2020/21 Richarlison

[orly]

I suppose it's because if we're going to 'do a Leicester' or 'do a Liverpool' we're going to have to sell one of the crown jewels at some point

The problem is - how much faith do we have in the current scouting/DOF system to bring in the appropriate players with the money we'd receive?

I'd have none

Oh definitely and if that is the strategy - particularly if stops the club being a financial basket-case - let's crack on.

However as you rightly point out, it would just be wasted on £35m for Dwight McNeil, which is insane.

 

[catcherintherye]

Oh definitely and if that is the strategy - particularly if stops the club being a financial basket-case - let's crack on.

However as you rightly point out, it would just be wasted on £35m for Dwight McNeil, which is insane.

I really don't think there's a joined up plan at all. I mean Mcneil would probably be ok for what Benitez wants, but we know it's highly unlikely the manager is here in 2 years and they are unlikely to pick a manager who wants the same type of players Benitez wants.

I do think this is a big problem for the club as well. Nobody likes losing their best players, but at Leicester, or even here for a long time, you knew you would recruit well. I don't think anybody really has faith that will happen. And it's not just that Brands is terrible or whatever, but it's that the whole structure is chaotic. You've got a guy who's meant to be thinking long term operating to short termism in the management department, and real favouritism in the academy. I'm not really sure how any DOF can add much value with those restrictions.

And whether we like it or not, after 5 years, this is very much the house that Moshiri built.

 

[blueblue]

I really don't think there's a joined up plan at all. I mean Mcneil would probably be ok for what Benitez wants, but we know it's highly unlikely the manager is here in 2 years and they are unlikely to pick a manager who wants the same type of players Benitez wants.

I do think this is a big problem for the club as well. Nobody likes losing their best players, but at Leicester, or even here for a long time, you knew you would recruit well. I don't think anybody really has faith that will happen. And it's not just that Brands is terrible or whatever, but it's that the whole structure is chaotic. You've got a guy who's meant to be thinking long term operating to short termism in the management department, and real favouritism in the academy. I'm not really sure how any DOF can add much value with those restrictions.

And whether we like it or not, after 5 years, this is very much the house that Moshiri built.

I think that a signing like McNeill is an agreed signing between RB and MB.
After all that has happened I don't believe any manager will be allowed unchecked spending without approval of MB.
I think last year was a good example.
We know both Godfery and Doucoure were largely Brands signings.. we know this because CA said he knew very little about each of them. I have no doubt Nkounkou is in the same category.

We would expect that both Allan and Jamez were CA signings.
There does not appear to be a fee for Jamez , probably a signing on fee for him and a salary ... which would not make this a terribly expensive signing as quality premiership players go.
If he is to be sold and if we do get a fee then it will have been a good financial deal as we got some very good games from him during the season.

Allan was probably the one signing from CA that cost money and he did contribute to last season and seems to be part of the plans for this season as well.
The only drawback with Allan will be the quickly diminishing resale value which will be almost total gone in the next twelve to twenty four months.

I think that we simply will not allow again a repeat of the Koeman, Allyrdyce spending years.

 

[TheBigIguana]

His value to us, is different to what others value him.
What are the values of Jack Grealish, Harry Kane?? £58 mill and £108 mill….and they are going for way more….and nobody is questioning it.

Always same comes up with zaha, its what these player mean to the selling club.

Zaha wasn't worth the 70m Palace wanted that's why he's still there. That's the best example here. Grealish and Kane are a different level.

 

[Pabbers]

Zaha wasn't worth the 70m Palace wanted that's why he's still there. That's the best example here. Grealish and Kane are a different level.

Good, thats the point of them asking for thats money.

Clubs either match it, or they dont and they keep their best player.

Thats how it works.

 

[TheBigIguana]

I asked this question on twitter and there were few answers, but I'll try the same here.

Can you show me a wide player, who is under 25, who has scored 45 domestic goals over the last 3 seasons in 1 of the top 2-3 leagues (so here, Italy and Spain) who has scored more goals than that and is available for less? If the valuation is well too high, there should be a number of examples you can provide?

But this is sort of my point from before. If you just go off goals and ignore everything else you can make the case he's one of the best players. And that's fine I guess if you want to do that.

I personally don't. I think successful teams get more out of their wide players and that more Richarlison is exceptionally poor at. I really only am willing to do the goals comparison when you're talking about strikers and if we do that 15 goals a year (another thing I don't do is include cups) won't do.

I don't have time to make a detailed list but someone who will probably run Richarlison close is Harvey Barnes and that is not a 70m player. I think we're getting dangerously close to Zaha'ing this. Putting a value on a player that's too high and not taking what is a very good sum for a player who has holes in his game and wants away. That's assuming offers come this summer or next.

 

[TheBigIguana]

Good, thats the point of them asking for thats money.

Clubs either match it, or they dont and they keep their best player.

Thats how it works.

It's better when you're keeping your best player because he's actually really good though.

And Richarlison is not our best player fwiw.

 

[Eggs]

It's better when you're keeping your best player because he's actually really good though.

And Richarlison is not our best player fwiw.

….that is clearly a matter of opinion & opinion differs. I suspect a series of managers would nominate him as our best player, i suspect he’s currently our most valuable asset although some might argue DCL could fetch more.

 

[Pabbers]

It's better when you're keeping your best player because he's actually really good though.

And Richarlison is not our best player fwiw.

Arguable, he is our best player.

DCL, Digne, Richarlison, James.

Not much between them all, but its 1 of that 4.

 

[coleman=quality]

I’d be happy to sell richarlison if we got martial in with option to buy and McNeil for no more than 30m, would probably help to balance the books and give us more squad depth but currently we’re in a right mess. The talk of losing players like richarlison and James is like losing stones and lukaku all over again never replaced either maybe Godfrey, he looked good last season hope he can build on that.

 

[roy vernon]

Good, thats the point of them asking for thats money.

Clubs either match it, or they dont and they keep their best player.

Thats how it works.

Is the right answer, tell him he can go, but only if we get top money for him. If no suitable offers come in, happy days, he stays here. I’d also try to tempt him with a new contract.

 

[TheBigIguana]

I’d be happy to sell richarlison if we got martial in with option to buy and McNeil for no more than 30m, would probably help to balance the books and give us more squad depth but currently we’re in a right mess. The talk of losing players like richarlison and James is like losing stones and lukaku all over again never replaced either maybe Godfrey, he looked good last season hope he can build on that.

I'd take Martial in a heartbeat and just ignore McNeil

 

[coleman=quality]

I'd take Martial in a heartbeat and just ignore McNeil

I think for between 20/30m he would be a good buy plenty of time to improve which I think he will.

 

[catcherintherye]

But this is sort of my point from before. If you just go off goals and ignore everything else you can make the case he's one of the best players. And that's fine I guess if you want to do that.

I personally don't. I think successful teams get more out of their wide players and that more Richarlison is exceptionally poor at. I really only am willing to do the goals comparison when you're talking about strikers and if we do that 15 goals a year (another thing I don't do is include cups) won't do.

I don't have time to make a detailed list but someone who will probably run Richarlison close is Harvey Barnes and that is not a 70m player. I think we're getting dangerously close to Zaha'ing this. Putting a value on a player that's too high and not taking what is a very good sum for a player who has holes in his game and wants away. That's assuming offers come this summer or next.

In fairness to Richarlison though, there are lots of other metrics he is very good at. He is defensively an absolute monster in terms of what he offers.

I'd probably let him go, but I can completely see why the valuation is what it is. I appreciate you don't like using goals, but goals is probably the most important currency forward and wide players trade in.

 

[TheBigIguana]

In fairness to Richarlison though, there are lots of other metrics he is very good at. He is defensively an absolute monster in terms of what he offers.

I'd probably let him go, but I can completely see why the valuation is what it is. I appreciate you don't like using goals, but goals is probably the most important currency forward and wide players trade in.

This is probably the only other area he excels at. But he's a forward so I'd put that down as pretty meh.

Goals are important. If you're not bringing anything else, no creativity, no forward passing, inconsistent at best dribbling, and you're playing wide where some of those things are needed in the team then the goals have to be overwhelming. 13, 13 and 7 is good, but not overwhelming.

And so we're clear by me saying he's worth 60m I'm not saying he's a bad player. That's a lot of money! But more starts to be in top 10 or so in the world at least at his position and I personally can't put Richarlison there.