Chelsea have had a £20 million bid for 21-year-old John Stones rejected by Everton, according to Sky Sports.
The former Barnsley defender, who joined the Toffees in 2013 for a fee around £3m, impressed everyone with some solid performances last season.
Naturally a centre back, but also capable of playing at right back, the youngster has drawn attention from some of the top clubs in the country. The likes of Chelsea, Manchester United, and Manchester City, are all said to be interested.
JOIN THE DEBATE
Who do you think is favorite to become Super Bowl Champions next season? Join the debate by becoming a GMS writer HERE: http://gms.to/haveyoursay1
Chelsea are currently leading the race for the four-time capped English youngster, with them being the only club to launch an official bid.
With departure of Sylvain Distin, it looks like Stones is all set to become a regular under Roberto Martinez. Stones, is a fantastic young player, but is he what Chelsea need now?
Here is why I think Chelsea should not sign Stones:
Chelsea had a £20m bid rejected, and are set to return with an improved offer of £26m. Everton are said to be holding out for a fee in excess of £30m.
Stones is a good, solid defender with a potential to become a really good one. He is pretty much unproven in Europe, and signing him would be a big gamble.
At almost half the price Chelsea are willing to pay for Stones, here is a small list of more cheaper options:
- Shkodran Mustafi (Valencia) - £14m
- Tin Jedvaj (Bayer Leverkusen) - £5.25m
- Jores Okore (Aston Villa) - £5m
(All values are taken from transfermarkt.co.uk)
Growth of own players
Rather than spending any money, Chelsea can look into their own youth squad for potential replacement for John Terry.
Tomas Kalas, Andreas Christensen, and Nathan Ake, are just a few youngster patiently waiting for their chance. Signing Stones will push them further down the pecking order.
I am not saying Stones would be a bad signing. Given the circumstances, Stones would be more of a luxury buy than a necessity.