How many of those actually “held us back” Adaramola was out the door before he could! The aim of a good transfer policy is to make more than you spend while the team improves. You can’t argue that that’s not happened. If we’re making money and the team is improving, in what was were transfers holding us back?
Strongly disagree. Vik in particular wasn’t a technically strong player, Sheaf oozes class, you can see he’s been trained at a high level. Vik and Gus were all action and had some outstanding traits, but technically I’d agree Sheaf is better. That doesn’t necessarily mean a “better player”, but I’d argue most suited to higher level football.
My thoughts exactly. We could get at least three good quality championship players for that kind of dosh. I'll be a little bit disappointed if we don't sell him. Speculate to accumulate and all that.I will be very sad to see Sheaf go but if we get a proper price for him and spend it well on 3/4 really good Championship level players it could turn out to be good for us.
Given that the fee Sheffield United are asking for Hamer, and given that it is very similar to what we are allegedly asking for in order to let Sheaf go, which one would you choose if you were a buying club? I can't believe for one minute anyone would not take Hamer as first choice.
Every club signs a few duds of course, but we have had a lot. We have traditionally been operating a very tight ship, so in order to be good at your job, you need to be a strong all rounder and recruit within pretty fine margins for the entire squad. Not just a few top players. We struggled to do that with Badlan, and that was obvious for anyone paying attention at the time. The fact he is now at Aberdeen having been sacked from Blackpool isn't a surprise to me personally, and whilst we did get some decent players when he was here, like I said, there was a ton of shit which held us back.
Bakayoko
Kastaneer
Charlie Wakefield
Allassani
Junior Brown
Morgan Williams
David Meyler
Jobello
Hillsner
Da Costa
Adaramola
I could go on but you get the point.
I think replacing Sheaf will be more difficult than we think. Without being spectacular, for me he's the glue that holds the side together and we've looked like a completely different team when he's not been in it.
I’m not sure the signings of the likes of Williams, Alessani, Wakefield etc ‘held us back’. They were young players we took a punt on when we didn’t have a pot to piss in.
And even when you ignore the obvious ones of Hamer, Gyokeres, Sheaf etc, there’s still a long list of signings that were crucial to our success:
Godden
Fadz
Walsh
Rose
Ostigard
Dabo
Bidwell
Maatsen
Callum Doyle
…to name a few.
We signed 62 players during his time at the club. Of course there’s some shit in there, we were shopping in the bargain bin of the outlet store for a big chunk of it.
I can’t believe anyone could possibly believe that Sheaf is better technically than Gyokeres or Hamer. Gyokeres was outstanding technically and skillwise. His control and ability to go past players far exceeds Sheaf before we even start talking about pace and goalscoring. Hamer had better tackling, ball control, passing and shooting. Sheaf is also lacking in pace, which the other two aren't and his shooting is poor.Strongly disagree. Vik in particular wasn’t a technically strong player, Sheaf oozes class, you can see he’s been trained at a high level. Vik and Gus were all action and had some outstanding traits, but technically I’d agree Sheaf is better. That doesn’t necessarily mean a “better player”, but I’d argue most suited to higher level football.
You don't point out that in the 18 games without sheaf, we only played 6 games against teams in the top half at the end of the season, and none of the top 4.That's a bit of a myth really.
Sheaf has played 28 full games (three others he made a 12, 32, and 42 minute cameo respectively).
28 games with Sheaf: 34 points = 1.214 (points per game)
18 games without Sheaf: 30 points = 1.666 (points per game)
Form is an indicator as well, and in the 8 games he played since coming back from injury, we claimed only 6 points. Of course that was our playoff hopes down the toilet. We also went on a four game losing streak directly after he came back from his injury in October too. I'm not for a minute saying there's only one denominator, there's obviously a multitude of reasons outside of this as well. I just cannot get on board with the argument we're lost without him. The stats say very much otherwise. If someone wants to pay us a lot of money then I personally think we should take it and reinvest. If some of the figures talked about are accurate, then we could do some serious damage in the transfer market with that.
Stats are dangerousYou don't point out that in the 18 games without sheaf, we only played 6 games against teams in the top half at the end of the season, and none of the top 4.
Also in those 6 games against top half teams without Sheaf we won none of them.
they can be skewed anyway to suit a view or opinionStats are dangerous
His fellow professionals voted him player of the season
If West Ham pay £20m they agree
You don't point out that in the 18 games without sheaf, we only played 6 games against teams in the top half at the end of the season, and none of the top 4.
Also in those 6 games against top half teams without Sheaf we won none of them.
But Pete,don’t you know.Stats are the only thing that matter.Stats are dangerous
His fellow professionals voted him player of the season
If West Ham pay £20m they
They are key metrics as moneyball and Brighton as well as a whole host of other documents could point toBut Pete,don’t you know.Stats are the only thing that matter.
Only dinosaurs still watch how players perform.
Well it is, he had a good hit rate.Not the point, but ok.
You don't point out that in the 18 games without sheaf, we only played 6 games against teams in the top half at the end of the season, and none of the top 4.
Also in those 6 games against top half teams without Sheaf we won none of them.
So you don’t think the quality of opponent is a valuable metric for the stats you posted?I've just posted the facts as they are, you guys can do whatever you want to interpret them or soothe yourselves.
We’re 1 year into the 4 Edit:5 year plan. So Play-offs is a priority.The club has a 5 year plan and in the next 5 seasons, the expectation is to make the playoffs 3 of those seasons. We were in the playoff race more or less till the end. Objectively, it was a success because we met expectations.
There’s a worrying trend of how teams who lose the playoff final specifically can spiral. When you have a turnover of 17 players in one window as well as losing your two best players, this season could’ve ended in disaster to be frank.
Going into next season, Top 6 becomes an expectation and failure to meet that we can say the season is a failure.
So you don’t think the quality of opponent is a valuable metric for the stats you posted?
I never understand why people say things are objective when they are clearly subjective. Whether or not the season was a success is a subjective view and depends what your measurements are.The club has a 5 year plan and in the next 5 seasons, the expectation is to make the playoffs 3 of those seasons. We were in the playoff race more or less till the end. Objectively, it was a success because we met expectations.
There’s a worrying trend of how teams who lose the playoff final specifically can spiral. When you have a turnover of 17 players in one window as well as losing your two best players, this season could’ve ended in disaster to be frank.
Going into next season, Top 6 becomes an expectation and failure to meet that we can say the season is a failure.
Good job our chairman doesnt share your opinion thenIf ten mill is on table for sheaf I’d take it in a flash he’s never gonna be worth more
good player but replaceable
We’ve turned down more by all accountsIf ten mill is on table for sheaf I’d take it in a flash he’s never gonna be worth more
good player but replaceable
Where did I say that it isn't? Again, we are inventing things.
Of course it is a valuable metric, but not a big enough one to completely invalidate the stats, or even come close, which will be the next step by the denial brigade once we're done trying to put words in my mouth. You can talk about injuries to other players, the wind measured in knots on particular match days, or the interfering road closures before kick of on the A444 if you want. I honestly don't care. The facts are there, swallow them however you want to.
Don't bother debating him. All his opinions seem to be based on the false premise we can just go out and sign guaranteed championship quality players for 1-2m a pop.
Strongly disagree. Vik in particular wasn’t a technically strong player, Sheaf oozes class, you can see he’s been trained at a high level. Vik and Gus were all action and had some outstanding traits, but technically I’d agree Sheaf is better. That doesn’t necessarily mean a “better player”, but I’d argue most suited to higher level football.
Already explained that my point was in response to you saying we should spend 1-2m on someone not from league one.I never said all our quality signings would be 1-2 mil a pop, obviously quality doesn’t come cheap and I’ve been an advocate of us spending £15 mil+ on 3-4 decent players rather than relying on players that clearly aren’t good enough.
I also don’t see how you can say you shouldn’t have a debate with me when you came up with some strange stats the other day about how we shouldn’t buy a keeper unless they’re either over £5 mil or were from a league 1 team or weren’t born on month with a letter R in it. Perhaps I’m not being logical in your eyes but I really don’t see many others disagreeing that a quality keeper is essential and spending at least £15 mil this season is needed if we’re to make it into the prem next season.
The club has a 5 year plan and in the next 5 seasons, the expectation is to make the playoffs 3 of those seasons. We were in the playoff race more or less till the end. Objectively, it was a success because we met expectations.
There’s a worrying trend of how teams who lose the playoff final specifically can spiral. When you have a turnover of 17 players in one window as well as losing your two best players, this season could’ve ended in disaster to be frank.
Going into next season, Top 6 becomes an expectation and failure to meet that we can say the season is a failure.
Already explained that my point was in response to you saying we should spend 1-2m on someone not from league one.
Depends what you mean by quality. Ipswich have gone up and Hladky has had a similar season to Collins.
The majority of your comments are just overly simplistic.
How do you think ‘good players’ are identified?Maybe my comments are simplistic but I sort of view our aims as simplistic tbh. Yes the process isn’t simplistic but the type of players we need and the money we should be spending (in my view anyway) is simplistic.
I don’t think there’s much need for stats of where a player should come from or how much we should spend based on championship precedence, we just need good players and if it costs £20 mil then try and sell Sheaf and if not then King should be looking to add to the £6-7 mil profit he made this season. We all pay good money to see our team play, especially with the attendances we get we deserve to see some quality and become a team that others are properly afraid of playing.
I mean this comment sums it up really. "We just need good players" is actually hilarious.Maybe my comments are simplistic but I sort of view our aims as simplistic tbh. Yes the process isn’t simplistic but the type of players we need and the money we should be spending (in my view anyway) is simplistic.
I don’t think there’s much need for stats of where a player should come from or how much we should spend based on championship precedence, we just need good players and if it costs £20 mil then try and sell Sheaf and if not then King should be looking to add to the £6-7 mil profit he made this season. We all pay good money to see our team play, especially with the attendances we get we deserve to see some quality and become a team that others are properly afraid of playing.
I’m not the bloke who does the identifying, I’m just a fan who wants to see his team perform to a high standard every week and become accustomed to the shite we’ve seen over the first 15-ish games and the last 5-6 games of the season. I feel like I’m in an interview for a job at the CBS arena atm, please stopHow do you think ‘good players’ are identified?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?