That would be the fastest way for Keane to get a move to Liverpool
After we make quite a tidy profit!..
Anyway, we don't need him, Jack Stephens is going to be even better....
Harry Maguire......
- Thread starter Peej
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
After we make quite a tidy profit!..
Anyway, we don't need him, Jack Stephens is going to be even better....
After we make quite a tidy profit!..
Anyway, we don't need him, Jack Stephens is going to be even better....
After we make quite a tidy profit!..
Anyway, we don't need him, Jack Stephens is going to be even better....
I hope his stats and when that Leicester fan watched him are/was better than Maguires
With a bit of luck Leicester will snatch this player away from under our noses.
Leicester City will have to offer at least £40m to even tempt Swansea City into discussing a possible deal for Iceland playmaker Gylfi Sigurdsson, 27. (Leicester Mercury)
Leicester City will have to offer at least £40m to even tempt Swansea City into discussing a possible deal for Iceland playmaker Gylfi Sigurdsson, 27. (Leicester Mercury)
Maguire beats them both in almost every aspect, Gibson and Keane ONLY have more blocks and clearances and Gibson has better passing.
I've highlighted the reason why Keane had so many blocks and clearances and it's because of Burnley's style of play. If you don't see that then you don't understand football, simple as that!
Well out of the three Gibson would fit that mould, Maguire is in between, better passer than Keane but not as good as Gibson.
Before we signed any of them I had a check to see which I wanted and when I checked stats I was surprised that Maguire beat them both in all but two areas and he was playing for a team who didn't have a defence or midfield and played open expansive football.
How do you even come to that conclusion? I'm interested not wumming so what is it that makes him a "more complete footballer" in your opinion?
My own personal opinion is I don't think there's really much to choose between Keane, Gibson or Maguire.
I think they're all good young defenders and in better teams will all be top defenders and will all play for England in the future.
The fee for Maguire was just a bargain in my opinion.
Anyway your biggest issue is replacing Lukaku because you're facked without him.
I think they're all good young defenders and in better teams will all be top defenders and will all play for England in the future.
The fee for Maguire was just a bargain in my opinion.
Anyway your biggest issue is replacing Lukaku because you're facked without him.
I can't believe that transfer went through without being covered in the press.
I'm sure one If the great defenders of his generation will have never issue setting up a defence with Keane in it and have it performing how he wants.
Looking at all three I know who I would prefer and I have watched Maguire about 15 times sat on the Kop at Brammal Lane.
I have watched the others 2-3 times. One has an England cap......playing defensive football for his club
Mate that's like me saying I don't rate Kane because he was crap at Leicester or Kean for that matter because he was nothing special either, hence why we didn't buy him.
Players improve and clearly Kane and Keane aren't the players they were when I saw them at Leicester, just like Maguire isn't the same player you saw at Sheff Utd. If you'd seen what I saw from Keane you'd be judging him the same but players improve and both were very young.
One does have an England cap and that's why you're having to pay so much for a defender who is no better than Maguire, who recieved great plaudits almost weekly on MOTD.
As I've said before I checked to see which of the three I wanted because originally my preference was Gibson but was then surprised by Maguire's stats, which did beat them both in almost every aspect so I'm happy we got him but I'd be happy with any of them because they're all good.
So on one hand stats are good. But in the key defensive attributes that Keane bosses......they seem less important.
Good luck with Harry.
Well it depends what you class as more important out of interceptions and tackles v blocks and clearances? I'd say they're all equally important to be honest.
On one hand tackles and interceptions show good reading of the game, good positioning and good timing and blocks and clearances show resilience and good positioning in the area but their respective clubs style of play is an important factor. At Hull they were open so Maguire had to read the game, intercept and tackle whereas Burnley were compact and invited balls into the box for Keane to clear and block. They both excelled in the areas required of them.
So I considered both when assessing who I thought was better (prior to us signing Maguire) and based on the 8/10 areas Maguire beat Keane and the 7/10 areas he beat Gibson, I allowed the stats to make my decision not pundits, valuations or England call ups and I was surprised when my no.3 went to no.1. There is no bias involved at all and I'd be happy with Keane or Gibson and u wouldn't care about the extra money either. I juat don't think there's any basis whatsoever to claim that Keane is better.
I'd suggest with your style of play better passing, tackles and interceptions would be better than blocks and clearances because you don't play like Burnley.
Let's see how good he is in tackles and interceptions next season, see if he beats Maguire and vice versa with Maguire playing for a more compact defence.
You haven't yet have you? Or have you signed him now? If so I missed it.
QUOTE="Champions of England, post: 10684552, member: 1004410"]One does have an England cap and that's why you're having to pay so much for a defender who is no better than Maguire, who recieved great plaudits almost weekly on MOTD. it[/QUOTE]
Well why are you saying the club is having to pay so much more?
If the club were happy to pay £11m for Lookman and £30m for Pickford, I don't think £5m more for Keane over Maguire potentially is an issue. Walsh knows our style, yet he went for Keane?
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/99487/Show/Harry-Maguire
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/107941/Show/Michael-Keane
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/86458/Show/Ben-Gibson
Well why are you saying the club is having to pay so much more?
If the club were happy to pay £11m for Lookman and £30m for Pickford, I don't think £5m more for Keane over Maguire potentially is an issue. Walsh knows our style, yet he went for Keane?[/QUOTE]
Because you're going to pay at least £25m and we didn't pay £17m, it's £12m with add-ons so "potentially" £17m so you're paying more than double and he's not worth more than double, if anything at all. I don't see any difference in value between the three.
Because of Vardy, Mahrez and Kante people forget about all the crap that Walsh brought to the club too. For the few gems there have been more dude. Inler, Hernandez, Mendy, Benalouane, Musa, Zieler and Amartey. Cost us £50m and none of them are good enough to be starting and I'd be surprised if the ones still here will be in the squad next season. So don't be expecting every signing to be spot on because it won't be.
We bid for Keane last season but didn't think he was worth going in for again, why is that? We've been watching Maguire since Sheff Utd and Keane since he was with us but we went for Maguire because he's the better, cheaper option so it makes more sense.
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/107941/Show/Michael-Keane
https://www.whoscored.com/Players/86458/Show/Ben-Gibson
Well why are you saying the club is having to pay so much more?
If the club were happy to pay £11m for Lookman and £30m for Pickford, I don't think £5m more for Keane over Maguire potentially is an issue. Walsh knows our style, yet he went for Keane?[/QUOTE]
Because you're going to pay at least £25m and we didn't pay £17m, it's £12m with add-ons so "potentially" £17m so you're paying more than double and he's not worth more than double, if anything at all. I don't see any difference in value between the three.
Because of Vardy, Mahrez and Kante people forget about all the crap that Walsh brought to the club too. For the few gems there have been more dude. Inler, Hernandez, Mendy, Benalouane, Musa, Zieler and Amartey. Cost us £50m and none of them are good enough to be starting and I'd be surprised if the ones still here will be in the squad next season. So don't be expecting every signing to be spot on because it won't be.
We bid for Keane last season but didn't think he was worth going in for again, why is that? We've been watching Maguire since Sheff Utd and Keane since he was with us but we went for Maguire because he's the better, cheaper option so it makes more sense.
Because you're going to pay at least £25m and we didn't pay £17m, it's £12m with add-ons so "potentially" £17m so you're paying more than double and he's not worth more than double, if anything at all. I don't see any difference in value between the three.
Because of Vardy, Mahrez and Kante people forget about all the crap that Walsh brought to the club too. For the few gems there have been more dude. Inler, Hernandez, Mendy, Benalouane, Musa, Zieler and Amartey. Cost us £50m and none of them are good enough to be starting and I'd be surprised if the ones still here will be in the squad next season. So don't be expecting every signing to be spot on because it won't be.
We bid for Keane last season but didn't think he was worth going in for again, why is that? We've been watching Maguire since Sheff Utd and Keane since he was with us but we went for Maguire because he's the better, cheaper option so it makes more sense.[/QUOTE]
If the club had been watching Maguire since his Sheffield United days, why wait till you had to pay £17m for him? Even then that was a reduced fee because of his relegation form at Hull
https://www.premierleague.com/players/9566/Harry-Maguire/stats
For a defender that played a more expansive game, he didn't make that many recoveries. Maybe you have signed an expensive liability
For a defender that played a more expansive game, he didn't make that many recoveries. Maybe you have signed an expensive liability
Do you ever actually watch football. you know....with your eyes?
As I saw all 3 of the players you've brought up in the flesh last season, and Maguire was the worst of the 3 imo. He's cumbersome and doesn't read the game anywhere near as well as Keane, his size gives him an aerial advantage as does his medicine ball head, but that's about it. Ask yourself why Steve Bruce - a quality CB - never really fancied him, and he was never a guaranteed starter under him.......
It's that big it's got it's own gravitational pull, I swear there was crisp packets orbiting it at Goodison this season
