Arsenal likely to spend £120m over next two transfer windows

8 Replies

Based on previous expenditure and revenue, we estimate that Arsenal will likely spend around £120m over the next two transfer windows.

That figure could rise if we see a high profile departure, but you would be surprised to see anyone other than the surplus to requirement loanees leave.

The Arsenal squad is in a really good place right now, which means for the first time in a while we won’t need to sell to free up space prior to buying. We also no longer have unwanted, senior pros on high money that we need to shift.

Taking into account the talent and age of the squad, we are in a position where the transfer funds can be spent on 3 or 4 players rather than needing 6 or 7.

We no longer need “squad position fillers”. The players we target will be important to our present and future. And due to not needing a huge volume of players, we can invest big in individuals.

Manchester City show what you can do when you already have a strong squad.

In the last two seasons, they have invested big in a couple of first team players, then also added a couple of younger players for the future (outside of buying youth players who are lined out).

In 2021/22 they only really signed Jack Grealish. Then in January 2022 they added Julian Alvarez; with the Argentine not joining until the summer.

This summer it was Erling Haaland and Kalvin Phillips. The senior pair then joined by Sergio Gomes (as an Alex Zinchenko replacement) and Martin Akanji – the Swiss centre back was signed due to an injury crisis at centre back.

Whilst Chelsea and Manchester United have invested heavily in the last two years, City have spent just £243m (Chelsea: £360m, Man U £330m).

So where do I expect us to invest that £120m over the next two windows?

For the first time in decades, it feels like our defence is in a good place.

We have a talented, young group of defenders, and investment will only be required if there are departures (keep your eye on Rob Holding and Kieran Tierney).

I wouldn’t be surprised if both departed us this summer, and if they do the obvious replacement would be Eintracht Frankfurt’s Evan Ndicka.

Ndicka would be available on a free transfer (although transfer are never free of all fees!). I will further blog on him another day!

The two areas I expect major investment in the next two windows is one midfield and the forward line. This is not exactly a groundbreaking opinion.

In midfield, we need to improve on Mohamed Elneny as back-up to Thomas Partey.

Partey is the best in the world plying as that single pivot defensive midfielder, so do not expect us to go for a big name in this area (no Declan Rice).

Likewise, get the likes of Youri Tielemans and Sergej Milinković-Savić out of your mouths. Neither are defensive midfielders or can play that Partey role.

Both might be an option if we decide to sign cover and competition for Granit Xhaka as one of the two 8s (the other side is covered by Martin Odegaard and Fabio Vieira). Again, a blog on this another day.

What we need to be looking at is a young, talented defensive midfielder who we can develop over the next 2-3 season to eventually replace Partey full-time. Basically succession management.

We should be looking at players aged 20-22. Players that would see joining Arsenal to be understudy to Partey as a step up from playing regular football at their current clubs.

They would understand that they would see plenty of game time as they continue their development, and as long as they work hard and keep improving, they will be in pole position to replace the Ghanaian in 2-years time.

The two obvious candidates are Palmeiras’ Danilo and Moises Caciedo of Brighton.

Danilo would be the cheapest of the pair – fee rumoured to be around £20-25m. Caciedo, with his Premier League experience, would cost double that.

The Brazilian would be available in January, the current Brasileiro Série A season finished in November. Brighton, meanwhile, would unlikely want to see Caciedo leave until the summer.

With the above considered, Danilo is a realistic January transfer target.

In the forward line, we need someone who is comfortable out wide and can potentially play up top.

We are heavily relying on Gabriel Martinelli and Bukayo Saka in those wide positions. We need to turn two into three and sign an equally talented wide man that can cover both wings.

That would then leave us with Emile Smith Rowe (and his injuries) as 4th choice winger. The Englishman could also be a cover option at 8. I also wonder if he could do a job as a “false 9”.

Mykhailo Mudryk, like Danilo, is one we have been linked with for a while.

Shakhtar Donetsk are rumoured to be demanding in excess of £80m. This is a huge fee for someone so inexperienced, and one I doubt Arsenal would pay.

At that level of investment, we should be targeting Napoli’s Khvicha Kvaratskhelia. Alternative PSV’s Cody Gakpo will be half that price.

Wilfried Zaha is a name that needs to be considered as a short term option.

I do think we will get a deal done if we want to for Mudryk. As discussed earlier, we do not need a volume of players which will allow us to spend big on those that do come in where required.

Considering what is happening in Ukraine right now, that deal could happen in January.

If in January we end up with Danilo and Mudryk, that will probably be around 75% of our investment for the next few windows.

A 3rd/4th choice central defender (if Ben White continues at right back) will likely join in the summer, whilst Edu might considering entering the market to add a better back-up striker to Gabriel Jesus.

Eddie Nketiah has not really done it this season, and the jury is still out on Folarin Balogun.

A few have made the case for Ivan Toney, and he would certainly be a good acquisition depending on his betting charges.

The forward option will all depend on how much we have spent in midfield and on Partey cover.

If Arteta decides he is happy with Jesus and one of Nketiah/Balogun, further backed up by Martinelli and a new wide forward, he might instruct the team to get him cover and competition for Xhaka.

Personally, I think he will use Charlie Patino and Smith Rowe in this position. And then summer 2024 could be where we invest big on a Xhaka replacement (he will be just shy of 32 come 2024).

But then if Tielemans is a target, would we want to give up the chance of getting him for free just because we don’t 100% need a new 8 for another 12 months?

Plenty to think about, and whilst we might debate personal, I doubt anyone will debate that we will spend much different to £120m over the next two windows.

Keenos

Two lined up to replace Gabriel Jesus

11 Replies

Eddie Nketiah and Gabriel Martinelli.

If anyone thinks we are about to go out into the transfer market to buy a short term replacement for Gabriel Jesus, then they clearly don’t understand the changes Edu and his team have made at the club.

Gone are the days where we sign someone like a Lucas Perez because we are desperate. Gone are the days we loan in a Denis Suarez or Kim Kallstrom in the hope they will settle and do a job for the club in the short term.

The club will no longer waste money on short term solutions, or on players that the scouts do not believe have a long term future.8

The pursuit of Dusan Vlahovic last January shows how much we have changed.

When Juventus beat us to the signature of the Serbian, we did not panic. We kept our powder dry and secured our primary target the next summer – Gabriel Jesus.

Some might blame our lack of striker signing in January as the reason we failed to hit top 4.

Last season the target was always top 6. Failing to strengthen in January did not result in us missing that target.

And by not buying, it ensured we had the finances to complete the best transfer window for some time. And as a result we are top of the league.

If the right player is available in January, we will move for them. But they have to be the right player.

Someone that we were already looking at. Someone who we were considering making a move for in January. If that target does not exist, then we will not waste money on someone who we do not really want.

And the reality is, that target probably does not exist.

Top striker, performing week in week out for his team, will not make a move in January.

That leaves you targeting 2nd tier players, or those whose clubs want rid.

Ivan Toney is a name I see banded about a lot, but he is facing a 6-month ban for his gambling. The Portuguese lad that scored a hat trick the other day, no one had heard of him 7-days ago. And Dominic Calvert-Lewin is more likely to find himself alongside Jesus in the medical room rather than scoring goals in front of the North Bank.

In Martinelli and Nketiah, the club has two good options.

Eddie is hungry and chomping at the but to show he belongs.

As for Martinelli, he is a generational talent and already proved he can play down the middle. 10 goals in his debut Arsenal season as a striker.

The list of potential strikers is short, but the list of new wingers is long.

A wide forward was always our primary target this winter. We will continue that pursuit which will enable Martinelli to be used upfront.

Eddie and Gabi. The two men ready to replace Jesus.

Back the boys!

Keenos

Did Arsenal make a mistake replacing former prodigy with Albert Sambi Lokonga

3 Replies

His has a tough old time of it since joining Arsenal has Albert Sambi Lokonga.

Is he a 6? Is he an 8? What we do know for sure is he has not exactly sparkled when playing in either position.

And he has come under further pressure due to the form of the man he replaced.

No, not Matteo Guendouzi but Joe Willock.

Willock was one of our own. A Hale End graduate and someone that played 78 games for us before leaving to Newcastle.

The majority of those 78 games were off the bench as he struggled to nail down a position at Arsenal.

A loan deal to Newcastle saw him find his feet, scoring 8 goals in 14 games as he was key to their survival. That led the Geordies to spend £25million on him in 2021.

At the time, every agreed it was a good deal for everyone.

Arsenal got a huge chunk of cash for a bit-part player who many questioned if he had the ability to consistently ply for us. Newcastle got a player who immediately became one of their top 2 or 3 performers. And Willock, then aged 22, would be able to kick on his career with regular football.

In Willock’s place, we signed Albert Sambi Lokonga for £17.2m

Both players born in 1999, Willock just 2 months older. It looked great business for Arsenal.

Lokonga was seemingly more advanced in his career compared to Willock, and Arsenal made around £8m profit across the two deals.

Ironically, Lokonga had played the same amount of games for Anderlecht as Willock did Arsenal (78). But unlike Willock, many of those came from the start rather than off the bench.

Lokonga captained Anderlecht for most of his final season, and his form saw him get a call up to the Belgium national team prior to joining us. Shortly after signing for Arsenal he would win his first (and only) international cap.

He came with the glowing endorsement of former manager Vincent Kompany, who said he reminded him of Yaya Toure.

In the 18 months since, he has stagnated and certainly not got close to being the “new Yaya Toure”.

But is it his fault?

We have seen it often with young players. In and out of the team, continually playing in different positions, it is tough to progress.

And this was infact why Willock left us.

Willock would play defensive midfield one week, then not be seen for 2 or 3 weeks, and then return in attacking midfield. The next game he would be on the bench and come in with 5 minutes to go in an attempt to run down the clock.

It was only with regular football at Newcastle that he kicked on. And I do wonder if their positions were reversed – Lokonga playing regularly at Newcastle and Willock a bit-pry player at Arsenal – would their form and progression be reversed?

When Willock left, Arsenal were not really playing a formation that suited him.

In 2020/21, we mainly played 4231, with 2 defensive midfielders and a “10”. Willock was always naturally an 8.

With us now transitioning to 4141 with 2 8s, you have to think that Willock might have excelled had he stayed at Arsenal.

He would’ve seen more consistent game time covering both Xhaka and Odegaard, and his progression would not have been as stunted as previously.

Unlike many, I am not writing off Lokonga.

There is a player in there and if he gets the consistent game time, he could explode.

He has the pace and power to be a top midfielder. He also has an exceptional range of passing. He just needs that game time and I am not sure whether Arsenal can give him it.

Some might call for him to have a loan deal, but at 23 that chance has probably gone.

With Charlie Patino performing well at Blackpool, and a new defensive midfield recruit to join in January, I wouldn’t be surprised if the club cash in on Lokonga. And it would be equally unsurprising if he kicks on following a departure like Willock did.

Final thought on this piece: It was Willock’s decision to go. He wanted to leave us to kick on his career. He didn’t want to be a bit part player despite us being his boyhood club. And we need to respect that.

Whilst some might now think replacing Willock with Lokonga was a bad move, the Englishman leaving was not our choice. And we would have been wrong to force him to stay against his will.

Hopefully in the second half of the season we see Lokonga play more in his natural 8 position. If he does kick on over the next 6 months he could save us a lot of money when it comes to signing a back up (and eventual replacement) for Xhaka.

But Lokonga v Willock. It’s an interesting debate.

Note: all the weird little Arsenal-incels will jump over Willock and Lokonga as examples of Arteta being unable to develop young players.. Ignoring Saka. And Martinelli. And Saliba. And the fact we have the youngest squad in the league.

Keenos