Arsenal make £6m bid for Cahill

Arsenalfaithfull wrote:

english_jewel wrote:

the_gooner wrote:Well, he is in the last year of his contract, and he's really not worth over £9-11million.

It's called negotitating, you just don't pay what the other team is asking for.

But who am I kidding, I'm talking to a fan whose club is planning to pay £15million for Perreira to sit on the bench.

And I'm talking to a fan whose club is willing to pay 15m for a League 1 player? Your point?

And LOL at Cahill not being worth more than 10m. 15-17m is a fair price for him, especially in this market.

how is cahill better than Kos when , koscielney has better tackle ratio, better passing ratio, beter 1 v 1 ratio, and more goals ... stop repeating what ever you hear on tv

Mr.S wrote:

english_jewel wrote:

the_gooner wrote:Well, he is in the last year of his contract, and he's really not worth over £9-11million.

It's called negotitating, you just don't pay what the other team is asking for.

But who am I kidding, I'm talking to a fan whose club is planning to pay £15million for Perreira to sit on the bench.

And I'm talking to a fan whose club is willing to pay 15m for a League 1 player? Your point?

And LOL at Cahill not being worth more than 10m. 15-17m is a fair price for him, especially in this market.

You make stupid comments. League 1 also has Eden Hazard who is atleast worth 25-30 Million.

Laugh my arse off you lot are thick as ...... learn ya own transfers before talkin about others

Arsenalfaithfull wrote:there was no intended diss on my part. I merely stated that Arsenal dont have Real Madrid cash. 17 million for a player that would not necessarily improve us? We spent 15 million on Arshavin, who single handedli rescued us from not making the top 4, making it our biggest transfer deal

of course you have money, your board just refuses to spend.

didnt you guys spend 15M or so on Chamberlain? waste of money then

Chamberlain improves our team, because we dont have genuine wingers. ANd he is a top top prospect in England. On the other hand, Chaill is no way better than Kos... the stats prove this

I cant understand that logic. You would rather spend 15M on a winger because you have no genuine wingers, but spending a less money on a player that improves your defense is a no no? oh boy...

defenses win you titles, and last i recall your defense choked in your last final, and has been the main culprit in your shortcomings in recent years. Do you need a prospect more than you need a defender? No. And we arent talking about a EPL top prospect that will have instant impact, but a kid of championship full of potential and "if".

that's wenger for you. From what i get, you are linked with no LB despite selling Clichy, which means there is an obvious possibility of Vermaelen going left when it matters, so you need depth. And even without that possibility, you still need Defense. Utd defense carried them to a title, Chelsea was relevant for so long because of Defense.

The stats prove what? you need experience MEN, not babies within your group, specially at the back.

St_Nick09_of_Goal wrote:I cant understand that logic. You would rather spend 15M on a winger because you have no genuine wingers, but spending a less money on a player that improves your defense is a no no? oh boy...

defenses win you titles, and last i recall your defense choked in your last final, and has been the main culprit in your shortcomings in recent years. Do you need a prospect more than you need a defender? No. And we arent talking about a EPL top prospect that will have instant impact, but a kid of championship full of potential and "if".

that's wenger for you. From what i get, you are linked with no LB despite selling Clichy, which means there is an obvious possibility of Vermaelen going left when it matters, so you need depth. And even without that possibility, you still need Defense. Utd defense carried them to a title, Chelsea was relevant for so long because of Defense.

The stats prove what? you need experience MEN, not babies within your group, specially at the back.

I do agree with you, but have you seen our defense this year? We don't really need a CB now we need a Striker and a 2 midfielders and then we can go for a CB. We have 3 good CBs and one good young one and one shity CB, I think we are fine.

you say that we need experience, but think that we should go after a cd, who is not better than any of the cd we currently have. And has no exp in europe , and plays for a team that sees as being in the top half of the table as an achievement.
You guys are making it seem like wenger bid 6 mil for Pique or Chiellini.... Its Cahill for *bleep* ake. He is behind 3-4 cbs in the ENglish squad, and yall think that he is worth 17 mil?

I have, i watched all your games so far, btut are you guys already deciding that you dont need back up? that's worse than madrid fans knee jerking.

who is on the bench? Kos and..... no one that's right. Last i recall Vermaelen and Djourou and injury prone specialists. It's just the beginning, we are still far away from the real hardship of a football season.

You signed a winger you didnt need, because he cant have direct impact, big waste. Having Miyachi on the bench is plenty enough. Those 15M should have contributed as you say, to buying a forward, a midfielder or an AM.

Who gives a *bleep* what we spend our money on: We've got shitloads to spend. Cahill isn't really rated highly, and I understand why. We only have a week left and I'm sure if they really want him they'll follow up with another bid, but I doubt we're folding to that hilarious 17m value for a player in his last year of contract. Oh, Nasri went for 25m (to City with unlimited funds) on his last year... Neuer went for potentially 25m, too. I guess that's the norm then, guys!

Luis Enrique a much better player, went for a measly 8m. Clichy the same.

Arsenalfaithfull wrote:you say that we need experience, but think that we should go after a cd, who is not better than any of the cd we currently have. And has no exp in europe , and plays for a team that sees as being in the top half of the table as an achievement.
You guys are making it seem like wenger bid 6 mil for Pique or Chiellini.... Its Cahill for *bleep* ake. He is behind 3-4 cbs in the ENglish squad, and yall think that he is worth 17 mil?

Not gonna lie, you leave me perplexed. What does the team he plays for have to do with his individual abilities, unless you expect him to carry his team on his back to be deemed good enough for Arsenal?

I never said you needed Cahill per say, but an experienced defender. What's wrong with Cahill as long as he fits the abilities Wenger is looking for? how do you know he is worse than Koscielny. a year ago Kos himself was playing for Lorient, a team 99% of people had never heard about. Im sure if the argument back then was about Kos vs Cahill, the ending would be much different from a fan standpoint.

St_Nick09_of_Goal wrote:I have, i watched all your games so far, btut are you guys already deciding that you dont need back up? that's worse than madrid fans knee jerking.

who is on the bench? Kos and..... no one that's right. Last i recall Vermaelen and Djourou and injury prone specialists. It's just the beginning, we are still far away from the real hardship of a football season.

You signed a winger you didnt need, because he cant have direct impact, big waste. Having Miyachi on the bench is plenty enough. Those 15M should have contributed as you say, to buying a forward, a midfielder or an AM.

We know we need players, but the defense we are good, but wont mind getting another player. We just want to improve in other areas for now.

St_Nick09_of_Goal wrote:

Arsenalfaithfull wrote:you say that we need experience, but think that we should go after a cd, who is not better than any of the cd we currently have. And has no exp in europe , and plays for a team that sees as being in the top half of the table as an achievement.
You guys are making it seem like wenger bid 6 mil for Pique or Chiellini.... Its Cahill for *bleep* ake. He is behind 3-4 cbs in the ENglish squad, and yall think that he is worth 17 mil?

Not gonna lie, you leave me perplexed. What does the team he plays for have to do with his individual abilities, unless you expect him to carry his team on his back to be deemed good enough for Arsenal?

I never said you needed Cahill per say, but an experienced defender. What's wrong with Cahill as long as he fits the abilities Wenger is looking for? how do you know he is worse than Koscielny. a year ago Kos himself was playing for Lorient, a team 99% of people had never heard about. Im sure if the argument back then was about Kos vs Cahill, the ending would be much different from a fan standpoint.

THat is just it tho, we all realize that we need defensive reinforcement. I just think that there are better and cheaper options out there. Wenger has pondered a move for Per Mertesaker (less than 10 million), Jagielka, Scott Dann, and Cahill. We are not naive enough to belive that we are well prepared for the season, but i cant see how paying 17 million for a player who is inthe last year of this contract is the right thing to do.

No one said you need to pay 17M for him ffs.

which statistics? please show me

Bolton just signed Dedryck on loan for the rest of the season so they just got better whether Cahill stays or leaves.

Poor man's Coates in all honesty

Looks estatic!!!! Arf!!!

Here is an article i found that will answer make it clear as to why adding Cahill will not make us any better

One of the issues this season (and a lingering worry of Arsenal fans) was the defense. There were question leading into the season about how Vermaelen's partner would fit in the team. When Vermaelen went down, that questio became "how will Arsenal's defense hold up without its best centreback?" The defense has had its lows (the four goal debacle at St. James, the CC mistakes, the late blown leads at Bolton, against Liverpool, and twice against the Spurs) and its highs (quite a few clean sheets were kept). If looked at from goals conceded, Arsenal tied with Fulham for fourth best defense behind the other members of the top three (City and Chelsea had the best goals conceded record). Obviously this needs to be changed, with Arsenal needing to concede less than 40 goals in order to keep themselves competitive down the stretch.

To shore up the defense, many names have been thrown around, but the most popular over the last two seasons have been Christopher Samba and Gary Cahill. These two are commonly portrayed as no-nonsense defenders Arsenal has been missing during the duration of our trophy crisis that might cause the world to end by May 2012. Both players have been estimated to cost 15-20 million (based on current market activity). But are they really offering an improvement to the defense? Will there be a noticeable return for such a price, compared to what Arsenal already has?

To begin to try arrive at some type of answer for those and other questions, Arsenal's defensive records needs to be compared to Blackburn and Bolton to develop a sense of the impact these two players could make to the team.

Comparing defensive statistics reveals that Arsenal's defense overall is better than both Samba's Blackburn and Cahill's Bolton. In goals conceded, Blackburn gave up 59 goals, while Bolton gave up 56. But that statistic is misleading since not all goals are conceded the same way. So the next stat, the dreaded goals conceded from set pieces, should shine some light on the defensive improvement both targets might bring. When looking at the percentage of goals conceded that are set pieces (not including penalty goals). Arsenal scores the lowest of the three teams, allowing 37% of goals from set play. Bolton is second, allowing 32%, and Blackburn allows 22%. This stat seems to indicate a glaring problem at Arsenal compared to these two teams. Obviously they have players or have some tactic/attribute (English tenacity?) that Arsene's kids don't.

However, the stat is not complete without the total goals allowed from set pieces. When this is included, it becomes clear that the disparity between the defenses isn't that significant. Arsenal allowed 16 goals from set pieces, Blackburn 13, and Bolton 18. So that is a +3 differential against Blackburn and a -2 differential against Bolton.This would mean, with everything else kept the same, Arsenal would have concede 41 goals with Bolton's set piece record, hardly an improvement, and still four goals more than United and eight goals behind City and Chelsea. The fact that Bolton and Blackburn concede more goals from open play distorts the percentage values given without the goal tally.

It is hard to determine how much responsibility Samba and Cahill have in the goals conceded, but it at least weakens the claim that one or the other would provided better organizational leadership for set pieces, and Blackburn and Bolton aren't a team of midgets outside of these two players. This is assuming that the quality of defending at Arsenal isn't vastly superior to Blackburn and Bolton (a perception that many probably hold). So then how are Samba and Cahill going to add to better organization against corners and free kicks.

Part Two will continue the team comparison and a comparison between Samba, Cahill, Koscielny, and Djourou.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 2:
--------
In the first piece, the overall defense and set-piece goals conceded were compared to reveal that Arsenal has conceded less goals than Samba's Blackburn and Cahill's Bolton, however Blackburn has conceded three and five goals less compared to Arsenal and Bolton, respectively. Again, the question remains, will Cahill and Samba improve Arsenal's defense in the places of need, and would the improvement justify their price.

Before that can be determined, some other defensive areas need to be covered in order to have more complete picture of the type of defenses Cahill and Samba anchor.

Both defenses concede considerably more goals in open play than Arsenal (Blackburn-37; Bolton-32; Arsenal-17). Whether that is a result of poor positioning by the back line or just the fact of less quality overall on the pitch is not clear.The difference in passes against each team per game (Bolton's and Blackburn's defenses face 100 and 50 passes more than Arsenal, respectively) might account for increased exposure for the Bolton and Blackburn defenses. And Arsenal concedes less shots (11) per game than Bolton (16) and Blackburn (16). I can't definitively say that a five shots over the course of the entire season would result in a 20 goal difference (Arsenal against Blackburn) or 15 (Arsenal against Bolton).

What is apparent is that Arsenal is fine in terms of open play defending, most likely the result of forcing the play in the midfield. Arsenal conceded the fewest shots per game in the League last season (Chelsea and United conceded were second with 12 shots/game). So the defense is not over pressured from shots. But compared to United, City, and Chelsea, Arsenal give up almost twice as many set piece goals (United-10, City-9 and Chelsea-.

Arsenal's lack of aerial prowess has been used to explain this failure to deal with set pieces. That is the problem Samba and Cahill are supposed to remedy. Looking at aerial duel (indicator of aerial success) percentage won, Arsenal players don't appear poor, winning 49% of duels. This is equal to the percentage won by Samba's Blackburn, whereas Cahill's Bolton top the league (tied with Spurs and Chelsea) at 55% of duels won. To be fair, Arsenal defenders face fewer long balls (84) per game than Blackburn (95) and Bolton (93) defenders. But viewed as long balls faced as a percentage of total opposition passes, Arsenal defenders deal with a slightly higher percentage (22.1%) than Blackburn (21.6%) and Bolton (19.8%). So teams tend to target Arsenal a little more with long balls than Bolton, which is understandable given Bolton's aerial success.

So how do Samba and Cahill figure into this? Are the failures/success of their defense the result of them or other players. To give a basic picture of this, these are the aerial success percentages derived from each teams five most used defenders and one defensive mid: Blackburn-52.8%; Bolton-60.2%; Arsenal-55%. Here they are without Samba, Cahill, and Djourou/Koscielny included : Blackburn-49.8%; Bolton-59.6%; Arsenal (without Djourou)-54%; Arsenal (without Koscielny)-55.4%. From this it is clear that Samba has the biggest impact on a team. It is also clear that Cahill's supporting defenders are sufficient without his contribution aerially. Arsenal doesn't change much without either Koscielny or Djourou, meaning starting defenders (excluding Vermaelen since he rarely featured last season) are a little above average at aerial duels (Sagna was the best at Arsenal, winning 67% of aerial duels).

What role does height play in these figures? The five defenders and the defensive mid. who featured the most for Bolton last season averaged 187.2 cm in height. At Arsenal, this was 183.2 cm. Blackburn had 181 cm. Taking out Samba from Blackburn's defense lowers that figure to 178 cm; removing Cahill leaves Bolton with 187cm; and Djourou from Arsenal leaves 181.4cm. So again, Samba is the key figure in the Blackburn defense, providing the height in his team. Cahill's Bolton is significantly taller than Arsenal and Blackburn, probably resulting in the better aerial success. Even without Cahill, Bolton still averages around the same height with him.

What does this all mean? For starters, it would seem to indicate that Blackburn's defense centers on Samba. He is the key to the success of their defense ( http://www.zonalmarking.net/2010/01/...kburn-defence/). Cahill plays in a defense that is taller and better in the air than Samba. Djourou and Koscielny, at Arsenal, play on a taller defense than Blackburn, but shorter than Bolton. Yet, Blackburn conceded less goals from set pieces (13) than the taller Arsenal (16) and the much taller Bolton (18) defenses. So the team with the best aerial success and the most height conceded the most set piece goals of the three, which leads me to still believe that organization may be more important. Whether Samba is the key in Blackburn's defensive organization I'm not sure of, but with a shorter defense they concede less at set pieces.

On their own, Samba (68% duels won) is better aerially than Koscielny (53%), Cahill (63%), and Djourou (58%). However, the open play stats for Blackburn concerns me about Samba's open play organization, since he is the center of their defense. The same can be said for Cahill at Bolton. That is unless one assumes that Arsenal's defensive players overall are better than both Bolton and Blackburn (which I would believe is the case). Playing in the better defense, both Cahill and Samba would contribute to the center and aerially. But for the needs of Arsenal (mainly set pieces and aerial success), Samba would seem to be the better choice, only if it is true that Samba is the key to Blackburn's set piece success. He would also be handy for the games against the taller/sturdier strikers of the EPL (Carroll, Drogba, Jones, Crouch, etc.).

For their price (15-17 million), I wouldn't consider either because Koscielny and Djourou with Vermaelen for defensive organization could deal with the set piece issue, and since Samba and Cahill aren't better open play defenders (except aerial defense) . Another DM and a left back would be my defensive signings. But again, if I had to choose, it would be Samba for the aerial presence against certain teams and because he would have bigger impact on Arsenals most pressing need.

Sushi Master wrote:
Luis Enrique a much better player, went for a measly 8m. Clichy the same.

Luiz Enrique is too old to play football dont u think :geek:

Sepi wrote:Poor man's Coates in all honesty

I'm going to have to agree. Young, good, huge. I'm surprised that it isn't a Wenger signing.

Much better bench than overrated 17m Cahill.

BeautifulGame wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:
Luis Enrique a much better player, went for a measly 8m. Clichy the same.

Luiz Enrique is too old to play football dont u think :geek:

Jose Enrique, my bad

chemicalboy99 wrote:Bolton just signed Dedryck on loan for the rest of the season so they just got better whether Cahill stays or leaves.

Doesnt Boyata play right back too? WIth the RB they signed from Burnley having a broken foot i would think he will be more of RB than a CB signing imo.

BeautifulGame wrote:

chemicalboy99 wrote:Bolton just signed Dedryck on loan for the rest of the season so they just got better whether Cahill stays or leaves.

Doesnt Boyata play right back too? WIth the RB they signed from Burnley having a broken foot i would think he will be more of RB than a CB signing imo.

May play RB at the weekend but obviously he's been signed to replace Cahill and add some quality alongside that clown Zat Knight.

Arsenal is not good on defense... very average to poor imo. Some of it is the players, some of it is the philosophy by Wenger. You can always use more defenders.

Other than Vermaelen, the other CBs are extremely inconsistent and you have no LB.

Sushi Master wrote:

BeautifulGame wrote:

Sushi Master wrote:
Luis Enrique a much better player, went for a measly 8m. Clichy the same.

Luiz Enrique is too old to play football dont u think :geek:

Jose Enrique, my bad

No wonder he chose Liverpool, when the Arsenal fans cant even get him his name right

chemicalboy99 wrote:Bolton just signed Dedryck on loan for the rest of the season so they just got better whether Cahill stays or leaves.

For a second I thought you meant Eden Derdiyok.

did the deal become official ?

HscouserZ wrote:did the deal become official ?

Not yet. I just find it surprising that Wenger has a kitty of 60m to spend yet he's still stingy to buy obvious needs for the squad.