Chelsea should take the “L” and sell Danny Drinkwater to West Ham
By George Perry
Chelsea don’t always know how to take the “L” after bungling a transfer. West Ham’s interest in Danny Drinkwater gives them an easy way to make things (belatedly) right (as much as possible).
Sometimes getting the band back together just doesn’t produce the same sound it used to. Danny Drinkwater and N’Golo Kante were the midfield engine behind Leicester City’s Premier League title. Perhaps they could have had a similar impact at Chelsea. But between Drinkwater’s calf, Cesc Fabregas, Tiemoue Bakayoko and the occasional appearance by Pedro in midfield, Drinkwater’s transfer to Stamford Bridge has been a complete zero for all involved.
West Ham United have been linked with Drinkwater for the past month, willing to pay £30 million for him. This would be slightly less than Chelsea overpaid for him from Leicester. The Blues normally think it is a mark of shame, failure or disgrace to sell a player at a loss. But everything so far about Drinkwater’s time at Stamford Bridge has been those things, so selling him at a loss may be some mild form of redemption.
Drinkwater’s prospects are not improving. Even if he magically returned to full fitness and his Leicester City form, he would not displace Fabregas or Bakayoko. Antonio Conte favours Fabregas for an increasing range of roles, with some justification as Fabregas is becoming far more than a highlight-reel playmaker. Bakayoko is five years younger than Drinkwater, giving him far more upside in terms of appreciating in value and developing into a Chelsea-calibre player.
The Blues are also likely to bring Ruben Loftus-Cheek into the first team next season. Both Marco van Ginkel and Mario Pasalic have outside chances of making a long-overdue transition from the loan army to their parent club. And if Chelsea feel the urge to play a Englishman in midfield, they still have Ross Barkley or – if he is still injured – accelerate Mason Mount’s accession.
Danny Drinkwater could have had an important role in Chelsea’ 3-5-2. He obviously had a good understanding of how to work with N’Golo Kante. Drinkwater was above-average in his pressing, passing and positioning. But he was not outstanding in any one of those areas. Antonio Conte’s highly specific conceptions of each role in each formation does not create many opportunities for a generalist, even if the player has a generally high ability level. Drinkwater did not have Pedro’s speed in the press nor Fabregas’ vision in passing. He was on par with Bakayoko in positioning and forward runs, but not on defending or speed.
Perhaps Drinkwater could have raised his game in one of these areas or carved his own place in Conte’s tactics. His injuries prevented him from an extended run to make his case. And when he was fit, his lack of sharpness made it impossible for him to displace a regular on the basis of sporadic appearances.
West Ham provide Drinkwater the opportunity to write off his Chelsea experience as just one of those things. He could have missed a season through injury anywhere. It just so happened to be at the Bridge.
Next: Four lessons Chelsea can learn from Liverpool's win over Roma
If the Blues hold on to him they will be doing Drinkwater a great disservice, one they normally reserve for their loanees.