What's new

Player Watch Player Watch: Timo Werner

jurgen

Busy ****
Jul 5, 2008
6,814
17,555
Werner is what he is, think his first chance against Newcastle was much trickier than he's getting credit for though. Getting him on loan again would be a smart move in my opinion.

The 'would Werner be in the squad of teams that want to win things' arguments aren't great considering he's started a CL final (and won), won a european Supercup and the World Club Cup, so he's literally won the biggest trophies in club football.
 

allatsea

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
9,047
16,352
Werner is what he is, think his first chance against Newcastle was much trickier than he's getting credit for though. Getting him on loan again would be a smart move in my opinion.

The 'would Werner be in the squad of teams that want to win things' arguments aren't great considering he's started a CL final (and won), won a european Supercup and the World Club Cup, so he's literally won the biggest trophies in club football.
Yet Chelsea got rid of him and his German club are happy to sell at a knock down price (for these days) why ?
 

CookieYiddo

Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2019
944
2,835
I think he really is a good squad option. I have said the from the start. If he is seen as the main plan moving forward then i dont think its right but if he is seen as squad player who will get games then I'm absolutely for it
 

easley91

Well-Known Member
Jan 27, 2011
19,446
55,736
Agree but is that enough? You'd have to be getting an absolute shit load of goals from your other 2 forwards to be able to carry one who basically cannot score
But his main objective here isn't to score the goals, it's to create for others. Which by and large he does do. He misses as many as the rest of our front line, but gets more flak. The last few games we have bemoaned players for not taking people on and for not shooting enough. He does both more than the rest. Could his finishing be better? Absolutely, but as I said it's currently no worse than his teammates.

As a squad option I would take him, as long as we bring in another winger/ST on top of it. As a squad option he is better than Gil, Solomon is still up for debate, Sessegnon is permanently injured. So if we can't get a squad winger, then Werner is fine for the role.
 

easley91

Well-Known Member
Jan 27, 2011
19,446
55,736
Yet Chelsea got rid of him and his German club are happy to sell at a knock down price (for these days) why ?
Players get sold and move on. It's part and parcel of the sport. Maybe he didn't fit their plans/tactical styles. Maybe the managers just didn't fancy him. Chelsea fans hounded him because he wasn't good enough in their eyes. We needed a stop gap until the summer and with the Euros in Germany, Werner needed game time. It made and still makes sense.

He may not be good enough to start in the future, but for right now he looks more dangerous (along with Johnson) than our other forwards. So for right now, I am happy with him and I can forgive the misses, because he never stops running his ass off and doing his bit for the side.
 

Cochraam

Well-Known Member
Jul 6, 2015
229
1,021
I think the reality of how difficult and complex transfers are will mean we sign Werner permanently. If we were playing a video game, then we'd not sign Werner, sell Gil, sell Solomon, sell Richarlison, maybe even sell Son or Kulusevski, and bring in 4-5 new attackers (plus a couple midfielders, a couple defenders, a new backup GK, and new academy starlets). But we're not playing a video game, and the reality of how hard it is to get alignment on player desire/wages, selling club motivation/price, and our profile fit means we're not going to be selling 15+ players and bringing in 10 new ones. Not to mention the huge risk in even "sure thing" transfers of the player not settling or not being what we were expecting/hoping. Werner is settled, presumably all agreed on fee/contract, and contributing already so it seems like an option we'll take up. All that said, if a second loan was actually an option, I would think that's potentially pretty appealing.
 

Styopa

Well-Known Member
Jan 19, 2014
5,597
15,589
I think the reality of how difficult and complex transfers are will mean we sign Werner permanently.

I see where you are coming from but it works both ways, so when we sign someone we are stuck with them for the foreseeable. Especially older players and/or players on relatively high salaries. Among others we still have Ndombele, Gil and Hojbjerg on the books. We have only just managed to move on Winks and Dier. Lucas only recently left. Two or three years ago we had to pay off the contracts of Aurier and Doherty. These aren’t all bad players. Some of them were decent squad players who made important contributions but ultimately they stood in the way of better players coming through and joining.

Werner is decent for sure but there is a bigger picture to consider here. I think he probably is a good squad option to have but I do worry about him blocking someone more exciting in a year or two. We know how it goes: the squad is too big, we don’t have the space, we need to sell before buying etc.
 

Westmorlandspur

Well-Known Member
Feb 1, 2013
2,987
4,882
I think you are being over-generous/over-rating our players relative to City.

Take Madders.

His competition would be:
Bernado Silva; more versatile (can play CM, just as good as a play-maker with goals in him too), more proven
KDB; no need to explain.
Foden; no need to explain.
Grealish; this is probably closest but Grealish edges it for me. Carried Villa on his own, better injury record.
Doku; offers something diff to the rest due to his directness.
Alvarez; a worldcup-winner, better off-the-ball than on it which is what City needs.

You can run a similar comparison the other players.

I agree with you that Werner is a filler and wont make us better.
But if we are genuinely talking about title-winning quality then hardly anyone in the squad has the individual quality now. They need to improve and who knows whether they would reach.
I see the phrase “World Cup winner” quoted about various players to say they are great players. Alvarez is decent but then he is in a top team. Lot of players in that Argentina team were quite average really, just in a team with Messi. Both full backs nothing special, the right back currently on the bench for Forest .
Djimi Traore probably the worst left back in liverpools history. He’s got a CL winners medal from Istanbul in his pocket.
Grealish reputation is similar to that of Beckham . The image is far more than the talent.
Beckham far superior player . Grealish not even first choice this season. Commentators fawning over him because he ran back 40 yards to make a tackle.
One day he may score a goal, he may even have a shot. Are his numbers any better than Werner.
 

ultimateloner

Well-Known Member
Jan 25, 2004
4,615
2,286
I see the phrase “World Cup winner” quoted about various players to say they are great players. Alvarez is decent but then he is in a top team. Lot of players in that Argentina team were quite average really, just in a team with Messi. Both full backs nothing special, the right back currently on the bench for Forest .
Djimi Traore probably the worst left back in liverpools history. He’s got a CL winners medal from Istanbul in his pocket.
Grealish reputation is similar to that of Beckham . The image is far more than the talent.
Beckham far superior player . Grealish not even first choice this season. Commentators fawning over him because he ran back 40 yards to make a tackle.
One day he may score a goal, he may even have a shot. Are his numbers any better than Werner.
Beckham was one of the best passers of the ball in his generation maybe only second to Scholes, so I dont see why you are comparing him to Grealish. Grealish wont even start for England atm.

My conversation was about who could make City's team and IMO only Son and Romero would. Madders was an example I gave. He is a good player for us, but Grealish is better. He can do everything Madders can do in the no.10 role, is less injury-prone, and has carried the Villa team on his own.

Alvarez is great off-the-ball which played to Messi's strengths, and now KDB/Foden's. When you are CIty and every AM can do defence-splitting passes, you need guys who can make alot of good runs.
 

jpascavitz

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2019
1,874
7,330


"Timo Werner now has enough Tottenham minutes for data to be computed and his numbers are incredible

🇩🇪 vs Premier League wingers, per 90
🥇 Successful dribbles, % – 1st
🥇 Offensive duels won, % – 1st
🥇 Crosses – 1st
🥈 Expected assists – 2nd

He is in the 94+ percentile (top 7 leagues) for assists, carries, xG+xA, attacking actions and successful dribbles ⚡️"



In response to "If only he knew how to score 💔"

"His obvious weakness

Shows 23rd in terms of goals
Shows 5th in xG"
 

Cochraam

Well-Known Member
Jul 6, 2015
229
1,021
I see where you are coming from but it works both ways, so when we sign someone we are stuck with them for the foreseeable. Especially older players and/or players on relatively high salaries. Among others we still have Ndombele, Gil and Hojbjerg on the books. We have only just managed to move on Winks and Dier. Lucas only recently left. Two or three years ago we had to pay off the contracts of Aurier and Doherty. These aren’t all bad players. Some of them were decent squad players who made important contributions but ultimately they stood in the way of better players coming through and joining.

Werner is decent for sure but there is a bigger picture to consider here. I think he probably is a good squad option to have but I do worry about him blocking someone more exciting in a year or two. We know how it goes: the squad is too big, we don’t have the space, we need to sell before buying etc.
Good point and the worry is certainly that he becomes someone who isn't quite good enough but hard to shift. As a mitigation to that possibility, I would assume if we're signing him on a permanent we're just taking on his current contract which has high wages but is only until 2026 I think, so two more years. We don't really like to let players leave on a free, so maybe we would try to extend his contract, but the issue of getting him off our books theoretically solves itself in two years. I like him and what he's brought to the team, but the best thing might be to either wait as long as we can and see how our other business appears to be shaping up and/or see if Leipzig would go for another loan where he could provide good depth as we improve the team.
 

Sp3akerboxxx

Adoption: Nabil Bentaleb
Apr 4, 2006
5,428
8,184
Fergie had a number of average squad players padding out a a quality 13-14 players.
Fergie was almost 20 years ago mate.

Would you like to name the average players that Pep has been padding his side out with?
 

Whazam

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2019
560
2,063
Fergie was almost 20 years ago mate.

Would you like to name the average players that Pep has been padding his side out with?
You added about a decade to that, I believe.

Pep's Manchester City side have probably been one of the most complete squads in football history, year after year, so a bit weird to compare with an extreme like that. Klopp's Liverpool would've been a much better comparison, imo.

But even Pep have used players like Fabian Delph, Danilo, Nolito Mangala, and Mendy throughout the years. Oh, and Zinchenko and Jesus as well.

In the current team, you could even argue players like Aké and Akanji are far from the same individual level as most of the team.
 

Trix

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2004
20,015
335,634
Fergie was almost 20 years ago mate.

Would you like to name the average players that Pep has been padding his side out with?
No point in dismissing what happened 20 years ago, and then use the crooked financial cheat code that is man city as an example of what we could/should be trying to achieve.
 
Last edited:

Sp3akerboxxx

Adoption: Nabil Bentaleb
Apr 4, 2006
5,428
8,184
No point in dismissing what happened 20 years ago, and then use the crooked financial cheat code that is man city as an example of what we could/should be trying to achieve.
I think that looking at the PL winners of the last 3 years is a bit more pertinent than looking at the PL winners from 20 years ago.
 

Trix

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2004
20,015
335,634
I think that looking at the PL winners of the last 3 years is a bit more pertinent than looking at the PL winners from 20 years ago.
You've picked them because they have little to no flaws running through their squad. You've however ignored how they've got to that position, and the fact it's basically unachievable for pretty much every other team.

If they are what you think we should be aiming to emulate I can tell you now it is never ever going to happen.

Now if you are willing to agree on those points I'm happy to go back to the last team other than City to win the league, and I'll happily point out the average players that padded out that Liverpool squad.
 

Sp3akerboxxx

Adoption: Nabil Bentaleb
Apr 4, 2006
5,428
8,184
You've picked them because they have little to no flaws running through their squad. You've however ignored how they've got to that position, and the fact it's basically unachievable for pretty much every other team.

If they are what you think we should be aiming to emulate I can tell you now it is never ever going to happen.

Now if you are willing to agree on those points I'm happy to go back to the last team other than City to win the league, and I'll happily point out the average players that padded out that Liverpool squad.
I picked them because they literally won the premier league for the last 3 years.

You picked Alex Ferguson's man united for absolutely no good reason at all.
 
Top