One way to look at it might be that because we've essentially spent little to no money on CB's in the last 4 years (last outlay of note was on Lovren in 2014) (or money on our defense overall) - that we can afford the outlay for VvD. Matip was "free" and Klavan was 4-5m?
Heck we've essentially spent nothing on the back line since that time so maybe that's a factor too.
2014 - Lovren - ~20m
2015 - Clyne - 12.5m
2015 - Gomez - 3.5m
2016- Matip + Klavan - 4-5m
2017 - VvD - 75m; Robertson 8m
2017 - SOLD - Sakho - 25m, Wisdom ~3m?
Last 5 seasons should look more like:
2013/14 - Sakho, Illori - 25m
2014/15 - Lovren, Moreno, Manquillo - 40m
2015/16 - Clyne, Gomez, Caulker - 20m
2016/17 - Klavan, Matip - 5m
2017/18 - VVD, Robertson, Gallacher - 80m
So we've spent about 170m on our defence over 5 seasons. But its massively inflated by VVD's transfer fee. Otherwise we've spent 100m over 5 seasons.
In comparison to our rivals
Man City : 335m over 5 seasons (they have spent 200m this season alone on defenders)
Spurs : 145m over 5 seasons
Man Utd: 165m over 5 seasons
Chelsea: 200m over 5 seasons
Arsenal: 100m over 5 seasons
Not surprisingly, all of our rivals have spent a lot more, and conceded far few goals (in the low to mid 20s). We've spent on par with Arsenal in terms of our defence, and we've conceded in a similar ballpark, the number of goals (in the low 30s). Not saying that money spent will prevent goals - as Man Utd have conceded 1 less than Man City even though they've only spent half as much over time.
We're finally approaching a situation where our first choice back 4 is actually half decent. I still think there's room to improve even further with a bit more decent scouting and investment.
