Menu

Arsenal 2020 transfer window – time to PARTEY or to chill and reflect? [Plus Window Rating]

An Arsenal transfer window analysis – was it good, bad, or indifferent?

 

EjlPBaGXkAIJW 1

Time to PARTEY

We’re all pleased we got Partey, and of Aouar and himself, I believe we needed Thomas more.

Though despite the high here, I’m not sure this is a stellar window. This isn’t to be unnecessarily negative.

The points from the start were to improve midfield and defence, keep Auba, and trim the fat off the squad.

We did achieve large parts of this. But do feel more could have been done, amidst the high of Partey.

These for me are the plusses and minuses of the window, with a rating at the end:

Positives

gabriel-arsenal

 

We addressed key areas.

Gabriel has thus far looked stable, and a difference vis a vis Luiz and others.

Partey would add some tenacity and passing in our midfield area.

Our captain is staying – and thank goodness he is! A world-class striker, and FA Cup winner and captain, it would have been criminal to let him go. Unlike a certain Tottenham England captain, Auba has helped us win trophies and how.

Willian offers more energy and pace in attacking areas.

Willian1408c

 

A transfer window must be strategic, possibly more than merely adding big names. All clubs need to priortise what they need, and I believe we have done that, for the most part.

Moreover, we signed a Swedish striker named Nikolaj Moller as well as Runnarson, so we these are clearly buys for the future.

Negatives

 

aouar-dribble

Lyon didn’t fold in our attempts to get Aouar.

Signing Partey took too long.

We should have got him earlier, given the opportunity to do so.

Aouar clearly has potential and ability, though I feel he would have been a bit superfluous in this capacity. We have others – such as Saka, Willock, Ceballos, and Willian – who can play in a number 8 or creative position.

 

Not getting rid of the deadwood

 

 

Considering the club had and still has numerous players who have outlived their usefulness, it could have been opportune to get rid of them.

The wages they’re on is one point, but couldn’t we just pay them off a portion of their salaries? Some of the supposed deadwood players to be fair have improved since Arteta has come, such as Mustafi.

It may be financial hits to us, but then it would be acceptable sunk costs, considering they won’t impact the team that much. Reports stated that Kolasinac turned down a move to Germany since he couldn’t get the proper wages he demanded.

But then as we apparently lack money due to successive seasons of no Champions League football, then surely like any other firm we need to be cost-efficient. Having eight/nine centre-backs isn’t very cost-efficient, is it?

There were some departures though who weren’t deadwood.

Guendouzi also left on loan to Germany – to Hertha Berlin and it’s a shame that apparently things between him and the club have deteriorated.

Torreira also left too, though on loan to Atletico Madrid. He was never going to be part of the Partey deal, but he is a good player and may fit very well in Simeone’s system.

I wouldn’t classify Martinez as deadwood. Far from it – since he was stellar after Leno’s injury and helped us win the FA Cup. But he wanted to go, and understandably so, and I feel having two keepers of similar quality would be problematic. One of Leno and Martinez would have wanted to leave after a while, so this was the best option. I wish all the best at Villa – and seemingly a 7-2 win over Liverpool shows he’s contributing well there.

Saliba was a prospect many were awaiting, but due to a recent family bereavement, it was thought that he would go back to St. Etienne. Though this apparently fell through towards the end of the window, and he’s staying put, for now.

Window rating

6.5/10

Don’t get me wrong – I’m happy we got Partey. He is a player we’ve needed for a while, and he can greatly enhance our midfield and overall team structure.

However, our squad is too bloated in some areas, and we could have taken the opportunity to make the squad leaner.

It’s very harsh though to say the window was crap. Imagine the uproar if Auba left, or we didn’t’ get Partey and Gabriel.

Even still, we have made some progress, and it’s a reasonable window vis a vis the other big six.

Our Borough of Haringey friends have done well in fairness, and Chelsea has done the best. City has got CBs which they badly needed, and Liverpool will be stronger with Thiago and defensive back-ups. United has, objectively, got some top players. van der Beek, Cavani, and Telles are all top level. Though their bumbling of Sancho and not getting a CB has been comically woeful – along with Spurs battering them at Old Trafford. And also Patrice Evra’s onscreen resignation and tears at United’s failing. A major negative of that result though was seeing Spurs dominate them. I feel they may be a strong rival for the top four this season.

So let’s see if we can get the top four, or win the Europa League this season.

, , , , ,

One Response to Arsenal 2020 transfer window – time to PARTEY or to chill and reflect? [Plus Window Rating]

  1. Blave October 6, 2020 at 5:20 pm #

    Seems rather pessimistic. A solid defender and an athletic DM capable of protecting a back 4 and ball progression were what we desperately needed. When was the last time Arsenal adequately addressed desperate areas of need in the transfer window? To say nothing of adding Willian and meanwhile holding onto guys like Hector and AMN. Of course it would have been nice to ship some of the deadwood, but it’s nice to have too many players rather than too few for a change.

Leave a Reply to Blave Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes

%d bloggers like this: