks to have a more rounded game as a deeper lying midfielder. If we send him back on loan to Antwerp it would make a lot of sense and save us a lot of money.
I've not seen a lot of Amrabat but isn't the general consensus that he's much better on the ball than Lavia? If that is the case, I can definitely see the value in us pursuing a player like that because we're so weak at retaining the ball in midfield, particularly in big games. Lavia is good for a player of his age but I don't see the passing ability there (yet). If the choice is a good passer with average defensive ability versus a good defender with average passing ability, I'm choosing the former every time.Agreed. Why would anyone choose a journeyman like Amrabat over a top prospect like Lavia? The job spec is cover, a young player with already good experience is a perfectly acceptable profile for the job. I’d say even the ideal scenario and more symptomatic of the succession planning of this well run club that I read so much about. It’s not an urgent first XI need, and we already have am experienced world class player in the starting role. Lavia is a better fit for the job than Amrabat, who is a weighed and measured player who had a good World Cup. He’d be a better fit for a loan signing to cover the first XI.
I don't think Lavia is ready to be a starter for a top team and from what I saw last season, he made quite a lot of mistakes in midfield. And eventhough he's got good ability on the ball as far as resisting pressure is concerned, his longer range passing isn't of the required standard as yet, and he'd be more of a project signing imo.
I think it would make much more sense to sign Amrabat and also look to complete the signing of the young midfielder from Antwerp (Arthur Vermeeren), who we've been linked to and looks to have a more rounded game as a deeper lying midfielder. If we send him back on loan to Antwerp it would make a lot of sense and save us a lot of money.
I've not seen a lot of Amrabat but isn't the general consensus that he's much better on the ball than Lavia? If that is the case, I can definitely see the value in us pursuing a player like that because we're so weak at retaining the ball in midfield, particularly in big games. Lavia is good for a player of his age but I don't see the passing ability there (yet). If the choice is a good passer with average defensive ability versus a good defender with average passing ability, I'm choosing the former every time.
We already have a starter. If that was the job spec we have available, we’d probably be going after Tchouhameni or Rice this summer. For the job being recruited for, Lavia is perfect IMO. We are literally after an understudy. One of the best young DMs in the game sounds perfect for that role.
If the idea was to use Amrabat as almost exclusive back-up to Casemiro, I might agree. From what I can tell the intention would be to use Amrabat as a rotational player with Casemiro against the smaller teams, but the option would still be there to play alongside him in the bigger games. Personally I don't think the ultra aggressive trio of Casemiro, Mount, Fernandes will work against most of the bigger sides, so an Amrabat would give us the flexibility to change approach in those games.I hear that, but ultimately, if we didn’t have Casemiro I doubt most would want us to have Amrabat as first choice instead. So if the consensus is that he’s not quite good enough to be first choice here, then I think I’d be happier with a younger understudy who we agree most likely will be. Let that person develop and have a succession plan in place.
This was like Varane joining Real to understudy Pepe. Real could have got an older, established ‘good’ defender to be back up, who ‘makes fewer mistakes’, but also where they already know his ceiling is nothing special. They instead went for one of the most promising CBs in Varane, who had only played about 30 games or so at the time, and by the time Pepe left the transition was seamless and they simply carried on winning major trophies with Varane. Rodrygo is experiencing a similar transition into their team now.
Ultimately, it is the presence of Casemiro that allows us to go the route of Lavia. So what if he made mistakes at 19?! His potential is obvious and he will have a fairly low pressure role to improve organically over the next two years, while certainly being a player who can step in and play tomorrow when needed too. If we get Amrabat we get Amrabat. Good player. But if given a choice I’d prefer Lavia for sure.
If the idea was to use Amrabat as almost exclusive back-up to Casemiro, I might agree. From what I can tell the intention would be to use Amrabat as a rotational player with Casemiro against the smaller teams, but the option would still be there to play alongside him in the bigger games. Personally I don't think the ultra aggressive trio of Casemiro, Mount, Fernandes will work against most of the bigger sides, so an Amrabat would give us the flexibility to change approach in those games.
Lavia might make some sense if we have a lot of faith in Mainoo to deliver at a consistently high level this season. Even still, if the job spec is to deputise for Casemiro whilst we mould him, we might be able to find a more rounded or cheaper talent than Lavia to perform that role for the £50m it'd take to prise him away from Southampton.
But Lavia himself is already a PL standard player who can also rotate against smaller teams. He’s clearly good enough to play PL football, so starting him at home against Luton is not the risk it’s seemingly being implied to be. He can also come in in tough games alongside Casemiro. What has happened to us? This is how it works. This is how we develop players. There will be games Lavia can play, but also, every 90 mins he does play will also be an investment on our part in his and our future.
And I’m not sure how many better young options than Lavia we can find for sub-50m, especially anyone who is also ready to start tomorrow if Casemiro can’t. If we went and got a 19 year old for 20m, I imagine he simply won’t be as good/promising as Lavia, or if he is, then probably even less ready to deputise in the here and now. The appeal with Lavia is the combination of his potential but also current level. He’s already a good PL level player, and will improve with every week and every game here.
You're right. The ONLY reason I think United is after Amrabat rather than Lavia is the transfer fee.
I remembered some of your comments and i like them(one of the best posters on this forum). The reason why we're going for Amrabat instead of Lavia is Glazer Apocalypse/Tragedy/Dystopia. Amrabat is cheaper - that's it.But Lavia himself is already a PL standard player who can also rotate against smaller teams. He’s clearly good enough to play PL football, so starting him at home against Luton is not the risk it’s seemingly being implied to be. He can also come in in tough games alongside Casemiro. What has happened to us? This is how it works. This is how we develop players. There will be games Lavia can play, but also, every 90 mins he does play will also be an investment on our part in his and our future.
And I’m not sure how many better young options than Lavia we can find for sub-50m, especially anyone who is also ready to start tomorrow if Casemiro can’t. If we went and got a 19 year old for 20m, I imagine he simply won’t be as good/promising as Lavia, or if he is, then probably even less ready to deputise in the here and now. The appeal with Lavia is the combination of his potential but also current level. He’s already a good PL level player, and will improve with every week and every game here.
Pretty sure United, Chelsea, and PSG are mentioned only so that the agent/Southampton can put more pressure on Liverpool to cough up the extra money.
We're only in for Amrabat and that too depends on player sales. Otherwise, I reckon we're done this window and ready to start the season with our new additions.
You consider Southampton a rival?I'd say use the funds from Maguire/Scott to grab Lavia.
Opportunity to weaken a rival, he will have resale value, low salary, great understudy to Casemiro, can play with him in some games, solo in League Cup games etc.
Badum tish.You consider Southampton a rival?
But Lavia himself is already a PL standard player who can also rotate against smaller teams. He’s clearly good enough to play PL football, so starting him at home against Luton is not the risk it’s seemingly being implied to be. He can also come in in tough games alongside Casemiro. What has happened to us? This is how it works. This is how we develop players. There will be games Lavia can play, but also, every 90 mins he does play will also be an investment on our part in his and our future.
And I’m not sure how many better young options than Lavia we can find for sub-50m, especially anyone who is also ready to start tomorrow if Casemiro can’t. If we went and got a 19 year old for 20m, I imagine he simply won’t be as good/promising as Lavia, or if he is, then probably even less ready to deputise in the here and now. The appeal with Lavia is the combination of his potential but also current level. He’s already a good PL level player, and will improve with every week and every game here.
At least it's better than some far-fetched logic that you'd weaken us if you signed a Southampton playerBadum tish.
There's that famous scouse wit.
Is Lavia not your number one target for midfield?At least it's better than some far-fetched logic that you'd weaken us if you signed a Southampton player
Disagree with this. Lavia's ceiling is so much higher than Amrabat's that its a no brainer if funds are available you take the long term option. If Mainoo is as good as he looks there will always be room in the midfield for him and it won't be long before both Casemiro and Bruno need replacing leaving us with a midfield of Mount plus battle hardened versions of Lavia and Mainoo which sounds very appealing to me as its more press resistant and posessionally secure than our existing midfield - although we'd be losing creativity.
Liverpool are in big trouble if all their hopes of solidifying their midfield are on this kid.
Even with lavia they are in big trouble and will need all 3 to stay fit all season. The Liverpool owners are crazy and in for a shock following their serious lack of transfer business.They're going to be cut through quite easily if they line up with him, Szoboszlai and MacAllister as their midfield three.
Leaving you without your 1st choice #6, less than a week before the season? I think this weakens you, unless you magically have several other DMC targets up your sleeve?At least it's better than some far-fetched logic that you'd weaken us if you signed a Southampton player