Why the Sporting Directors want a young striker... and the best solution up front

Is there method in the madness?

So it looks like Chelsea are intending to sign a younger, less proven striker. There’ve been various links to players who aren’t quite so established, who need development. As someone who has for over 12 months been demanding we sign some more proven, established players, including up front, I’m hugely frustrated.

I actually have a lot of time for the players we’re linked with. I trust our sporting directors in relation to their ability to spot talent. Nicolas Jackson is proof they know what they’re doing in terms of spotting talent. My issue has always been they have no experience in building squads and leading a football club, and this matter has proven this again.

However, I always try to be balanced and see all slides of the argument, so I decided to look at why they’ve made the decision to look at this profile of striker.

First, I think its important to note, you can’t accuse the sporting directors of completely ignoring experienced players. Only a few weeks back we signed a quality, PL proven, 26/27 year old CB in Tosin Adarabioyo, who has leadership qualities. Our main transfer target is Michael Olise, who has several years PL experience despite his young age, and is a proven, top tier talent ready to start for Chelsea.

Milos Kerkez, a known LB target, also has a years PL experience, two years experience in top European leagues playing regularly, and also has growing international experience. He’s currently playing at the Euros. He’s not a raw talent who needs tons of development. Marcin Bulka, a rumoured GK target, has been playing regular first team football in the French league, been around big clubs being developed, and, again, is not a raw unproven talent.

Striker seems to be the only position we’re looking at someone less proven.

So why aren’t we going for a proven elite striker?

The first answer to this is Nicolas Jackson. I’ve been a fan of Jackson from the beginning. He has a good attitude, wants to improve, works hard, has clear potential and its been visible how he’s developed and improved as a player and a striker over his first season at Chelsea. It was also his first ever full season playing as a striker. He is only 22, and will undoubtedly improve over the next few years. You’d expect his goalscoring numbers to improve too, which given he got 17 goals and 6 assists in 44 games last season, means we can probably expect over 20 goals next season. Chelsea have clearly seen his potential and his improvement, and want to give him the opportunity to establish himself as our first choice striker. I actually respect this.

The second answer is that goals were not an area we struggled with last year. We scored 103 goals in 51 games. Our issue last year was our defence, we conceded an obscene amount of goals, and if our defence had been remotely decent, we’d have made top 4 comfortably, and likely have won a trophy.

And remember last season we had basically one fit striker all season. Our backup striker Armando Broja only got 2 goals for Chelsea in half a season, and Christopher Nkunku was out for the vast majority of the season - though he still got 3 goals. Our two main goalscorers were Cole Palmer and Nicolas Jackson, who got 42 goals between them. If Nkunku had been fit most of the season, the odds are we’d have scored another 10-12 goals, taking us to 110-115 goals in all comps, and likely have got a top 4 spot.

The sporting directors might be thinkin if we sign Michael Olise, who got 10 goals and 6 assists in 19 PL games last season, we’ll be adding another 15 goals at least to our team on top of the players we already have. Nkunku being fit will add similar. Nicholas Jackson will likely get more goals. Those four between them could score 65-70 goals alone. That’s not even including our 4-5 backup attackers, Sterling, Noni, Mudryk, and a new striker who combined could score 20-25 goals between them. Add midfield and defence, we’re looking at 115-120 goals next season. If we improve our defence, that would surely guarantee top 4 and maybe a trophy.

Our backup striker, Broja, got 2 goals last year. The new one doesn’t have to do much to improve on this.

When you look at it this way, you can understand why the sporting directors are happy to spend less on a striker, and more open to another young talent. They might feel we’re going to score more goals than last season regardless.

Now I would counter this, in that you can back Jackson as your number one striker, and go cheaper, but still sign someone who is relatively established who doesn’t require any development.

For example, Serhou Guirassy, 28 years old, who got 28 Bundesliga goals last season and available for £15m, would be the perfect option. You could rotate him and Jackson, or even have the option of Jackson off the left with Guirassy up front, and have solid competition and some proven ability in the squad, cheaper than you’ll pay for either of the current targets. That would be my personal preference. Its a smart deal and doesn’t block Jackson, but pushes him to improve.

However, if we go ahead with our current plan, I don’t think its a disaster, especially if we sign Michael Olise. Goals weren’t a problem last season and our young players will only improve, so they shouldn’t be a problem this year either.

To be very clear, I disagree with going for a less proven striker again. I think there’s smart options which achieve the aim of allowing Jackson to develop, without going for another kid. But the sporting directors already have and intend to recruit more proven players this summer in other positions to complement this, so it's a less serious issue as previously.

Whoever it is we sign up front, I’m going to get behind them and back them, and if I’m wrong, I’ll admit it and hold my hands up. But even taking into account the above, right now I think going for another raw striker is a mistake.

The Score