John Stones

[Adversus]

Stones is good but not worth £40 million. £30 million should be more than enough.

The problem is it really isn't. We will be able to get 30m in another season's time and since he's got another 4 years on his contract there's no financial reason to sell him at the same price we will be able to get for him in 2 years.

Mourinho has to pay a premium given the length of his contract and he knows it which is why he's trying to unsettle the player.

You might think that 30m is a lot to pay for a 21 year old defender who is "potential" and therefore a risk but the Everton board, manager and fans don't see it like that. To them there's no chance Stones won't go on to be one of the very best.

 

[Raed]

A 30 million year fee amortized over a 6 year contract is 5 million per year and with low wages, he becomes a cheap option for good quality.

When we got bale for 100 over 6 years, he cost us 16.6 million a year + his wages which are like 15 million. Bale costs us 30 million euros a year, minimum. Not sure how much revenue he brings in either. If John Stones becomes something of a WC defender, he is good value.

 

[antonnn]

Everton likely trying to drive up the price with "Man Utd in for Stones" rumours.

 

[Butaan4barca]

seems like chelsea is really really interested in him. Last young defender that mourinho showed that much interest in was varane.

 

[AnfieldEd]

A 30 million year fee amortized over a 6 year contract is 5 million per year and with low wages, he becomes a cheap option for good quality.

When we got bale for 100 over 6 years, he cost us 16.6 million a year + his wages which are like 15 million. Bale costs us 30 million euros a year, minimum. Not sure how much revenue he brings in either. If John Stones becomes something of a WC defender, he is good value.

Stones would not be on low wages though. He'd be on 100k at least. Unless you think 100k is low!

 

[xavisionary]

No way Stones would be on 100k a week at Chelsea. 60k seems more reasonable.

 

[Raed]

Stones would not be on low wages though. He'd be on 100k at least. Unless you think 100k is low!

No way Stones would be on 100k a week at Chelsea. 60k seems more reasonable.

I think so too. I guess Liverpool might have to shell this sum out to lure players given their situation but Chelsea might get away with a lower wage.

 

[AnfieldEd]

Not when there is more than one club that can pay interested. 60k is cheap and he'd be a fool to accept that. He's on 40k atm so 60k is not going to cut it.

English players will always be overpriced be it transfer value or salary. Stones being arguable the best young defender in england can command over double his current salary, quite easily.

 

[RaidersGunz]

Chelsea reportedly set to bid £37m for him. Everton should accept.

 

[Adversus]

Chelsea reportedly set to bid £37m for him. Everton should accept.

As an Everton fan I hope they don't.

 

[antonnn]

Yeah this is meant to be our final bid for him too, if this doesn't go through we proably won't sign him any more.

 

[MaxY]

Is he that good?

 

[Trickykid]

Is he that good?

I heard he's absolutely brilliant. The new Phil Jones.

 

[Truthist]

From what I have seen he is severely overrated. Everton would have comitted daylight robbery if they receive that much for him.

 

[S7_MUFC]

From what I have seen he is severely overrated. Everton would have comitted daylight robbery if they receive that much for him.

He's nothing like Phil Jones...Jones was hyped simply based on his physique whereas stones is technically sound and is more refined defensively..still not worth £37 million but he's very good..