Christian Eriksen

[.h.]

I'm more than willing to trade occasional defensive lapses for the passes he makes. Those two passes led to two goals, his lapses there didnt lead to any goals. We've got Italy's best defense IMHO, and if it wasnt for the fucking Kolarov prick at the start of the season, we'd probably have conceded the fewest goals in the league as well.

If the balance we're making is an incredible passer with sometimes defensive lapses, for an average passer who is a better defender, give me Eriksen EVERY day of the week. That's the stuff of scudettos right there.

[CafeCordoba]

That might be the stuff of Scudetti but the point here all along has been the suboptimal allocation of resources. Eriksen costs a ton and we are paying for the quality which we are underusing. I'm not complaining, just stating how the things are. We are paying for certain level of quality (his goalscoring/assisting ability costs extra money in the market, thus his 7.5m€ net salary) but we are only getting his possession play and passing ability. This is the issue with Eriksen IMO.

Like said, not complaining and it's not a huge issue but IF we had to cut somewhere, I'd start at Eriksen. This is purely hypothetical and hopefully we don't have to sell assets from current first team.

[.h.]

Honestly, we can cut a lot of bench before we even talk about eriksen, and if we move onto the first team, I'd personally rather drop Perisic and Brozovic before Eriksen tbh

[CafeCordoba]

Honestly, we can cut a lot of bench before we even talk about eriksen, and if we move onto the first team, I'd personally rather drop Perisic and Brozovic before Eriksen tbh

Sorry, with the assets I meant the pricy ones we have in Barella, Bastoni, Skriniar, Hakimi, Eriksen, Lautaro, Lukaku. Players we can net either net a lot of plusvalenza or then save salary costs. Brozovic doesn't quite fit to the bill as his salary isn't high and last year of the contract so I don't think there are clubs willing to put tens of millions of euros, maybe 20m€ (well that's almost pure plusvalenza still so there's that).

Of course Vidal comes pretty soon into these discussions if we needed to get rid of some salary. Perisic is in my books pretty much gone anyway. And cutting off Eriksen is only academic talk because he seems to be settled and "in the loop" of the coach now so I don't see he wants to leave anywhere anytime soon.

edit. Anyway, back to my argument. The bottom line is we aren't getting everything out of the salary we pay, apart from I'd say almost all the other key players in this squad. Vidal is one exception for sure, maybe Sanchez too initially, but he has padded his stats seriously in recent weeks (yeah Kolarov too but he's gone in the summer anyway).

[.h.]

from a savings perspective, given what we'd likely have to subsidise on Eriksen's contract, selling 2 of Vidal, Joao Mario, Dalbert, Lazaro, Nainggolan impacts more than Eriksen tbh.

Eriksen's annual cost is just under 17m a season (total) - Nainggolan is 18, Vecino is 10, Vidal is 10, Lazaro+Dalbert is 10m ignoring any salary, and JM is also 10m. Perisic is 12m.

In terms of 'worth', does he deserve to be the 3rd highest annual cost on our team, behind Lukaku and Nainggolan? No, probably not. But there are plenty of ways to save it.



Plus, on his current trajectory, I think we'll see more goals and assists from him soon. TBH, those passes i've identified in the last page or so alone are probably worth 1-2mil, if not more. And you could (presumably) add a sponsorship+broadcast revenue benefit solely to his goal vs Milan in the Coppa Italia. That's gotta be at least a million, right?


Before you know it, a player like him can really look kinda cheap

[CafeCordoba]

You still didn't get my point. We are surely going to "make money" by getting rid of all those players mentioned. What I meant is if we needed to get rid of a pricy asset on top of the obvious ones which are anyway going. And I want to repeat this is just academic theory, because Eriksen is most probably not going to go anywhere. The point is the resource allocation.

I don't understand a damn thing how some individual passes or freekick goals are worth million a piece, but what the heck.

But enough by me of this subject, I've already said everything about it.

[J..]

That might be the stuff of Scudetti but the point here all along has been the suboptimal allocation of resources. Eriksen costs a ton and we are paying for the quality which we are underusing. I'm not complaining, just stating how the things are. We are paying for certain level of quality (his goalscoring/assisting ability costs extra money in the market, thus his 7.5m€ net salary) but we are only getting his possession play and passing ability. This is the issue with Eriksen IMO.

Like said, not complaining and it's not a huge issue but IF we had to cut somewhere, I'd start at Eriksen. This is purely hypothetical and hopefully we don't have to sell assets from current first team.

But who is to blame for this? Eriksen is not used on his prefered position and has a coach who earlier this season did humiliate him multiple times. I am actually very surprised that Eriksen performs this well when taking this into consideration.

I really don't understand the blame on Eriksen part that some people have in here. You can't expect him to perform with massive assisting numbers when he is deployed with much more defensive responsibilities than what he has had elsewhere.

It's like buying Messi and use him as a wingback. Would his scoring numbers fall. Yup surely.

[Harpsabu]

But who is to blame for this? Eriksen is not used on his prefered position and has a coach who earlier this season did humiliate him multiple times. I am actually very surprised that Eriksen performs this well when taking this into consideration.

I really don't understand the blame on Eriksen part that some people have in here. You can't expect him to perform with massive assisting numbers when he is deployed with much more defensive responsibilities than what he has had elsewhere.

It's like buying Messi and use him as a wingback. Would his scoring numbers fall. Yup surely.

Well, the argument here a few weeks ago was that conte was stupid for not playing him in this role earlier, instead conte tried him more as an attacking midfielder, his natural position.

I'm happy eriksen is getting more and more involved in our game and providing more for us, but for his wage bill, which is equal to lukaku, you would expect more. The obvious comparison would be Sensi in thag like 6 week period he was actually fit, who got what, 3 goals and 4 assists in that period? Eriksen plays a bit deeper yes but for his quality and again wages, it's fair to expect more than 0 goals and 0 assists.

To be clear as well, I'm not criticising eriksen on his last few games, as I said I'm happy and glad he's delivering now, but for his status in the squad as one of the highest earners we should be hoping he starts getting more numbers soon.

[J..]

The obvious comparison would be Sensi in thag like 6 week period he was actually fit, who got what, 3 goals and 4 assists in that period? Eriksen plays a bit deeper yes but for his quality and again wages, it's fair to expect more than 0 goals and 0 assists.

Sensi is used to this position. Eriksen has never had this many defensive responsibilities before. Not at Spurs and definetely not at Ajax.

Eriksen is adapting to this position and is already performing better and better after each match. We are not talking about a young talent but a mature player at the age of 29 which is impressing.

The 0 goals and 0 assists argument is BS. Eriksen has had, as .h. many important building-up passes which are just as important as registred assists.

I think we should sign Messi and let Conte use him as a wingback. He could then join the club 0 to 0.

[Harpsabu]

Sensi is used to this position. Eriksen has never had this many defensive responsibilities before. Not at Spurs and definetely not at Ajax.

Eriksen is adapting to this position and is already performing better and better after each match. We are not talking about a young talent but a mature player at the age of 29 which is impressing.

The 0 goals and 0 assists argument is BS. Eriksen has had, as .h. many important building-up passes which are just as important as registred assists.

I think we should sign Messi and let Conte use him as a wingback. He could then join the club 0 to 0.

Eriksen played quite a few times as a centre mid for spurs. Its not as if this position is totally new to him. Plus, Eriksen did get played in his natural position and was even worse.
I'm not even saying the 0 and 0 arguement isn't bullshit, all I'm saying is for a player on the same wages as lukaku, you would be expecting some more from him. Hopefully that comes in time now he's adjusting to his role and the team.

[Candreva Crosses]

As long as our coach is Conte we will never be able to see Eriksen earn his high salary.

[Universe]

To no one in particular, but just addressing some points that have come up recently:

1. I don't really like the idea that Eriksen's failures playing in his preferred AM position should be held against him. As we've discussed exhaustively, and as I believe most people now agree with, Conte's 3412 was broken in the first place. That made it largely unfair to judge any performances as AM.
   
   As we saw, Conte tried out Eriksen, Vidal, Barella, Brozovic, Sensi and Sanchez as the "1" in that 3412 and it simply didn't work no matter who played as AM. The entire system was flawed and ineffective because the AM position was completely bypassed and made redundant by the way we played. Our results from this period, and Conte completely abandoning the formation, are irrefutable evidence of this.
   
   
   
2. I agree that we should expect more goals and assists from Eriksen. However, at the same time, I believe Browha is 100% right in saying we will NEVER see Eriksen getting 10 goals and 15 assists per season like he did at Tottenham. The point is, that is completely fine and a natural consequence of his new position in this particular set up. Do not underestimate how big a factor that is.
   
   With Eriksen, we have already demonstrated an increased ability to play with the ball from deep and quickly hit penetrating forward passes. This is something that Conte clearly values and he made a point of looking for solutions to help Brozovic not get frustrated when pressed. Despite Barella's strengths, he is not very good with the ball in deep positions. How better to help Brozovic in this regard than to deploy another capable playmaker alongside him?
   
   If people have issues with Conte's tactics, or with Brozovic etc, these are different issues entirely and irrelevant to the current context. What is certainly relevant is that Eriksen is helping relieve the pressure off Brozovic (which is crucial) and simultaneously contributing to Conte's desired tactic of quick, accurate, vertical balls into the forwards. The goals and assists will come gradually.
   
   
   
3. As far as his defensive work goes, obviously he's no Kante or prime-Vidal, karate flying into every challenge - but there's no question he's improving vastly. He always covered a lot of ground, but now he's doing it smarter and becoming more comfortable with defending deep. He's actually got surprisingly impressive stats for balls recovered and defensive interventions etc.
   

Ultimately, Conte said he now trusts Eriksen in both phases of the game but that he still expects more. IMO this is exactly the right way of looking at it. It took a long time, and we can argue all day whether it's Eriksen's fault, Conte's fault, or anything in between. But he's finally settled now, tactically speaking, and he's being trusted to start consistently - therefore he's playing at a solid level. That's all I ever wanted.

Don't get me wrong, is he absolutely majestic? No. Are some posters exaggerating how good he's been? Definitely. Is €7.5m too much for the performances he's putting in? Yes, probably. But the way I see it, this is the real start of his Inter career and this is what we should've aimed for since day 1, not day 400. Eriksen is only going to improve with further playing time.

If I had my way, he would play every second of every match for the rest of the season. Then we can see if the answers to these questions are any clearer.







*inb4 Conte doesn't appreciate his "I played 79 minutes in total from December to January 23" comment during the Danish TV interview and re-benches him forever

[Broseph Stalin]

It’s so amusing that people find every excuse to justify Eriksen’s mediocre performances and at the same time, they are ready to crucify 5gag for the tiniest mistake he makes. in reality though given the wage difference between these two and their contributions to our team, they’re more or less on the same level.

[Alex de Large]

It took 15 months to make the 3-5-2 work, and looks like it was normal to expect the 3-4-1-2 would work in only a couple of games with Eriksen playing AM.

[Ronaldo]

I love Eriksen but I don’t think his performance so far justifies his salary. We have to see how his game evolves till end of the season but somehow I don’t believe he could evolve to the point of justifying his price tag, even if he stayed for another year and was playing consistently. I just don’t see him getting to that level.

It also depends on what options we have on the market and how much money can we spend. If the Tielemans rumors are true and we are in fact going to sign him, I would Eriksen go.

[.h.]

no, theres no way we're about to spend 40m on another midfielder.

[Harpsabu]

To no one in particular, but just addressing some points that have come up recently:

1. I don't really like the idea that Eriksen's failures playing in his preferred AM position should be held against him. As we've discussed exhaustively, and as I believe most people now agree with, Conte's 3412 was broken in the first place. That made it largely unfair to judge any performances as AM.
   
   As we saw, Conte tried out Eriksen, Vidal, Barella, Brozovic, Sensi and Sanchez as the "1" in that 3412 and it simply didn't work no matter who played as AM. The entire system was flawed and ineffective because the AM position was completely bypassed and made redundant by the way we played. Our results from this period, and Conte completely abandoning the formation, are irrefutable evidence of this.
   
   
   
2. I agree that we should expect more goals and assists from Eriksen. However, at the same time, I believe Browha is 100% right in saying we will NEVER see Eriksen getting 10 goals and 15 assists per season like he did at Tottenham. The point is, that is completely fine and a natural consequence of his new position in this particular set up. Do not underestimate how big a factor that is.
   
   With Eriksen, we have already demonstrated an increased ability to play with the ball from deep and quickly hit penetrating forward passes. This is something that Conte clearly values and he made a point of looking for solutions to help Brozovic not get frustrated when pressed. Despite Barella's strengths, he is not very good with the ball in deep positions. How better to help Brozovic in this regard than to deploy another capable playmaker alongside him?
   
   If people have issues with Conte's tactics, or with Brozovic etc, these are different issues entirely and irrelevant to the current context. What is certainly relevant is that Eriksen is helping relieve the pressure off Brozovic (which is crucial) and simultaneously contributing to Conte's desired tactic of quick, accurate, vertical balls into the forwards. The goals and assists will come gradually.
   
   
   
3. As far as his defensive work goes, obviously he's no Kante or prime-Vidal, karate flying into every challenge - but there's no question he's improving vastly. He always covered a lot of ground, but now he's doing it smarter and becoming more comfortable with defending deep. He's actually got surprisingly impressive stats for balls recovered and defensive interventions etc.
   

Ultimately, Conte said he now trusts Eriksen in both phases of the game but that he still expects more. IMO this is exactly the right way of looking at it. It took a long time, and we can argue all day whether it's Eriksen's fault, Conte's fault, or anything in between. But he's finally settled now, tactically speaking, and he's being trusted to start consistently - therefore he's playing at a solid level. That's all I ever wanted.

Don't get me wrong, is he absolutely majestic? No. Are some posters exaggerating how good he's been? Definitely. Is €7.5m too much for the performances he's putting in? Yes, probably. But the way I see it, this is the real start of his Inter career and this is what we should've aimed for since day 1, not day 400. Eriksen is only going to improve with further playing time.

If I had my way, he would play every second of every match for the rest of the season. Then we can see if the answers to these questions are any clearer.







*inb4 Conte doesn't appreciate his "I played 79 minutes in total from December to January 23" comment during the Danish TV interview and re-benches him forever

I agree with pretty much all of this, especially the conclusion. Great post Uni.

[rfU]

If the balance we're making is an incredible passer with sometimes defensive lapses, for an average passer who is a better defender, give me Eriksen EVERY day of the week. That's the stuff of scudettos right there.

Why do we have to sacrifice one for the other? There are plenty of midfielders who perform well at both ends: Zelinksi (6 goals, 6 assists), De Paul (6/5), Luis Alberto (8/0), Pellegrini (4/6) for example, (all on lower wages). Why does there need to be a trade off between offensive skill and defensive output?

TBH, those passes i've identified in the last page or so alone are probably worth 1-2mil, if not more. And you could (presumably) add a sponsorship+broadcast revenue benefit solely to his goal vs Milan in the Coppa Italia. That's gotta be at least a million, right?

You're still going on about those passes, do you know how many of these De Bruyne does per a game? DePaul is the leader in key passes in the league and that's with lowly Udinese who spend 85 minutes of the game in their own half. Imagine what he could achieve at Inter in addition to working his ass off in defense.

The 0 goals and 0 assists argument is BS. Eriksen has had, as .h. many important building-up passes which are just as important as registred assists.

Reason I brought up Eriksen's goals/assists is because everyone's going on about how much he contributes on offense as a way to defend his lack of defensive output. I'm really not big on numbers, it all depends on context. Iniesta, one of my favorite midfielders of all time, hardly assisted or scored. But he did do these:



When Eriksen can bend space and time like this, no one will give a damn about his numbers.

[Il Drago]

Why do we have to sacrifice one for the other? There are plenty of midfielders who perform well at both ends: Zelinksi (6 goals, 6 assists), De Paul (6/5), Luis Alberto (8/0), Pellegrini (4/6) for example, (all on lower wages). Why does there need to be a trade off between offensive skill and defensive output?

De Paul numbers may look good now but this is his third season being used as a mezzala. When he started playing in the role his stats (and his performances) were pretty poor. In his first season as a CM he had 1 goals and 4 assists in 14 matches (3 of them in his last appearance of the season against SPAL). He started playing much better once he adjusted to the role in the following season.

You're still going on about those passes, do you know how many of these De Bruyne does per a game? DePaul is the leader in key passes in the league and that's with lowly Udinese who spend 85 minutes of the game in their own half. Imagine what he could achieve at Inter in addition to working his ass off in defense.

It doesn't work that way. De Paul performances at Udinese are no guarantee he would be successful at Inter. There are many examples of players who were leaders at midtable teams and failed to make an impact when they joined a top team.

[wera]

Why do we have to sacrifice one for the other? There are plenty of midfielders who perform well at both ends: Zelinksi (6 goals, 6 assists), De Paul (6/5), Luis Alberto (8/0), Pellegrini (4/6) for example, (all on lower wages). Why does there need to be a trade off between offensive skill and defensive output?




You're still going on about those passes, do you know how many of these De Bruyne does per a game? DePaul is the leader in key passes in the league and that's with lowly Udinese who spend 85 minutes of the game in their own half. Imagine what he could achieve at Inter in addition to working his ass off in defense.



Reason I brought up Eriksen's goals/assists is because everyone's going on about how much he contributes on offense as a way to defend his lack of defensive output. I'm really not big on numbers, it all depends on context. Iniesta, one of my favorite midfielders of all time, hardly assisted or scored. But he did do these:



When Eriksen can bend space and time like this, no one will give a damn about his numbers.

We had a player like this - Kovačić. I'd love to bring Kova back as a LCM and have Eriksen play in Bro's place.