Chelsea Football Club could be about to splash £50-60m on Alejandro Garnacho. I write this, sitting next to a friend that supports Manchester United, being begged to take the player from Manchester United. 

Now, this isn’t necessarily the best litmus test to use when assessing whether or not to buy a player from a rival, especially one that is currently undergoing a crisis unseen for decades at the club, but it is a decent insight into the thoughts of fans on the player we want to buy. 

It’s definitely a ‘controversial’ move and one that has been met with both anger and confusion by Chelsea fans online and around the stadium.

Despite this, Chelsea seem adamant in continuing their approach on Garnacho and as of writing this, it looks increasingly likely he could be a Chelsea player come the end of the January 2025 transfer window. 

Garnacho is a troubling character

I do have some sympathy for his situation. Garnacho may not be a superstar yet, but he is an extremely talented young player who works hard and does things.

He burst onto the scene at 17 years old, making his debut against Chelsea (ironically) in a 1-1 draw under Ralf Ragnick.

Over the next season, he started playing more and actually did pretty well. He did well enough to the extent that he quickly became lauded as one of the big up and coming players at Manchester United. 

Despite all of this, things have soured fast. The appointment of Eric Ten Hag was nothing short of a car crash, despite his short term success in cup competitions.

The change in ownership and sudden decision to randomly not sack Ten Hag as well as countless other suicidal decisions made within the club has turned the situation at Manchester United to be pretty nasty.

At a club the size of Manchester United, success is almost instantly demanded on all occasions and this isn’t much different to the atmosphere at Chelsea. 

Expecting a young player to maintain high levels, and even elevate his levels in a toxic atmosphere is a stretch and it’s pretty unrealistic. Now compound that with constant fan and media scrutiny, it’s simply not possible for a young player to thrive. 

However, what is concerning is that Garnacho has contributed in a negative sense. Rumours of leaking team news, his brother posting dodgy tweets, or even Garnacho posting a vape on his own story, he hasn’t kept his name out of the spotlight.

If anything, he’s put his name out there even more to be criticised and scrutinised. Chelsea are reportedly conducting background checks into his temperament.

So in this sense, I’d say it’s harsh to criticise his on field performances, given the wealth of issues off the field.

But at the same time, it’s just as much on him as it is on the club, he seems immature and arrogant in a bad way, and again this is a product of both the poor atmosphere and environment at the club and himself. 

Chelsea’s direction is confusing

I will talk about him more later as a player, but I have a hard time believing that Garnacho raises the floor of the team significantly.

And this is something I’ve repeatedly spoken about. We have a top 4 worthy team and where we can and should be investing to make it a title-challenging team, we aren’t.

We’re just buying ceiling raisers instead of floor raisers. There is no guarantee any of the players will become as good as we think they can be in five years.

There’s also no guarantee any of them are still here if we miss out on top four again over the next few years. Chelsea are hedging risky bets with wods of cash. 

The sporting directors seem to believe he will provide goals, unlike the rest of the Chelsea wingers, such as Pedro Neto and Jadon Sancho, who have two and one respectively.

We’ll go a bit deeper into the data later but there is quite literally no evidence to suggest that Garnacho will provide goals and cover for finishing deficiencies when other players are missing chances. 

It also isn’t exactly a genius move to limit your profile options in the striker position and to rely on a 20 year old who clearly doesn’t cope massively well with pressure to score all your goals.

If anything, I believe that it’s borderline irresponsible. 

Furthermore, why are we looking to spend so much on someone we don’t need when that could’ve gone towards a midfielder or a striker? With that much money, last summer we would’ve secured deals for:

• Jhon Duran
• Samu Omorodion
• Amadou Onana
• Bradley Barcola
• Michael Olise

And for some of those deals, we would’ve even had some left over to invest elsewhere. Apart from the first two and arguably Barcola, the other three would’ve raised our floor and probably got us 5 extra points come the end of the season.

And on the topic of taking risks, why didn’t we take a risk on those three players then?’

Assessing some of the key data

The data for Garnacho, as with most players we buy these days, is relatively unremarkable. This again affirms my point in that buying Garnacho does nothing to raise the floor of the team – he isn’t an upgrade on anyone. This is rather conveniently shown in the data.

So first up – dribbles attempted p90. 

This could be a result of system but Garnacho attempts less dribbles per 90 minutes than all of our wingers. 

Let us then compare the dribble completion, a more accurate representation of quality of dribbling. 

I think the numbers are pretty telling. 

Below are charts showing the comparison for other more ‘output’ related metrics.

So it’s pretty apparent that Garnacho is not someone that wants to take on a player, but more someone that’s happy to just pop off a shot.

This is good in the sense that in the front line, you want to have a group of players that satisfy each metric group to a certain extent.

To explain that in simpler terms:

• You want someone who will create chances (do well in stats like xA, SCA, take ons). (Production metrics)

• You want someone who will score goals (do well in stats like xG, shots per 90)

I know production is basically another word for output, but think of it as producing something (chances) to get to that output – goals.

I think if we got Garnacho it could be a good balance overall, and that’s probably what the club is trying to achieve here.

To visualise this across our front line, I’ll add Jackson and Palmer into the charts in place of Mudryk who hasn’t played enough this season to get good data from. 

See how the two players who are meant to produce that ‘output’ do less of the ‘production’ stats. 

Now see how the players that are low on ‘production’ are high on ‘output’. 

I’m fairly confident that this is the thinking behind going for someone like Garnacho. 

In a simple sense, if Jackson is no longer scoring and Madueke is not playing, Palmer would be the only one scoring. They hope that Garnacho will also score. And if he isn’t playing then hopefully Madueke is playing. 

That being said, if you wanted to see just how good Palmer is. He also excels in his ‘production’:

I’m pretty confident if Jackson took more chances (as with others on the pitch), Palmer would probably hit at least 15 assists and 20 goals a season.

Maybe the thinking is that Garnacho can help score more. The issue here is below:

This graph suggests that Garnacho scores less than he should have, based off the expected goals value of all his shots combined.

Sancho is remarkably clinical (he just doesn’t really shoot), Madueke is decent for the amount of shots he does take, Jackson is predictably not clinical, Neto is alright given he doesn’t shoot much and Palmer is about where you’d expect him to be.

It’s feasible to assume that Garnacho will eventually become more clinical but again, you would be assuming. Nothing in life is a guarantee, and catching up to your xG is almost definitely not one. 

I’m going to give a final bit of data on his defensive contributions which will lead me on to the final section on my thoughts of him as a player in a bit more depth. 

Here are his ‘defensive’ numbers in the attacking third. And so…

Garnacho as a footballer, how good is he?

He is a good young player and definitely has a future in the Premier League. He can run (fast), cover ground, works very hard and doesn’t aimlessly fly around the pitch.

He can be a bit dodgy in his decision making (I watch him and always feel frustrated, kind of like Mudryk in that sense) but there’s room to work with for that.

I feel as though he will thrive more in a heavy positional system (less opportunity to think) as his decision making is dodgy as just mentioned.

Whether or not his decision making troubles stem from ego or just generally a poor understanding of the game, we will have to see. 

I wouldn’t say I’m always left in a constant state of frustration when watching Garnacho (I am when watching people like Darwin Nunez) but every time he has played against us I would say I have felt grateful he lacks that bit of quality in the final actions.

With that being said, I do think Garnacho could do on to do really well at Chelsea but I’m not massively sure it’s a risk I’d take for the price, he comes with baggage.

Could we play devils advocate and say his sheer willingness to continue doing him instead of crawling back into a shell is a good trait to have, though? Maybe.

The final point I want to make kind of links to everything said so far – he’s very persistent, almost irritatingly persistent if you watch him.

He will chase down the ball, press well, launch himself into duels to try and get the ball and ultimately he’ll probably help the team in that aspect, similar to Pedro Neto.

The conclusion: Should we part with £50-60m for Garnacho?

No. It’s a legacy defining sum for the sporting directors. I wouldn’t make the gamble but I will wish them good luck should they go for it, they’ll need it.

The main issue is we are burning money to fuel the fire, leaving the squad with gaping squad holes (keeper, centre back, midfielder, striker) that shouldn’t exist after spending over £1BN.

If it works out, great, it almost has to and It will be for the reasons mentioned above (improving on his underlying numbers, his arrogance being harnessed in a good way, his hard work and fit into Maresca’s system).

I’ve written loads on how I quite like almost all our targets. Garnacho is a good player with plenty of room to grow and I believe he can go on to be very good, but there is no point in identifying good if you can’t bring them all together to make something great.

The gaping holes mentioned in more important areas of the squad are why there will be so many questions around this potential deal, and why I would look to avoid doing it.