2017 Summer Transfer Rumors and Discussion

[Live in the Now]

Of course. But at his age, it was probably going to be next year like any other small keeper. It was a gamble, but if they qualify for the CL it probably doesn't matter. Not sure they'd have won anything this season anyway.

 

[Deficient Mode]

Caballero's passing is decent to good at times. Problem is that he's dreadful under pressure. A lot of teams will man-mark the CBs though or use other pressing schemes that give the goalkeeper time, and Caballero is good in those circumstances. Long-term he's not the solution, and exploitable by good managers.

Fact is, if Pep wants to buy a keeper with great feet it's going to cost at least 30-40m. Not only because the keeper has to be that good but because any club that knows City is coming for their keeper knows to ask for a ton of money.

33 year old Bravo for 17 million was dumb. It was a blatant attempt to save money instead of buy a top keeper and hope it worked out. 30 year old Bravo was a great keeper, but a player that gets older is going to become less athletic. He's small for a goalkeeper so once his athleticism leaves, he can't really save anything.

City's transfer policy as a whole seems not to factor age into the equation. They just won't get as many good years - if any at all - out of 30+ year old players like Nolito and Bravo.

Good news is, it shouldn't be hard for them to improve on their current goalkeeping situation next year.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Well he didn't upgrade it since he went back to the bakcup from before the deal.
As for Caballero being better than Hart, do you mean with his feet or overall?
With his feet marginally better, as a whole I think there's a reason Hart was starting over him for years.

Pepe failed with that transfer, the same way he failed buying Stones for 50+M€.

Hence the quotations.

Yeah, I meant willy is better with his feet. He's obviously not as good overall.

I agre Pep failed with both signings. That's not what I'm contesting.

Fact is, if Pep wants to buy a keeper with great feet it's going to cost at least 30-40m. Not only because the keeper has to be that good but because any club that knows City is coming for their keeper knows to ask for a ton of money.

33 year old Bravo for 17 million was dumb. It was a blatant attempt to save money instead of buy a top keeper and hope it worked out. 30 year old Bravo was a great keeper, but a player that gets older is going to become less athletic. He's small for a goalkeeper so once his athleticism leaves, he can't really save anything.

They already bought Rulli. He has loads of potential.

 

[Deficient Mode]

Pepe failed with that transfer, the same way he failed buying Stones for 50+M€.

Stones transfer has not been proven a failure by any means. Just a very inflated price, and he attracts a lot of (unfair) criticism for that reason. I like him. City fans seem to like him in general.

 

[Live in the Now]

They already bought Rulli. He has loads of potential.

Completely forgot about that, and I wanted to draft him last year. So I should know.

 

[Live in the Now]

This is the first season of Stones entire life where he played a high defensive line. I do hope he fails but it's too soon to know.

 

[Evilo]

Stones transfer has not been proven a failure by any means. Just a very inflated price, and he attracts a lot of (unfair) criticism for that reason. I like him. City fans seem to like him in general.

So far he's failed. And that's according to every City fan I talked to. Regardless of price.
Of course when you consider the price, it's even more of a failure. Plenty of very good defensemen could have been bought for half that price and deliver much better.

 

[John Pedro]

Ederson probably will be the most expensive goalkeeper of all time. According to a lot of reports, Guardiola is ready to active his release clause (£33 million). That would solve their GK's woes.

 

[Luigi Habs]

Hearing rumors that many EPL clubs are after Patrik Schick of Sampdoria. The kid has mad skills for someone that tall, but he's not nearly ready for EPL. He's not even a starter with Sampdoria.

Also RM looks to be willing to trigger Theo Hernandez release fee.

 

[Halladay]

Stones transfer has not been proven a failure by any means. Just a very inflated price, and he attracts a lot of (unfair) criticism for that reason. I like him. City fans seem to like him in general.

We will have this discussion in again in a few years and I will tell you I told you so. He is a mistake waiting to happen.

 

[Chimaera]

At that price, he's either going to give them a decade of top level Central defending, or he's a bust.

So much to pay.

 

[cgf]

I agree, but call me crazy I'd prefer a goalie that can keep the ball out of his net not one that's good with his feet. I mean working around a goalie with poor technical abilities can't be that hard.

Maybe once. But now a days having a keeper who isn't inept with his feet and can sweep, is paramount to a strong possession game.

 

[Deficient Mode]

We will have this discussion in again in a few years and I will tell you I told you so. He is a mistake waiting to happen.

Confirmation bias with CBs making mistakes is strong. Happened to Hummels for years after he became an elite defender.

 

[Halladay]

Confirmation bias with CBs making mistakes is strong. Happened to Hummels for years after he became an elite defender.

Dont change the subject with Hummels. We are talking about Stones. I get that your affection for Pep is deep, but he has done nothing in his career to suggest he should have been bought at that price.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Dont change the subject with Hummels. We are talking about Stones. I get that your affection for Pep is deep, but he has done nothing in his career to suggest he should have been bought at that price.

It's the English tax, not that complicated for why he went for what he did. Top young defenders have been expensive lately and when you add 10-20 million for being English, you get what Stones got.

Especially when you consider that City only has 4 homegrown players, they really weren't in a position to negotiate. They could either waste money on more Delph type signings or overpay for an homegrown that at least has the potential to contribute.

 

[Deficient Mode]

Dont change the subject with Hummels. We are talking about Stones. I get that your affection for Pep is deep, but he has done nothing in his career to suggest he should have been bought at that price.

Hummels was just an example of how fans treat the mistakes of CBs who don't make a good first impression.

Re:the price, I have always agreed and never said anything to the contrary. Between City obviously not caring about money, and English players being at a premium, his cost rose to an obscene amount.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Ederson probably will be the most expensive goalkeeper of all time. According to a lot of reports, Guardiola is ready to active his release clause (£33 million). That would solve their GK's woes.

Looked good against Dortmund. I was wondering who is this guy.

 

[mmk786]

Dont change the subject with Hummels. We are talking about Stones. I get that your affection for Pep is deep, but he has done nothing in his career to suggest he should have been bought at that price.

Mourinho at Chelsea wanted Stones the year before and there were strong rumors Chelsea was willing to pay 40m+ but Everton rejected the offer.

Not like City paid some ridiculous price that no none else was even close to offering.

 

[Halladay]

Mourinho at Chelsea wanted Stones the year before and there were strong rumors Chelsea was willing to pay 40m+ but Everton rejected the offer.

Not like City paid some ridiculous price that no none else was even close to offering.

Anyone who watched him was saying that price was nuts then.

 

[Gecklund]

I don't get why everyone is up in arms about the price. If it was a club in debt maybe. But City have so much money. Who cares if Stones cost 50M? It's not your money. They can spend it however they like. If they see something in Stones that's worth overpaying for then I don't see why it's a big deal. Also I trust the professional scouts much more than anyone here.

 

[Ceremony]

Stones is basically an expensive John Souttar.

 

[mmk786]

Anyone who watched him was saying that price was nuts then.

He was obviously bought based on potential and plenty of people see it. He is like a first round pick, he might fail but doesnt mean he doesnt have the talent.

The problem is he has to start all the important games because City have no one else worthwhile at the position, furthermore it is especially difficult to play centerback in pep's system. Sounds odd but overall he has been city's best centerback over Otamendi and Kolarov.

 

[Evilo]

I don't get why everyone is up in arms about the price. If it was a club in debt maybe. But City have so much money. Who cares if Stones cost 50M? It's not your money. They can spend it however they like. If they see something in Stones that's worth overpaying for then I don't see why it's a big deal. Also I trust the professional scouts much more than anyone here.

1/ Who cares? We care that for the same price he could have bought better players.
2/ if you don't trust anyone here over pro scouts why are you even on HFBoards? Plenty of posters have been proven right over NHL or football scouts. Scouts make mistakes ALL THE TIME.

 

[Gecklund]

1/ Who cares? We care that for the same price he could have bought better players.
2/ if you don't trust anyone here over pro scouts why are you even on HFBoards? Plenty of posters have been proven right over NHL or football scouts. Scouts make mistakes ALL THE TIME.

99.9% of the time posters are wrong.

But they could have also bought worse players. That's not a good argument.

 

[Epictetus]

Even if I were a rich ass owner, with a seemingly endless supply of money, I would still be pissed off if one of my competitors\rival clubs were paying half of what I was and getting better results in whatever area of spending.

Look at what Liverpool spent on Andy Carroll and the return on that investment they got. To say Liverpool fans shouldn't be upset about the spending because it wasn't their money seems outlandish.