John Stones' Value

[knowwhatimean]

The way the game is played today a cb is just as important than a forward. the market is
so inflated that 50 mill is not that ridiculous. Man city lost the title last year because Kompany
was [Poor language removed] and Chelsea won it because Terry was magnificent.

 

[kiss the crest]

Does it matter because he is priceless to Everton

 

[njligernj]

Lets be honest, john stones is a 15-20 mil player. he is not the finished article, he is good. people saying he is 50 mil need to have a word with themselves. if we could get 30 mil for him but at the beginning of a transfer window, that would be an outstanding bit of business.

I've heard variants of this from the few people who want to sell Stones.

It's entirely irrelevant what his "honest true value" is in terms of how much we should accept.

Chelsea obviously would have bid again if we didn't have the BK/RM statements and it would have been higher than 30m. So he's already worth more than 30m according to the market. Taking 30m now -- even at the start of a window -- would be accepting less than we could receive.

Now lots of things can change but assuming he has a good season there is no reason not to think a number in the 40's is extremely likely and 50+ at a stretch is attainable. Whether he's "worth" that much is completely irrelevant. Even if we knew some deep secret which meant his real value was 10m; if we could get 50m by holding out then we should hold out.

Someone posted how Martial was "rated" at 16m or something but Man U paid more than double that. True value and market value can often be way off.

Edit: Writes long reply, gets distracted by something else, finishes it hours later then notices a bunch of other people already made the same point.

 

[DanEFC123]

You what? A players transfer fee is decided by 2 things:

1: What the buying club is prepared to pay.

2: What the selling club is prepared to accept.

Chelsea were willing to pay £30m +. We told them to koff, so all we know for certain is he'll cost more than that for the foreseeable.

Add in the fact he's young, English, and one of the best prospects in Europe, then he's worth more than 15-20 million, even if we were actually trying to flog him.

so would you have not took 30 mil at the beginning of the window for stones? what im saying though just forget his potential for a second, looking at the player he is now though 30 mil is ridiculous amount of money mate

 

[DanEFC123]

I've heard variants of this from the few people who want to sell Stones.

It's entirely irrelevant what his "honest true value" is in terms of how much we should accept.

Chelsea obviously would have bid again if we didn't have the BK/RM statements and it would have been higher than 30m. So he's already worth more than 30m according to the market. Taking 30m now -- even at the start of a window -- would be accepting less than we could receive.

Now lots of things can change but assuming he has a good season there is no reason not to think a number in the 40's is extremely likely and 50+ at a stretch is attainable. Whether he's "worth" that much is completely irrelevant. Even if we knew some deep secret which meant his real value was 10m; if we could get 50m by holding out then we should hold out.

Someone posted how Martial was "rated" at 16m or something but Man U paid more than double that. True value and market value can often be way off.

Edit: Writes long reply, gets distracted by something else, finishes it hours later then notices a bunch of other people already made the same point.

good point about martial aswell. i agree, its just looking at the player he is now, having 30 mil is alot of money

 

[USABlue]

Mine too as City could still do with a few more English players as well - they still only have Hart, Delph, Sterling, Clichy that count as homegrown and although they have a good academy they seem reluctant to bring some of the players through into the first team. Dimechellis is likely to leave soon, he is 35 this December, so they presumably willbe looking for another CB. They are also rumoured to be getting Guardiola and you'd think Stones would suit his style.

The Barry negotiation seemed to be done amicably and they even have a young CB Denayer that might be used in any deal...

just got loaned out to galatasary, it was between them and mariselle

 

[Harryflashman]

so would you have not took 30 mil at the beginning of the window for stones? what im saying though just forget his potential for a second, looking at the player he is now though 30 mil is ridiculous amount of money mate

I didn't and don't want to sell stones but the figures being quoted are still a bit crazy in my opinion. The pad ended up on his backside against Watford and for me that's not what you expect of £40m defenders and let's be honest it wasn't Messi or ronaldo that did it to him.

I think stones could and probably will be an England regular for a decade or two and the figures quoted will look about right but at the minute they still strike me as high given much of what we are talking about is potential .

That said I hope he stays an is interegal to a resurgence of our side and looks worth every or my if not more .

 

[DanEFC123]

I didn't and don't want to sell stones but the figures being quoted are still a bit crazy in my opinion. The pad ended up on his backside against Watford and for me that's not what you expect of £40m defenders and let's be honest it wasn't Messi or ronaldo that did it to him.

I think stones could and probably will be an England regular for a decade or two and the figures quoted will look about right but at the minute they still strike me as high given much of what we are talking about is potential .

That said I hope he stays an is interegal to a resurgence of our side and looks worth every or my if not more .

I defo hope he stays, my argument is i think IF we sold him it would have to be striaght away in the window to give us the max amount of time to spend it

 

[Harryflashman]

I defo hope he stays, my argument is i think IF we sold him it would have to be striaght away in the window to give us the max amount of time to spend it

I couldn't agree more if it ever comes our decision to sell we need the time to spend the money rather than rushing into it .

 

[catcherintherye]

It is very hard to put his true value really. He could go on to be world class, but he still makes the odd mistake. As yet I don't think he has put a spell of game sin where he dominates for a side and pushing them to victories. That is what world class centre halves do. People are right to mention Kompany, but at present they are still a layer above Stones.

I think he should be valued at a similar price to Varane. At present 35 million would have been good for us had it come in at the start of the summer. He could kick on this summer though and push himself above the 50 million pound mark. But he would need to do something like being a central part in an England team that goes far in the Euro's.

 

[Alex Hindmarsh]

LOL at people thinking he won't be England's best defender for the next 10 years. If we'd sold for the 30 mill being banded about by a few here I'd have publicly executed the board one by one.

 

[SpurtingLesbian]

I think stones could and probably will be an England regular for a decade or two and the figures quoted will look about right but at the minute they still strike me as high given much of what we are talking about is potential .

you talk about it as if you don't think that potential is an attribute that has value.

Clubs don't 'overspend' for fun and IF he becomes an England regular for over decade as looks likely then £40M will be cheap.
I imagine the way the market is going £40M will be cheap for most starting players at 'Elite' Clubs within the next couple of years, we're not actually that far away from it now before the Sky money shoots up again next year.

 

[Timak]

I heard someone (may even have been Big Nev) on the radio the other day saying you should never judge a centre back without looking at how the team is set up in front of them.

His point was that Chelsea centrebacks don't make the glaring errors that they do at other clubs because they have a lot more protection from the rest of the team. Of course Stones and Jagielka will be caught out more because we play 2 attacking fullbacks and Barry/McCarthy haven't provided sufficient protection. Much like Terry looked a clown playing for England when he didn't have the same structure in front of him (see WC 2006 and 2010) and Kompany looked bad last year when City had a poor centre midfield.

So you have to use both your eyes and stats. The stats show Stones is in the elite in terms of tackles won, passing ability, clearnaces made etc and my eyes show me by far the best young english defender. Therefore £40-50m is his current value.

 

[Harryflashman]

you talk about it as if you don't think that potential is an attribute that has value.

Clubs don't 'overspend' for fun and IF he becomes an England regular for over decade as looks likely then £40M will be cheap.
I imagine the way the market is going £40M will be cheap for most starting players at 'Elite' Clubs within the next couple of years, we're not actually that far away from it now before the Sky money shoots up again next year.

I think potential is important and I think it's valuable but if he wasn't an Everton player would we value him at that ? I don't know what was the response in the Liverpool thread about sterlings price ? I genuinely can't remember .

I'm not saying id have sold or that he isn't a hugely valuable asset just it seems massive as a figure even factoring in potential

 

[SpurtingLesbian]

I think potential is important and I think it's valuable but if he wasn't an Everton player would we value him at that ? I don't know what was the response in the Liverpool thread about sterlings price ? I genuinely can't remember .

I'm not saying i'd have sold or that he isn't a hugely valuable asset just it seems massive as a figure even factoring in potential

I think (from memory) we were putting Stirling down as £30M-£35Mish. I suppose that's similar to the difference between Chelsea's bid for Stones and our valuation.
I suppose there's also the difference of position, Stirling is very much a player for now, his pace will only decrease with age and injuries and he's going to have to reinvent himself in his late 20's, whereas Stones is already playing in his final position and will only get better with experience. Stirling also plays higher up the pitch and scores goals which automatically increases his value (generally the pricing is attackers>midfielders>defenders>goalies). Stirling will have a shorter part of his career at high value whereas Stones will have a longer career at a slightly lesser value so I think it might actually even itself out potential wise.
One thing is for sure though, Stones is worth a lot more than the laughable bids Chelsea have put in for him so far. Quite how much he is worth however is down to how much other teams will scramble to pay for him IF/WHEN we choose it's the right time.