To be fair the guy was a kid back then, wasnt he 22 or something when we sold him to Everton?I’m very concerned about this buy. I think it will seriously jeopardise our plan for Haaland next year unless a deal has already been struck.
It’s far too much for a player twice proven he couldn’t cut it for us. I hope I’m wrong though.
And he has since proved he can score bags of goals at 2 other PL clubs (Everton and Man Utd) and in Italy with Inter.
Chelsea is a much different team than it was in 2013 and Lukaku is a much different player than he was then, so I am not too worried about that.
Lukaku is very much a box striker, a poacher, someone who, if you create chances for him, he will stick them away (ie the opposite of Werner). That is how Everton and Inter utilised him to great effect
He isnt good at being involved in build up play, his first touch can be left wanting and he isnt as good at holding up the ball as you would expect from a guy his size. He gets compared to Drogba, but I dont see that at all, he is more of a Van Nistelrooy type striker. At United he didnt get quite as good service and was expected to be involved in the build up play, which is why he was less effective, but even then he still had a decent goal scoring record.
We create a lot of chances, we just lack a striker with a killer instinct to put them away. With players like Mount, Ziyech, Werner, Pulisic creating chances for him, Lukaku should get 20+ league goals a season for us.
I agree about the Haaland part though, and that was my only reservation about buying Lukaku is that it may prevent us from going for Haaland next summer, because he could be a 10 year investment and Lukaku very much is a short term fix, for 2-3 years tops. I think we have paid a little more for Lukaku than I would have liked, but these days a proven 20+ goal a season striker who is under 30 is going to cost you north of £75m, thats just the way the market is these days.