From Left: Mats Wieffer, Bart Verbruggen, Joao Costinha and Luka Vukovic of Brighton
Photo by Visionhaus/Getty Images
Under Clearlake Capital, Chelsea’s transfer business has come under real scrutiny, and rightly so.
They have spent a lot and quite a few of their big-money signings have not worked out. Mykhailo Mudryk, Jamie Gittens and Wesley Fofana are three names that instantly come to mind.
Statistically, Fofana had a good game against Manchester United at the weekend. But he still made two very bad mistakes that almost cost Chelsea.
Simply put, the likes of Fofana, Gittens and Mudryk have been far from successful. One player the club do not need to worry about flopping, though, is Bart Verbruggen.
Romeo Lavia or Alex Scott? Who would Moises Caicedo rather start alongside and why?
Lavia please he believably a better option
I would really, really like to see Scott play alongside Caicedo but maybe that’s a grass is always greener approach.
If it was a level playing field, Lavia. But given his fitness issues, it's got be Scott regularly? Nice headache to have!
Chelsea didn’t need Bart Verbruggen as Mike Penders shows his worth
During the summer, Chelsea were interested in signing Verbruggen from Brighton & Hove Albion but decided not to make a move for him in the end. The Blues still bought a new goalkeeper, Emiliano Martinez, but unlike Verbruggen, Martinez will not block Mike Penders’ development.
Verbruggen is only three years older than Penders. The Dutchman could have kept him out of the starting XI for seasons. With Martinez coming towards the end of his career, it may not be long before Penders becomes Chelsea’s No.1.
READ MORE:Xabi Alonso has a pretty simple decision to make involving Mike Penders and Emi Martinez
Because of an injury to Martinez, Penders is already starting for Chelsea. And based on what he has shown this season so far, Chelsea did not need to sign Verbruggen.
Verbruggen is a quality keeper, and as was mentioned by one user on TalkingPoints, both he and Penders were excellent over the weekend. But the fact that Penders is starting to deliver is proof that Chelsea never needed to sign Verbruggen.
I am happy to see Estevao being given the chance to display his quality on the ball, and to show he has workwd on his off the ball movement. Lavia’s performance was impeccable, and as far as Penders goes only Verbruggen played better in goal yesterday.
How do the 24-year-old and Penders compare? Well, this season, some of their stats have been quite similar.
For example, Verbruggen has a save percentage of 78.8%, according to FotMob, while Penders’ is 77.8% — almost identical. In the games Penders has played, his shot-stopping has been just as good as Verbruggen’s.
Verbruggen clears Penders when it comes to distribution. He has a pass success rate of 75.5% compared to Penders’ 58.1%. His long balls are also more accurate. So far this season, Verbruggen has played nine matches and 810 minutes of football, while Penders has played three games and 195 minutes.
Goalkeeper Saves per 90 Save percentage Goals conceded per 90 Goals prevented per 90 High claims per 90 Successful passes per 90 Successful passes % Accurate long balls per 90 Accurate long balls %
Bart Verbruggen 2.89 78.8% 0.78 0.49 0.44 30.11 75.7% 8.44 47.2%
Mike Penders 3.23 77.8% 0.92 0.35 0.92 19.85 58.1% 6.00 29.5%
However, Brighton as a whole have been better in possession than Chelsea. Under Fabian Hurzeler, they are one of the best teams on the ball in the Premier League. In contrast, Chelsea’s lack of control under Xabi Alonso has been a major talking point this season.
It is true, Penders made a pretty bad mistake in his first Premier League start for Chelsea after punching the ball into the back of his own net against Tottenham Hotspur. But last term, Verbruggen made four errors leading to goal.
Verbruggen has done well for Brighton, but he is not the finished article. Give Penders time, and he has the potential to develop into the superior goalkeeper.