Buy Gyokeres for any price?

[Andy_W]

It would only make sense to spend big on a player if there was some sort of correlation between size of transfer fee and quality of player in the championship. There isn't.

It depends when a player is bought, and if he's already proven himself to some degree. Clubs don't tend to want to sell their best players, once they're proven, which is why top champo strikers don't get sold to other champo teams.

What would these cost (now), if they were for sale/ available:



Probably exclude Weimann, as he's 30. Out of the 8 remaining around half will be at prem teams by the end of the window.

I'd assume that list roughly correlates with ability, certainly better than those not on the list and certainly would cost more.

None of those would sell for less than £15m, and you're probably looking at £20m plus for most of them. Mitro was ~£25m and Solanke was £19m, grant was £15m (from the champo),

If you got back, every year, nearly every single striker under 25 on those lists ends up being worth far more, or is now at a premier league club.

Yes, you can buy players not on the list, but the chance of success is low. We had three goes last year with Sporar, Connolly and Balogun, and they only got 13 in total.

The only player we've had that would have made this list in the last 12 years (who we sold), is now in the prem.

 

[Andy_W]

I’m on about us trying to sell Britt and why he ran his contract down.

Ah I see. Yeah nobody in the champo is paying £5m for a player at that age on those wages, who had seemingly lost interest.

 

[Way_Out_West]

It depends when a player is bought, and if he's already proven himself to some degree. Clubs don't tend to want to sell their best players, once they're proven, which is why top champo strikers don't get sold to other champo teams.

What would these cost (now), if they were for sale/ available:

View attachment 42297

Probably exclude Weimann, as he's 30. Out of the 8 remaining around half will be at prem teams by the end of the window.

I'd assume that list roughly correlates with ability, certainly better than those not on the list and certainly would cost more.

None of those would sell for less than £15m, and you're probably looking at £20m plus for most of them. Mitro was ~£25m and Solanke was £19m, grant was £15m (from the champo),

If you got back, every year, nearly every single striker under 25 on those lists ends up being worth far more, or is now at a premier league club.

Yes, you can buy players not on the list, but the chance of success is low. We had three goes last year with Sporar, Connolly and Balogun, and they only got 13 in total.

The only player we've had that would have made this list in the last 12 years (who we sold), is now in the prem.

How much did each of those players cost their current clubs? Were they on 'the list' when they were bought?

 

[indeedido]

We are still committed to the £20 million. I think a better example than Britt is Ashley Fletcher. Paid over the odds for him and in the end got nowt when he left. The £20 million can only be spent once no matter how you "structure" it. It might mean no money to spend on a CB or a midfielder next season or the season after, we still don't have a top keeper contracted to us. Investing that much of our money in one asset could be crippling if it went wrong. There are more effective ways to spend that sort of money.

Fletcher is the perfect example of why we shouldn't just speculate on "potential".
We spent £7m on a prospect, who was awful and who we let go for nothing.

We would only be "committed" to the £20m IF the structured conditions were met.
That would mean he would have scored lots of goals (that would preserve/increase his value) AND we would have gone up (that would increase his value, our other players' values, and our turnover by over £100m)

We have £22.5m to spend in amortisation across the length of the contracts of players signed, without them costing us anything but wages from our budget.

Prospects, like Fletcher have been awful, disastrous.
Free transfers, like Boyd have been awful.
Loans, like Connolly have been awful, horrendous.
Buying "quality" like Assombolonga have been awful.

But Dijksteel was a good Prospect, Ramirez/Hasselbaink great Free transfers, Bamford a wonderful Loan, and Viduka a fabulous Quality signing.

It is about getting the best value given your position, not sticking to one route of trusting Scott to play Moneyball.

Getting Lenihan and Smith Free makes sense.
Getting Giles and Steffan on Loan makes sense.
Paying modestly for potential in Roberts makes sense.
We can't afford PL players and they wouldnt come to us in the Championship, so anything we buy has to have potential as well as proven capability. Gyokeres offers that and we can easily afford him without jeopardising our ability to sign what else we need.

Risk and Reward.
Signing Gyokeres does not risk our future at all. The chances of Reward are much greater from doing so.

 

[UTB70]

Id say hes worth the 12.5m we got up front from spence. He would improve us

 

[indeedido]

It would only make sense to spend big on a player if there was some sort of correlation between size of transfer fee and quality of player in the championship. There isn't.

Ollie Watkins lost the play off final for Brentford having scored 26 goals that season. He signed for Villa in that summer for £30.6m.
Buendia won promotion and was then sold for £34.5m from the Championship.
Wood, Webster, Maupay, Maddison are other examples of where a Championship player commands value.

I'd argue there is a correlation.
Other good players go up with their Championship club and enhance their values too.

Championship clubs simply can't afford to pay the fees for very good Championship players, unless they have PP's and sell some of their stars on relegation.
We have this opportunity where we could for the right player, without stunting us elsewhere.

 

[Colin Warnek]

Ollie Watkins lost the play off final for Brentford having scored 26 goals that season. He signed for Villa in that summer for £30.6m.
Buendia won promotion and was then sold for £34.5m from the Championship.
Wood, Webster, Maupay, Maddison are other examples of where a Championship player commands value.

I'd argue there is a correlation.
Other good players go up with their Championship club and enhance their values too.

Championship clubs simply can't afford to pay the fees for very good Championship players, unless they have PP's and sell some of their stars on relegation.
We have this opportunity where we could for the right player, without stunting us elsewhere.

But those were in good teams challenging for promotion. Cov would sell Gyokeres for 15m. But I don't think we will have that to spend on one player.

 

[indeedido]

But those were in good teams challenging for promotion. Cov would sell Gyokeres for 15m. But I don't think we will have that to spend on one player.

£3m this season. £9m in the 3 year FFP.
Of course we have that to spend from £22.5m profit THIS season.

 

[viv_andersons_nana]

This is the grey area, or one of them, within FFP. We can declare a £22.5m profit now and then commit to spending that £22.5m on Gyokeres, but only have to put, say, £4m in the expenses column for this year as the fee will be paid over the length of his contract. So it looks like we’ve made a profit of £18.5m but we’ve actually committed to spending it all, just not all in the same year.

It’s how clubs get into trouble. I think Chievo went bust because their owner was doing it in the extremes. Boro can actually afford to buy Gyokeres and still have lots of money left over for other areas of the team but it’s a gamble. As are all transfers TBH.

 

[Frozen Horse]

Ok, I take it you've not seen him play? Even if he stopped scoring (which he probably won't), he would still be a great player.

It depends what you mean by not delivered, I'd expect him to get 14/15 goals in an absolute worse case scenario (he's already got 1), like Britt did, for two years. We would have still got decent money for him then.
I don't see any reason why he wouldn't match what he did at Coventry (17, which is the same as Bamford's best season for us), not with the supply we now have from Jones and Giles, and how much of the ball we should have (assuming we get another couple of players). I think he'd get at least 20, which would be good enough for me, but I think he could get even more than that.

He got 17 last year for a pretty poor team, and none of those were penalties.

Brereton only got 22 and four of those were penalties, is that "only had one good season"? He's been touted at £15m to the prem for 100k a week, and he's only got one year left on his contract.

So who do you think would pay 7m for if him if he stopped scoring?

Surely not a PL club?

Otherwise, only 1 player has been bought by a championship club for more than 7m this summer.

Actually, only 2 have been signed for more than 5m.

So I think it's very naive to think anyone would pay 7m and take over the wages of a moderate championship goal scorer.

 

[indeedido]

This is the grey area, or one of them, within FFP. We can declare a £22.5m profit now and then spend that £22.5m on Gyokeres, but only have to put, say, £4m in the expenses column for this year as the fee will be paid over the length of his contract. So it looks like we’ve made a profit of £18.5m but we’ve actually committed to spending it all, just not all in the same year.

It’s how clubs get into trouble. I think Chievo went bust because their owner was doing it in the extremes. Boro can actually afford to buy Gyokeres and still have lots of money left over for other areas of the team.

No Viv from a FFP perspective it is a rolling 3 years.
The Club HAVE made a £22.5m profit this year from the sales and that will effectively impact across the next 3 years of FFP.

A £22.5m acquisition(s) would all be eventually spent and drop through the P&L, but the 3 year impact from a FFP perspective would be £13.5m across the next 3 seasons i.e. comparable FFP time period. (£4.5m per year for 5 years)

In 3 years those players would sit on the books with a remaining Book Value of £9m and the next two years' P&L's would be hit by £4.5m amortisation of the remaining asset value write down to end of contract.
If the players were sold for £9m in summer 3, then their value would be cleared and there would be no further charges to P&L.
If they were sold for £15m in summer 3, then their value would be cleared, no further charges to P&L but a £6m profit on player registrations would be declared in Year 4.
If they were sold for £5m then there would be a hit to the P&L as outstanding book value would not be covered.

We have a remarkable opportunity now because we have made that profit of £22.5m on two players who cost us nothing/have zero book value.
Fry, Jones, McNair, Dijksteel offer similar scope.
The key thing on spending big is:
1. Will that player make a seismic difference.
2. Could we get some money back if he is a disaster.
3. Is that player likely to grow in value if he and we are successful.
Selling a £5m signing for £15m is the same as selling a £15m signing for £25m.

 

[viv_andersons_nana]

No Viv from a FFP perspective it is a rolling 3 years.
The Club HAVE made a £22.5m profit this year from the sales and that will effectively impact across the next 3 years of FFP.

A £22.5m acquisition(s) would all be eventually spent and drop through the P&L, but the 3 year impact from a FFP perspective would be £13.5m across the next 3 seasons i.e. comparable FFP time period. (£4.5m per year for 5 years)

In 3 years those players would sit on the books with a remaining Book Value of £9m and the next two years' P&L's would be hit by £4.5m amortisation of the remaining asset value write down to end of contract.
If the players were sold for £9m in summer 3, then their value would be cleared and there would be no further charges to P&L.
If they were sold for £15m in summer 3, then their value would be cleared, no further charges to P&L but a £6m profit on player registrations would be declared in Year 4.
If they were sold for £5m then there would be a hit to the P&L as outstanding book value would not be covered.

We have a remarkable opportunity now because we have made that profit of £22.5m on two players who cost us nothing/have zero book value.
Fry, Jones, McNair, Dijksteel offer similar scope.
The key thing on spending big is:
1. Will that player make a seismic difference.
2. Could we get some money back if he is a disaster.
3. Is that player likely to grow in value if he and we are successful.
Selling a £5m signing for £15m is the same as selling a £15m signing for £25m.

More complicated than I thought TBH. Surely if the chairman can make the finances work then he’ll back the manager.

We’re much earlier in our development under Wilder than we were when Rhodes joined but it has that sort of energy to it. A big signing, a statement of intent as they say. So we could do one big fat signing and a few bits and pieces elsewhere maybe. Because we’re still five short across the squad. Which is probably why some of us are reluctant to see the club go out and spend a massive wad on a single player.

 

[Andy_W]

How much did each of those players cost their current clubs? Were they on 'the list' when they were bought?

It says in the post, I highlighted the price of some of the players who were proven at that level or higher.
Mitro was ~£25m, Solanke was £19m, Grant was £15m (from the champo)

None of them were on the list when bought, other than grant (and he was £15m from Huddersfield), he's still on the list.

If they're not on that list, or a recent one, then they're a far bigger gamble, or may take years to come good (we don't want that). This is probably our best chance at promotion in recent times, if we don't do it now, the chance of that happening will probably get lower.

Which of those on the list bought for high fees will sell for a loss, if sold now? None?

 

[Nano]

Yeah and the reason they had those proven players is because they were a Premier League club, the timing of the transfers is absolutely relevant. If Newcastle get relegated this season but keep all their players is the key to going up then to spend £20m-£40m on multiple players? We aren't competing with those clubs financially and nor do we need to, it's irrelevant what they do. We're competing with the rest while hoping Burnley, Norwich and Watford have stinkers although they're probably 3 decent clubs to be up against because they don't blast money like Fulham and Bournemouth do.

That isn't true is it? We are competing with all of these teams for promotion. Burnley, Norwich & Watford might not go and spend £15m on individual players but they don't need to because they've got a squad full of quality players. Their worries are hanging on to players rather than signing new ones.

We might not be competing on wages/fees with some of those clubs that have deeper pockets than us but 100% we are competing with them to have the best squad this season and discounting someone that is already good and would improve us because we might be able to sign someone cheaper doesn't compute. We should sign the best players we can afford. We should be confident enough in our own ability that we can get Gyokeres to repeat his goalscoring. If he does, whether we get promoted or not, we could probably get £25m+ for him next season.

Spending £3m 5 times on players that we have to give away in the future or on loan fees is much worse value than buying players that have already achieved something. Uche, Akpom etc were low fee and they are still here years after being useful to us. How is that better?

 

[Colin Warnek]

£3m this season. £9m in the 3 year FFP.
Of course we have that to spend from £22.5m profit THIS season.

I didn't say we wouldn't spend it. I said on one player. Rightly so when we've had our fingers burnt with Britt.

 

[Chappy112]

Spending £3m 5 times on players that we have to give away in the future or on loan fees is much worse value than buying players that have already achieved something. Uche, Akpom etc were low fee and they are still here years after being useful to us. How is that better?

If you can't understand why losing £800k on Uche and £2m on Akpom is better than losing £15m on a player then I don't think there's much to discuss to be honest. Both players signed before we got Scott in too, I don't think Scott would have recommended an Uche type player, possibly Akpom fits the bill though. We just have completely different opinions on the approach the club should take and that's fine I guess but yeah, we're never going to agree so there isn't much point continuing the discussion.

 

[Way_Out_West]

It says in the post, I highlighted the price of some of the players who were proven at that level or higher.
Mitro was ~£25m, Solanke was £19m, Grant was £15m (from the champo)

None of them were on the list when bought, other than grant (and he was £15m from Huddersfield), he's still on the list.

If they're not on that list, or a recent one, then they're a far bigger gamble, or may take years to come good (we don't want that). This is probably our best chance at promotion in recent times, if we don't do it now, the chance of that happening will probably get lower.

Which of those on the list bought for high fees will sell for a loss, if sold now? None?

It's impossible to say. Being on the top scorers list puts them at their peak market value (at this level). A poor season and they lose value. Don't get promoted and they lose value.
Oliver McBurnie for example. Karlan Grant probably. Adam Armstrong potentially. Martyn Waghorn. Britt Assombalonga.
There's no such thing as a sure fire success, all have potential to lose or gain.

 

[Nano]

If you can't understand why losing £800k on Uche and £2m on Akpom is better than losing £15m on a player then I don't think there's much to discuss to be honest. Both players signed before we got Scott in too, I don't think Scott would have recommended an Uche type player, possibly Akpom fits the bill though. We just have completely different opinions on the approach the club should take and that's fine I guess but yeah, we're never going to agree so there isn't much point continuing the discussion.

Primarily because I don't think we would lose £15m on Gyokeres. He's a good player and will have resale value, potentially very profitable resale value even at £15m. Losing £5m every season and replacing them when they don't work out the following year is far worse. That's not to even mention the fact that if he secures us promotion then that fee is paid for 10x over. Chances of spending £3m and ending up with an Uche or Akpom are far higher than spending £3m and finding the next Gyokeres.

Even just the financials on finding the next Gyokeres don't stack up. Try 10 over 5 seasons, spending £30m to sell one for £15m and probably not getting the whole £30m recouped vs signing a player you are sure is good and doubling your money on a sale to a PL team or getting promoted.

Of course there is risk but signing a player for £15m means you can probably sell them for £7m the following season if it doesn't go brilliantly.

I don't think £15m is realistic anyway. I think if we actually bid £10m we'd get him and the maths improves even more. I like the look of some of the others we are linked with although they are all unproven in playing regularly in the championship. Armstrong would be a great signing but he wouldn't be cheap either. Big money on a loan fee and wages. He could score 20 goals but then he's not ours and we have this conversation again next year (when we're quoted £20m for Gyokeres because he's had another good season).

 

[Andy_W]

If you can't understand why losing £800k on Uche and £2m on Akpom is better than losing £15m on a player then I don't think there's much to discuss to be honest. Both players signed before we got Scott in too, I don't think Scott would have recommended an Uche type player, possibly Akpom fits the bill though. We just have completely different opinions on the approach the club should take and that's fine I guess but yeah, we're never going to agree so there isn't much point continuing the discussion.

You're not factoring in for probability of success, or factoring in for the reward v the risk.

What about the loans of Connolly, Balogun and Sporar too. They probably all cost £1m in loan fees and 500k each in wages. That's 4.5m down the pan, plus another 4m on Uche and Akpom's fees and wages, that's nearly 9m gone, for no return. We wont get back what it cost us for another season outside the prem too.

If we paid £15m for Gyokeres and tied him onto a 4 year contract with the intention of reassessing after two, then there might be a 1 in 3 chance he later goes for £5m, a 1 in 3 he goes for £10m and a 1 in 3 he goes for £25m. The equity of that is around £40m, so averaged out you might expect to lose £2m in value but this does not factor for the chance of you getting in the prem (which makes all that look like pennies). Those numbers won't be bang on, but the principle behind it works, it's basically an equity calculation.

It doesn't make sense for poor/ small teams to lump loads of money on big/ proven players, as they can't supply them, and also have little chance of going up, and thus the probability of the reward is exceptionally low. It's practically a one way ticket to the poor house, which is why they buy cheap and hope they pay off and gradually crawl their way up the table.

If we think our team is missing one key piece (and a few cheap/ free backups), which I do, then it's a poor decision to waste that opportunity on strikers which have a low chance of success. If we don't think we have a sniff, then the cheaper risks may be better, but next year we could be without Giles, Jones, Steffen, Howson, Fry etc, and could be starting from scratch again.

We could make a punt on loaning a proven champ player (on the bench in a prem side), if we could convince one to come, and their team to loan him out, but then if we went up we would still need to buy him, or buy someone else.

We might think we've got a find from another league, but unless it's a top league then their previous records are practically worthless, especially when nobody knows anything about them.

 

[Chappy112]

You're not factoring in for probability of success, or factoring in for the reward v the risk.

What about the loans of Connolly, Balogun and Sporar too. They probably all cost £1m in loan fees and 500k each in wages. That's 4.5m down the pan, plus another 4m on Uche and Akpom's fees and wages, that's nearly 9m gone, for no return. We wont get back what it cost us for another season outside the prem too.

If we paid £15m for Gyokeres and tied him onto a 4 year contract with the intention of reassessing after two, then there might be a 1 in 3 chance he later goes for £5m, a 1 in 3 he goes for £10m and a 1 in 3 he goes for £25m. The equity of that is around £40m, so averaged out you might expect to lose £2m in value but this does not factor for the chance of you getting in the prem (which makes all that look like pennies). Those numbers won't be bang on, but the principle behind it works, it's basically an equity calculation.

It doesn't make sense for poor/ small teams to lump loads of money on big/ proven players, as they can't supply them, and also have little chance of going up, and thus the probability of the reward is exceptionally low. It's practically a one way ticket to the poor house, which is why they buy cheap and hope they pay off and gradually crawl their way up the table.

If we think our team is missing one key piece (and a few cheap/ free backups), which I do, then it's a poor decision to waste that opportunity on strikers which have a low chance of success. If we don't think we have a sniff, then the cheaper risks may be better, but next year we could be without Giles, Jones, Steffen, Howson, Fry etc, and could be starting from scratch again.

We could make a punt on loaning a proven champ player (on the bench in a prem side), if we could convince one to come, and their team to loan him out, but then if we went up we would still need to buy him, or buy someone else.

We might think we've got a find from another league, but unless it's a top league then their previous records are practically worthless, especially when nobody knows anything about them.

Like I said to Nano, there is literally no point in continuing the discussion, for me anyway. We're all sat here just making things up, it's completely pointless

I'm still waiting for the evidence of this having worked in the past for teams outside of previous Premier League clubs but no one seems to have that so I'll assume it doesn't exist. Plenty of evidence that it's completely reckless though but I'm sure people will be along soon enough to make some more numbers up. I trust the club in the hands of Kieran Scott and Chris Wilder more than I have done for a long time so we'll see what they come up with.