Stones named among top 20 Under-21s in Europe

07/07/2015  13 Comments  [Jump to last]
John Stones has been listed among the most valuable young player in European football according to a study.

The Soccerex 20 U21 Report has ranked the Continent's top players aged 20 or younger as of January 1, 2015 and Everton's rising central defensive star comes in at 15th.

His valuation is set at just under Ł12m, though, some Ł18m less than most Evertonians would say should be the minimum fee the England international would command were the Blues to sell him.

The tabloid press have resumed pushing stories linking Stones with Chelsea, with the Daily Express ignoring Roberto Martinez's need to replace Sylvain Distin by claiming that Everton's pursuit of Angelo Ogbonna is to cover the departure of Stones instead.

Everton have no interest in selling one of the jewels in their crown as he continues to mature into one of the Premier League's best defenders.

The Soccerex rankings were compiled using the Football Value Index, a player valuation methodology which takes into account various metrics including age, position, minutes played and technical quality.

Liverpool's Raheem Sterling was ranked first with a value of Ł35m, new Manchester United signing Memphis Depay was third at Ł23.5m while Luke Shaw, a Ł30m signing for United last summer, was listed ninth with a value of Ł18m.  


Reader Comments (13)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer


Matt Traynor
1 Posted 07/07/2015 at 05:55:27
If this "analysis" proves anything, itĂ‚’s that players are worth what someone is willing to pay for them.
Brian Hill
2 Posted 07/07/2015 at 06:46:54
Is Soccerex yet another RS propaganda vehicle? Sterling is one of the most overrated players I have ever seen, his reputation based entirely on who he plays for.

The Stones valuation seems reasonable, as he still has a propensity for the odd howler; once he eliminates that habit, he will be magnificent.

Phil Sammon
3 Posted 07/07/2015 at 07:20:10
Absolutely nonsensical. Where do the get the valuations from?
Darren Bailey
4 Posted 07/07/2015 at 08:51:14
The whole list is pretty irrelevant really as like Matt says "a playerĂ‚’s worth whatever a team is willing to pay", ie: Luke Shaw.

I think itĂ‚’s worth pointing out just how much of a decline Ross Barkley must have had last season for him not to named on this list and how much work he needs to put in to get back up in amongst the top young players. Or has he just found his level? I hope not as I believe the younger group of players Martinez is forming is good for our club.

Keeping the likes of Coleman, McCarthy and Lukaku are vital for us as they will form the the basis for Stones, Barkley, Besic and Deulofeu to kick on and reach their potential. Add promising younger players like Browning, Garbutt, Galloway, Ledson, Henen and we have a great group of younger players who "could" be at the club for many years to come-if we can keep hold of them all. Value is irrelevant if thereĂ‚’s no intention to sell in the first place.

Chris Williamson
5 Posted 07/07/2015 at 10:29:00
We should buy two more John Stonses if heĂ‚’s fetching that price.
Ajay Gopal
6 Posted 07/07/2015 at 10:48:03
Chris (5), I donĂ‚’t understand your comment. If it was so easy to find two Stones, then why would someone pay us for that value for one Stones? In any case, that discussion is academic, because as others have pointed out, we need to Ă‚’buildĂ‚’ on what we got, not Ă‚’sellĂ‚’, otherwise we will perpetually be a club which Ă‚’is progressingĂ‚’.
Trevor Lynes
7 Posted 07/07/2015 at 11:16:18
A bit of a foolish article really as a player or any other asset is worth what it can get on the open market. I think Mr Hill is a bit catty with his talk of Sterling who will fetch good money.

Too bad Mr Barkley had a very poor last season as he would definitely have been high on that particular list if he had. reckon we should have sold him after he had his one period of fame as the lad has unfortunately stopped improving.

He seems to lack confidence and stamina IMO and only seems to do well from the bench when he initially comes on. Osman out-shone him last season.

James Stewart
8 Posted 07/07/2015 at 11:49:11
What a truly bizarre list.
Dave Pritchard
9 Posted 07/07/2015 at 13:22:34
Ajay, I have easily found two Stones. Shame it is my gut.
Chris Williamson
10 Posted 07/07/2015 at 14:13:33
Ajay - my comment wasnĂ‚’t meant to make any sense! There is only one John Stones - (unless we can clone him). My comment was an acerbic aside at seemingly arbitrary, out-of-touch value but on him by some random author of a few column inches.
Keith Glazzard
12 Posted 08/07/2015 at 16:02:08
We have a very good group of young players with the possibility of great things over the next five years or more. RobertoĂ‚’s job is to play the tactics that will get the results to keep this squad together. I really do think that this is a major motivating factor, given that they are all well paid anyway.

What happens on the Dark Side is none of our business. I donĂ‚’t rate Sterling too much anyway, but what can have gone so badly wrong to lead to todayĂ‚’s news? Perhaps his over-valuation in daft lists like this is one factor?

Duncan McDine
13 Posted 09/07/2015 at 21:46:45
IĂ‚’m with Ajay on this...

Three John Stones in the same team would make the commentators job a nightmare.

Paul Hewitt
14 Posted 09/07/2015 at 21:57:04
㾸 Million. If Luke Shaw is worth 㿊 million then Stones is worth at least the same.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.


About these ads

© ToffeeWeb