AnniHilat0R

Official: Thibaut Courtois Signs New 5 Year Contract

1,553 posts in this topic

So we only buy a keeper when we definitely need to replace Cech or we buy one who is or will be homegrown qualified?

Exactly.

^ I think you start first with the quality of the keeper. If you think you've identified a lad with the potential to become our number 1 ...

Trouble with "potential" is that it needs to come with percentages.

You might say he has a 10% probability of becoming our No 1, and a 30% probability of becoming a competent No 2*

That then makes your argument a lot weaker.

* topside estimates, IMO 4% and 15% are more realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trouble with "potential" is that it needs to come with percentages.

You might say he has a 10% probability of becoming our No 1, and a 30% probability of becoming a competent No 2*

That then makes your argument a lot weaker.

* topside estimates, IMO 4% and 15% are more realistic.

Yet you say that without having a clue.

The argument doesn't become weaker, only the likelihood of him making it. I'm not going to attempt putting figures on his chances to make it with us (that would be plain silly), but I have absolutely no issues with this signing, or how we have handled the loan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet you say that without having a clue.

A clue about what? The actual probabilities?? Well of course. I was responding to a post that said " If you think you've identified a lad with the potential to become our number 1" - so it's Bridgejunky's hypothetical judgement we're discussing.

The argument doesn't become weaker, only the likelihood of him making it.

Sure - if you judge that he has a 100% chance of being better than Cech the argument remains strong.

I'm not going to attempt putting figures on his chances to make it with us (that would be plain silly), but I have absolutely no issues with this signing, or how we have handled the loan.

Not silly. Essential for any judgement. The "you can't make estimates like that" excuse is just being a rhetorical luddite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A clue about what? The actual probabilities?? Well of course. I was responding to a post that said " If you think you've identified a lad with the potential to become our number 1" - so it's Bridgejunky's hypothetical judgement we're discussing.

Hi Droy,

You've missed my point I'm afraid. I've offered no judgement, hypothetical or otherwise about Thibaut and his chances. I have offered the 'judgement' that I like the plan outlined by our goalkeeping coach, and indeed I do. It's a very good one.

Frankly you've lost me with your argument on this occasion. You give support to the idea that we only buy a new keeper when the existing starter needs replacing and I think it's safe for me to infer that you have in a mind that this would be an established, mature keeper. Fair enough, the merit of that approach is clear but what happens if we can't get one that we judge to be of sufficient quality at that point? Why, in the meantime, should the club pass on the opportunity to develop its own potential replacements and why on Earth should the club not be prepared to back its judgement of a young keeper's potential?

We back our judgement by signing him, he backs his ability by coming here. If he's wrong, or we're wrong, then c'est-la-vie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Droy,

You've missed my point I'm afraid. I've offered no judgement, hypothetical or otherwise about Thibaut and his chances. I have offered the 'judgement' that I like the plan that our goalkeeping coach has outlined, and indeed I do. It's a very good one.

No I haven't.

Your judgement about the plan was made with the condition "If you think you've identified a lad with the potential to become our number 1"

so it certainly is your hypothetical judgement based on a supposed rating of the players abilities.

My point is how slippery that vague description of a rating is in real life.

This is best viewed by turning the question around. If we are going to justify a player and plan that offers no value to the club until he becomes a better player than Cech, just how certain (in probability) do you need to be that he will eventually be better than Cech?

To make your judgement, that is the question you have to (or rather Lochillon should have had to) answer. Not just say "he has the potential"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No I haven't.

Your judgement about the plan was made with the condition "If you think you've identified a lad with the potential to become our number 1"

so it certainly is your hypothetical judgement based on a supposed rating of the players abilities.

My point is how slippery that vague description of a rating is in real life.

This is best viewed by turning the question around. If we are going to justify a player and plan that offers no value to the club until he becomes a better player than Cech, just how certain (in probability) do you need to be that he will eventually be better than Cech?

To make your judgement, that is the question you have to (or rather Lochillon should have had to) answer. Not just say "he has the potential"

Mate you are just plain wrong about this. How is, 'if you (the club) think you have identified a lad with the potential to become our number 1", a judgement by me as to whether the player actually has that potential? It's clear I mean if the club makes that judgement then proceed, if they don't then don't. Nothing to do with what I think of the lad.

As to the probabilities, I myself would not even attempt to put numbers to them in the way you suggest. In the spirit of your point however let me say, without ever having seen him, that, baring injuries, there is a 95% chance of Thibaut eventually being 'better' than Petr. The age gap will see to that but this is not how I believe the club should be thinking, nor indeed how I believe they will be thinking. What if Petr should suffer an injury or decide he'd like a new challenge? The question for now is not, "Will he ever be better than our current number 1", but rather, "Will he ever be good enough to become our starter if, for whatever reason, we need him to?"

The plan outlined by Christophe is designed to aid Thibaut's development until he reaches that state of readiness and I say again, I like, no, I love , that plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mate you are just plain wrong about this. How is, 'if you (the club) think you have identified a lad with the potential to become our number 1", a judgement by me as to whether the player actually has that potential? It's clear I mean if the club makes that judgement then proceed, if they don't then don't. Nothing to do with what I think of the lad.

Of course. But as I said, it is a hypothetical assessment - the clue is in the word "if".

As for the plan - I'm sure it is a great one for Courtois. I just can't see the point for Chelsea unless someone thinks he is going to challenge Cech some time in the next 10 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A clue about what? The actual probabilities?? Well of course.

So why mention the numbers 4% and 15%? It doesn't make you look clever at all.

Sure - if you judge that he has a 100% chance of being better than Cech the argument remains strong.

No, the argument you think is under discussion isn't. It's how the club handled the signing and his subsequent loan. That has nothing about us thinking he'll become our new number 1, just that we agree with how the club has hadnled it. Pretty essential difference.

Not silly. Essential for any judgement. The "you can't make estimates like that" excuse is just being a rhetorical luddite.

Yes, it is plain silly when it comes from you.

You've missed my point I'm afraid. I've offered no judgement, hypothetical or otherwise about Thibaut and his chances. I have offered the 'judgement' that I like the plan outlined by our goalkeeping coach, and indeed I do. It's a very good one.

Your judgement about the plan was made with the condition "If you think you've identified a lad with the potential to become our number 1"

so it certainly is your hypothetical judgement based on a supposed rating of the players abilities.

No it is not. The club (I.e. Chelsea Football Club) obviously think that he is good enough to claim being A Madrids first choice GK next season. If he is that good at the age of 19, then I think the club is right to expect him to be able to challenge for one of the top two spots with us. And the chances of him making it would obviously be a lot higher than the 4%-15% you mentioned (if indeed he is that good and the club made the right assessment).

The plan outlined by Christophe is designed to aid Thibaut's development until he reaches that state of readiness and I say again, I like, no, I love , that plan.

I for one am extremely happy with this signing. If we would have started making signings like this 5 seasons ago (I'm not talking about Matic/Di Santo etc) we would be in a lot better shape today. Exactly the way forward, buy young, send out on loan at a high level and slowly ease them in with our first team. It really isn't rocket science, that's how most clubs in the world build their squads. Why should we be any different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he doesn't suffer any serious injury Cech is on course to being our number 1 for the next decade.

From that point of view this move makes absolutely no sense. In 3 years time Cech will still be the best keeper in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course. But as I said, it is a hypothetical assessment - the clue is in the word "if".

Not hypothetical, conditional and still not a judgement by me; just a summation of the situation. If condition A, then take one action; if not condition A, then take a different action.

As for the plan - I'm sure it is a great one for Courtois. I just can't see the point for Chelsea unless someone thinks he is going to challenge Cech some time in the next 10 years.

I gave my take about the 10 year argument in my previous reply but as to Thibaut's best interests vs our own: He's our player now. It must surely be in our interests that he becomes the best keeper he can be and that he reaches that level as quickly as he is able to. If this plan helps him achieve this then the plan is just as much in our interests as it is his.

For what it's worth, my judgement is that this plan is fit for that purpose and that, therefore, it is good for Thibaut and good for Chelsea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now