Torres - Worth the risk?

[lets all have a disco]

Torres needs to rest until October and i mean rest,literally sit on the beach watch footy from a beach bar and totally rest.

He has been injured for a year now,what still gets me is that even injured and not on fire he still scored a lot of goals last year unnoticed.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

Torres needs to rest until October and i mean rest,literally sit on the beach watch footy from a beach bar and totally rest.

He has been injured for a year now,what still gets me is that even injured and not on fire he still scored a lot of goals last year unnoticed.

Exactly.

Whoever signs him, needs to give him proper rest and let him injuries heal. However when he comes back, he will be scoring goals left, right and center. I mean last season when he was apparently poor and constantly injured, he managed 18 league goals.

Injuries or not, I honestly can't see how we can take a pass on him at 26 years of age and 5 years ahead of him on top of his game.

Him nad Dzeko are different type of strikers by the way. I have been banging on about Dzeko for few years now but I don't think it's either or.

[john@staustell]

Torres needs to rest until October and i mean rest,literally sit on the beach watch footy from a beach bar and totally rest.

He has been injured for a year now,what still gets me is that even injured and not on fire he still scored a lot of goals last year unnoticed.

Exactly.

Whoever signs him, needs to give him proper rest and let him injuries heal. However when he comes back, he will be scoring goals left, right and center. I mean last season when he was apparently poor and constantly injured, he managed 18 league goals.

Injuries or not, I honestly can't see how we can take a pass on him at 26 years of age and 5 years ahead of him on top of his game.

Him nad Dzeko are different type of strikers by the way. I have been banging on about Dzeko for few years now but I don't think it's either or.

Totally right mate.

Can't believe the fans of the club that brought the world Barry Conlan are regularly turning their noses up at some of the world's top strikers. There's also this 'oh, we can't afford to take a risk on him' mindset that dates from the days of Lee Bradbury, not the Sheik Mansour era. We can 'afford' to buy Torres just as back-up.

Mancini always had lots of striker choices at Inter.

[Original Dub]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

[Beeks]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Good point Dubbers

[lets all have a disco]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Good point Dubbers

One MIGHT be available the other deffo isnt.

[xavi6]

I think if we don't sign him then we will have dodged a bullet.

The Dippers rely on him too heavily and have never let his injuries heal fully before playing him again. As a result he's on the way to becoming another Crocky (albeit a far better player when fit).

[Original Dub]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Good point Dubbers

One MIGHT be available the other deffo isnt.

I'm not asking which one we should go for mate, I'm wondering where the valuations come from?

If David Villa is worth £34.2m then Torres is worth £30m tops.

Yet we're being told he's worth.... wait for it.... SEVENTY FUCKING MILLION?

I don't think so mate.

[lets all have a disco]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Good point Dubbers

One MIGHT be available the other deffo isnt.

I'm not asking which one we should go for mate, I'm wondering where the valuations come from?

If David Villa is worth £34.2m then Torres is worth £30m tops.

Yet we're being told he's worth.... wait for it.... SEVENTY FUCKING MILLION?

I don't think so mate.

Thats Liverpool being arsewipes and trying to warn people off,if Torres wanted to leave he could easily slap in a transfer request and have done with it at a lower price.

[Rae4685]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Good point Dubbers

You could argue you would get twice as many years for you money with Torres? Injury permitting of course! Also maybe you could presume Torres could still get better whereas villa is definitely already in his prime

[Rae4685]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Good point Dubbers

You could argue you would get twice as many years for you money with Torres? Injury permitting of course! Also maybe you could presume Torres could still get better whereas villa is definitely already in his prime

[Rae4685]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Good point Dubbers

You could argue you would get twice as many years for you money with Torres Injury permitting of course Also maybe you could presume Torres could still get better whereas villa is definitely already in his prime

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Because he is Premier League proven and THREE years younger.

Torres had 82 goals in 214 games in Spain and he left Athletico when he was 23! since he moved to England, he has 56 goals in 79 games. Whopping 70% strike rate! I don't know many strikers who can match that.

I agree though that transfer fee is over the top. Then again, I thought 34.2m for 28 year old striker was ott as well so there you go.

I don't think anyone can argue with Torres' numbers. Whether you think he is injury prone is another question.

[Original Dub]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Because he is Premier League proven and THREE years younger.

Torres had 82 goals in 214 games in Spain and he left Athletico when he was 23! since he moved to England, he has 56 goals in 79 games. Whopping 70% strike rate! I don't know many strikers who can match that.

I agree though that transfer fee is over the top. Then again, I thought 34.2m for 28 year old striker was ott as well so there you go.

I don't think anyone can argue with Torres' numbers. Whether you think he is injury prone is another question.

Well this age factor - if both were available, we would have signed either one on an initial 5 year deal more than likely, at the end of which, Torres would be 31 and Villa 33.

56 goals in 79 games is impressive, no doubt about it, but its a fact that Villa's strike record over his whole career for both club and country is much more impressive than Torres, so the valuation is total bollox.

Even taking age into account, if Villa is valued at £34.2m, how much do you think Torres should be valued at?

[steveo_88]

Definately not, you saw it again when he came on last night just like this season for Liverp**l when it's not going his way he starts snapping and wingeing. It's plain for all to see in a tough situation where he has to fight out of a bad run of form he doesn't have a complimentary team attitude. Tevez would put his head down and go to work, Torres has a little moan to himself on the bench, when he comes on, snaps at the officials and blame anyone else for his mistakes.

I know in the near future we probably will not get him but David Villa was the man in the Spanish team to be looking at not Torres. That's why the Spanish manager who really backed him eventually dropped him for the good of the team and brought in Pedro.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Because he is Premier League proven and THREE years younger.

Torres had 82 goals in 214 games in Spain and he left Athletico when he was 23! since he moved to England, he has 56 goals in 79 games. Whopping 70% strike rate! I don't know many strikers who can match that.

I agree though that transfer fee is over the top. Then again, I thought 34.2m for 28 year old striker was ott as well so there you go.

I don't think anyone can argue with Torres' numbers. Whether you think he is injury prone is another question.

Well this age factor - if both were available, we would have signed either one on an initial 5 year deal more than likely, at the end of which, Torres would be 31 and Villa 33.

56 goals in 79 games is impressive, no doubt about it, but its a fact that Villa's strike record over his whole career for both club and country is much more impressive than Torres, so the valuation is total bollox.

Even taking age into account, if Villa is valued at £34.2m, how much do you think Torres should be valued at?

IF value for money came into it, and if we are looking to buy him we can forget all that, I'd say Torres would be realistically valued somewhere around 40m mark. Tranaldo went for 80m and Robinho went for 32m so I don't think 40 to 45m would be ott. BUT you got players like RSC going for what, 18m was it? Veron cost united even back then around 30m. Ferdinand 28m. And as we all know, you always pay premium for genuine goalscorers.

Personally I would LOVE to have Torres and then let him properly recover from his injuries. He is guaranteed to do it. I'm huge fan of Dzeko as everyone knows but there will always be question marks regarding him before he joins us. Ibrahimovic is head case and for me too lazy for Premier League. Personally I'd stay million miles away from Balotelli but if Mancini is absolutely 100% sure he can develope him into top player and keep him under control then I'm ok with it but I think it's a huge gamble especially despite his super natural talent he is still far from finished article and shouldn't be expected to be starter next season.

So the big question is, what have got to choose from IF we skip Torres? We DO need striker additions, that I'm sure everyone agrees with.

[Murph]

Torres is a fantastic striker, I'd have him at the club in a heartbeat. He has had some injury problems but I see that more to do with Liverpool being desperate to get him on the park at the earliest opportunity and not letting him recover 100%. He probably should not have gone to the World Cup as he was clearly not match fit. For those who say he's a total crock I would point out that since 2001/02 he's never played in less than 30 games in a season.

[Original Dub]

David Villa's strike record over a number of seasons has been fantastic. David Villa's strike record for Spain is fantastic. Torres had about a 1 in 3 strike rate at Madrid and less than 1 in 3 for Spain. He has had ONE season in which he bettered David Villa. His injury record is far worse than Villa's.

David Villa transfered to Barcelona for £34.2m.

Torres is valued at more than TWICE that.

I'm just wondering if someone can explain why that is... and indeed as the title asks, why he IS worth the risk?

Because he is Premier League proven and THREE years younger.

Torres had 82 goals in 214 games in Spain and he left Athletico when he was 23! since he moved to England, he has 56 goals in 79 games. Whopping 70% strike rate! I don't know many strikers who can match that.

I agree though that transfer fee is over the top. Then again, I thought 34.2m for 28 year old striker was ott as well so there you go.

I don't think anyone can argue with Torres' numbers. Whether you think he is injury prone is another question.

Well this age factor - if both were available, we would have signed either one on an initial 5 year deal more than likely, at the end of which, Torres would be 31 and Villa 33.

56 goals in 79 games is impressive, no doubt about it, but its a fact that Villa's strike record over his whole career for both club and country is much more impressive than Torres, so the valuation is total bollox.

Even taking age into account, if Villa is valued at £34.2m, how much do you think Torres should be valued at?

IF value for money came into it, and if we are looking to buy him we can forget all that, I'd say Torres would be realistically valued somewhere around 40m mark. Tranaldo went for 80m and Robinho went for 32m so I don't think 40 to 45m would be ott. BUT you got players like RSC going for what, 18m was it? Veron cost U***d even back then around 30m. Ferdinand 28m. And as we all know, you always pay premium for genuine goalscorers.

Personally I would LOVE to have Torres and then let him properly recover from his injuries. He is guaranteed to do it. I'm huge fan of Dzeko as everyone knows but there will always be question marks regarding him before he joins us. Ibrahimovic is head case and for me too lazy for Premier League. Personally I'd stay million miles away from Balotelli but if Mancini is absolutely 100% sure he can develope him into top player and keep him under control then I'm ok with it but I think it's a huge gamble especially despite his super natural talent he is still far from finished article and shouldn't be expected to be starter next season.

So the big question is, what have got to choose from IF we skip Torres? We DO need striker additions, that I'm sure everyone agrees with.

I'm a big Dzeko fan too and I think he's the one I want to see most. You could be right about Ibra and Balotelli - but maybe its comparable to Hughes getting Bellamy - Mancini knows these players inside out...

Fuck it, I just want it done already!