Topic: Dejan Lovren

[Jookie]

Playing CB for Jurgen Klopp and Brendan Rodgers is especially hard to do because so much is asked of them and so much of it run contrary to looking good as a defender.

There's a reason not a single CB has looked very good under Rodgers and Klopp, and its not all because they've all been shite all the time.

Its a thankless task to be quite honest and any CB in the world would find it harder to look great at CB under Klopp than they would for Conte or Mourinho.

The set play fume is more fair game, but still.

I was going to say something pretty similar. Centre back in our system is different than that in Chelsea's, United's or Spur's. City is probably the best comparator. What we ask our centre backs to do is very different than those other teams. It doesn't make Lovren good enough for our system but it does make comparisons to certain other team's defenders inappropriate.

I actually the set piece issue is driven partly by system, partly by personnel. We play 4 mobile players in the front 5 positions. Mobility up front is key to what we do. Those four 1st choice players are Firmino, Mane, Coutinho and Lallana. They are going to offer relatively little help aerially on set pieces. Particularly if we go man to man marking. The system need mobile full backs as well. Hence we compound the issue further with Clyne and Milner.

No team has a team of 11 giants but our 1st XI is relatively weak in the air. Part of that is dictated by the system. We can easy have mismatches on set pieces against teams who have a physical centre forward and 2 big centre backs. A lot of other teams (WBA for example) will play a CB at one of the full back positions. I reckon this mismatch physically with some teams is why we go zonal rather than man-2-man on set pieces.

[Jookie]

If Ashley Williams can sign a 3 year contract of 75k p/w at the age of 31 then Lovren doesn't look too bad at 100k p/w.

It's easy to pull selected data to support an argument.

I'm not actually sure if Lovren is good enough to be a regular starter but some of the stuff in this thread comes across as people being crying c*nts for the sake of it. The contract value is par for the course. If it isn't then it's 10-20k per week over valued at most. That's nothing in the context of a +200M wage bill. The monetary value of Lovren's contract shouldn't be a stick to beat the club or Lovren with.

People's criticism of Lovren's playing ability is fine. Comparing him to players playing in completely different systems is wrong though. The attributes needed to play at CB for us is relatively different to what you need at Spurs or Chelsea. For people, who are suggesting Lovren is nowhere close to good enough I'd like to ask 3 things:

(a) what are the ideal attributes for a CB in Klopp's system?

(b) What available centre backs do you think have these attributes?

(c) Is Matip good enough for the system?
 

[Redman78]

Good squad player, so pleased he's signed.  Saying that £100k is a tad over the top in my opinion

[poopscoop]

Good move by the club. He's had a decent season IMO.

[RK7]

Lost for words on this occasion.

[rawcusk8]

I don't mind the extension, as long as he's 3rd choice next season or at least competing to play alongside Matip with a new signing

For the life of me I cant understand why people cant see this. It's being reported everywhere that we are in for another CB and we will get one which means Dejan will no doubt be rotated more. So we can sell Lovren and get back up CB's to a similar level to Klavan and a youngster like Gomez or we can keep him on and boost our squad. People moan left right and centre about not having a good enough squad, this new contract will ensure we improve our squad and people want to cry about it as if the £100k comes out of their pockets.

[BER]

Good move by the club. He's had a decent season IMO.

Decent is enough to warrant 100k/week wages now?

Deals like this are why agents see us as a soft touch.

[Redman78]

Lost for words on this occasion.

There's a first time for everything 

[J-Mc-]

Decent is enough to warrant 100k/week wages now?

Deals like this are why agents see us as a soft touch.

The way money is going in football, £100k a week is the new £60-80k a week of the last few years.

It's a fucking joke.

[wemmick]

Good. We need to build a competitive squad for next season. Lovren is good enough to be a part of our squad, and now he needs competition to prove he should start consistently. I think the lack of competition has hampered his development over the past few seasons.

[hzsa]

Overpaying, as usual.

[TepidT2O]

Why the anger?

For a player of his ability it's the going rate.

Genuinely can't understand the fewm.  Yes, no one needs to be paid £100k a week, but that's what a player of his ability is on.  It's the par wage for a good CB in our league at a big club.

Weird

[PeterTheRed ...]

Decent is enough to warrant 100k/week wages now?

Deals like this are why agents see us as a soft touch.

In a league where Otamendi is on £120,000 per week and Mustafi is on £100,000 per week, Lovren is worth £100,000 per week.

[[new username under construction]]

Decent player, can play either side of the centre. Good in air, decent on front foot. Nothing wrong with that.

[PhilV]

LEAVE DEJAN ALONE!

[TepidT2O]

That mac red is the voice of reason in here, tells us a lot about people's knee jerk reactions.

[RK7]

There's a first time for everything 

😁

[Gods_Left_Boot]

I don't mind the extension, as long as he's 3rd choice next season or at least competing to play alongside Matip with a new signing

Couldn't agree more. Lovren has a mistake in him, but he's a good option to have. The wages are high, but that's the going rate, give or take a few thousands. As long as we make a strong signing at CB in the summer, it'll be fine. Also, had the deal been announced before last Saturday, it'd be nothing but praises in here, so recency bias and all that.

[JackWard33]

If Ashley Williams can sign a 3 year contract of 75k p/w at the age of 31 then Lovren doesn't look too bad at 100k p/w.

It's easy to pull selected data to support an argument.

I'm not actually sure if Lovren is good enough to be a regular starter but some of the stuff in this thread comes across as people being crying c*nts for the sake of it. The contract value is par for the course. If it isn't then it's 10-20k per week over valued at most. That's nothing in the context of a +200M wage bill. The monetary value of Lovren's contract shouldn't be a stick to beat the club or Lovren with.

People's criticism of Lovren's playing ability is fine. Comparing him to players playing in completely different systems is wrong though. The attributes needed to play at CB for us is relatively different to what you need at Spurs or Chelsea. For people, who are suggesting Lovren is nowhere close to good enough I'd like to ask 3 things:

(a) what are the ideal attributes for a CB in Klopp's system?

(b) What available centre backs do you think have these attributes?

(c) Is Matip good enough for the system?
 

a) Positioning - we play a zonal system defensively with our centre backs expected to cover a lot of territory (the full backs are usually high etc etc)
   Pace  - he wants us to play a high line
   On the ball / passing ability - because we're squeezing teams and we're good a lot of teams drop off so centre backs that can carry the ball and pass are important

  Interestingly i think those characteristics are much more important than aerial ability despite the narrative. Because we play high up the pitch we're rarely under aerial threat apart from set pieces (getting countered is a much bigger danger in this system). Obviously in the league we play in you have to be decent in the air of course but its more negotiable than the above (you could also get away with playing less aerially good CBs if we had a good keeper in the air... but we don't so its more of a problem)


b) no idea really - I don't pay a lot of attention to centre backs and they're hard to scout. Van Dijk is a no brainer but I don't think we've got much chance of getting him. Finding a 22-24 year old stand out in an overseas league is probably the answer - they'll be a few of them I'm sure. 

c) yeah pretty much. although he's probably not quite top class and he you need an aerially good CB next to him as despite his height he's pretty bad

[didi shamone]

We're keeping our 2nd best centre half. Hopefully he's our third best centre half next year. I'm not at all surprised. 100k is probably the going rate.

[Sir Psycho Sexy]

Overpaying, as usual.

Haven't people criticised us for not paying enough quite a bit? Or is this sarcasm?

[please, I have my reasons for it but...]

If Ashley Williams can sign a 3 year contract of 75k p/w at the age of 31 then Lovren doesn't look too bad at 100k p/w.

He earns more than Boateng, Bonucci and Varane mate.

(b) What available centre backs do you think have these attributes?

Since JackWard33 answered most of the questions, I will put one name here for this particular question, Kostas Manolas.

[sms1986]

He earns more than Boateng, Bonucci and Varane mate.

Who play in entirely different countries and leagues to Lovren.

[please, I have my reasons for it but...]

Who play in entirely different countries and leagues to Lovren.

He also earns more than Cahill, Koscielny and Bailly.

[Jookie]

He earns more than Boateng, Bonucci and Varane mate.

They don't play in our league so the wages aren't directly comparable. They choose to earn less wages to play in the countries and for the clubs they do.

I don't quite understand it but transfer fees and wages are higher for English based players. I'm sure I've been read Klopp mention this.

[newterp]

He also earns more than Cahill, Koscielny and Bailly.

I believe these guys all are up for new contracts soon/or in process? Bailly may not as he is one year in - but he's their best defender and I can see them giving him an improved contract quickly.

[Jookie]

a) Positioning - we play a zonal system defensively with our centre backs expected to cover a lot of territory (the full backs are usually high etc etc)
   Pace  - he wants us to play a high line
   On the ball / passing ability - because we're squeezing teams and we're good a lot of teams drop off so centre backs that can carry the ball and pass are important

  Interestingly i think those characteristics are much more important than aerial ability despite the narrative. Because we play high up the pitch we're rarely under aerial threat apart from set pieces (getting countered is a much bigger danger in this system). Obviously in the league we play in you have to be decent in the air of course but its more negotiable than the above (you could also get away with playing less aerially good CBs if we had a good keeper in the air... but we don't so its more of a problem)


b) no idea really - I don't pay a lot of attention to centre backs and they're hard to scout. Van Dijk is a no brainer but I don't think we've got much chance of getting him. Finding a 22-24 year old stand out in an overseas league is probably the answer - they'll be a few of them I'm sure. 

c) yeah pretty much. although he's probably not quite top class and he you need an aerially good CB next to him as despite his height he's pretty bad

I agree with you mostly about (a). I actually think aerially ability is important with a high press and being able to maintain territorial advantage when teams just go long to a physical striker. The other thing I would add is that when the centre backs get pushed wide they need to be good in one on one situations.

See I think if you list the ideal attributes and stack them against Matip then I think there's areas of weakness for him too. I'm not saying get rid of him but I don't think he's ideal and in the long run I think that without the right centre back partnership he may get exposed.

I suppose my over arching point is that I think it's hard to find to find CBs with the complete attributes for our system. Therefore we are compromising with Lovren and to some degree Matip. That why I think (b) is harder than yourself and others are suggesting.

[SerbianScouser]

Really impressed that we are able to give our squad players this much money.

It's about time FSG started acting like the big boys that we are. Have a feeling it'll be the same in the summer transfer window as well. Long may this continue.

[Coolie High]

Haven't people criticised us for not paying enough quite a bit? Or is this sarcasm?

Our wage structure isnt great we always overpay for just about decent players in regards to that, the reason we've missed out on players in the past isn't really to do with wages, it's to do with location our posturing as a club in terms of honours and success in the last few years, and us not wanting to pay transfer fees. Wages not too big of an issue compare it to our rivals and we're actually underachieving in terms of what we pay and where we normally finish.

[Coolie High]

Really impressed that we are able to give our squad players this much money.

It's about time FSG started acting like the big boys that we are. Have a feeling it'll be the same in the summer transfer window as well. Long may this continue.

Why? We always do this.

[JackWard33]

I agree with you mostly about (a). I actually think aerially ability is important with a high press and being able to maintain territorial advantage when teams just go long to a physical striker. The other thing I would add is that when the centre backs get pushed wide they need to be good in one on one situations.

See I think if you list the ideal attributes and stack them against Matip then I think there's areas of weakness for him too. I'm not saying get rid of him but I don't think he's ideal and in the long run I think that without the right centre back partnership he may get exposed.

I suppose my over arching point is that I think it's hard to find to find CBs with the complete attributes for our system. Therefore we are compromising with Lovren and to some degree Matip. That why I think (b) is harder than yourself and others are suggesting.

I wasn't suggesting it was easy so I do tend to agree with you as it goes.
our CBs need physical ability but they also need to be really good from a mental / footballing brain perspective.
I don't think its an easy system to look good in at all (unlike Conte's for example).

 

[SerbianScouser]

Why? We always do this.

We'll have a 3rd CB on 100k+, don't think we've ever done that.

[Jookie]

He also earns more than Cahill, Koscielny and Bailly.

All of them are comparable to 100k though. All signed their contracts at an earlier date when the going market rate was different.

Cahill signed his 85k p/w contract in 2015, Kosclieny renewed in January (his old contract value was 75k p/w), Bailly was this summer at a reported 75k p/w.

Not really a huge difference and I'd suspect that if they renewed contracts they'd be at around 100k p/w. Because that's the going rate for centre backs of roughly equivalent quality.

Debate whether Lovren is good enough as a CB for our system but his contract value is in line with what you'd expect for a top 7 team centre back. It's massive red herring for all the people wailing about it.

[Jookie]

I wasn't suggesting it was easy so I do tend to agree with you as it goes.
our CBs need physical ability but they also need to be really good from a mental / footballing brain perspective.
I don't think its an easy system to look good in at all (unlike Conte's for example).

Agree mate. Pretty sure that all our centre backs would look better in Chelsea, Spur's or United's system where they are afforded a lot more protection in both open play and at set pieces. Conversely it'd be interesting to see how the centre backs at those clubs would fair in our system.

[JackWard33]

All of them are comparable to 100k though. All signed their contracts at an earlier date when the going market rate was different.

Cahill signed his 85k p/w contract in 2015, Kosclieny renewed in January (his old contract value was 75k p/w), Bailly was this summer at a reported 75k p/w.

Not really a huge difference and I'd suspect that if they renewed contracts they'd be at around 100k p/w. Because that's the going rate for centre backs of roughly equivalent quality.

Debate whether Lovren is good enough as a CB for our system but his contract value is in line with what you'd expect for a top 7 team centre back. It's massive red herring for all the people wailing about it.

Yup - it's also important to realise its the last contract he'll ever get from us. If he's still in and around our first team he'll be one of the lowest paid in 2/3 years. What will we need to pay Mane in 18 months for example? etc etc
There's going to be some huge, wild wage deals across the Premier league over the next 12 months and beyond that will put this to shame.

[Lycan]

They don't play in our league so the wages aren't directly comparable. They choose to earn less wages to play in the countries and for the clubs they do.

I don't quite understand it but transfer fees and wages are higher for English based players. I'm sure I've been read Klopp mention this.

Isn't the wages thing something to do with tax?

[Grobbelrevell]

Absolutely okay with this.

It doesn't mean that he's now first choice. As others have pointed out, £100k p/w is the new £50-60k p/w in the current footballing landscape.

What he is though, is a perfectly adequate option, and we need more of those.

[ggcc14]

A wage hike would suggest a dramatic upturn in his performance standard, that isn't the case. As others have said, good option as 3rd choice CB but if he's shoehorned as a constant starter next year then we won't be challenging for the title again.

I was abit mifted when I seen his salary but as others have said, that is the sorry state of football nowadays, mediocre to steady premier league players can command bigger wages than world class centrebacks around the globe.

[Titi Camara]

Let's keep the wry, shite one liners to an absolute fucking minimum eh

[Jake]

Let's keep the wry, shite one liners to an absolute fucking minimum eh

It's also quite insulting for those who see this as positive news labelling those who don't see it as positive news as "wailing" "bedwetting" and other patronising crap. Not that you are like