Transfer Rumours and Deals - Winter Window 2016/17

[Frankie 8,186]

I'd argue our midfield was the problem and I'm confident Toral and particularly Hyndman will help in that respect.

 

Not only do we need to be able to retain possession in tight situations, we need to be able to move the ball quicker and help create more chances. I think Hyndman has shown himself capable of that and I reckon Toral will do the same after more games.

[Frankie 8,186]

I should add that generally I agree we need better players in central defence and in attack but unless we're able to move people on then it's a struggle to bring in others.

 

We simply can't afford to pay decent sums for players and keep fringe guys like Senderos.

[craig 5,199]

Another poor transfer window. Zero problem areas fixed.

 

It's becoming clear why Brentford took transfers out MW's hands.

 

Yes, they took transfers out of his hands because the owner, Matthew Benfield, decided he wanted to use the "Moneyball" philosophy and make all transfer dealings from statistics. Warburton argued that he agreed, to an extent, about using statistical analysis in transfer dealings but that, in football, you couldn't take the human element out of these decisions.

 

But if you wish to paint it as a "his signings were crap so the owners didn't trust him" situation then you are at liberty to do so - it just doesn't make it true.

 

Indeed, look at just how well his successors managed to do with the moneyball philosophy - Brentford went downhill, and in a hurry, when Warburton left.

[trublusince1982 243]

I should add that generally I agree we need better players in central defence and in attack but unless we're able to move people on then it's a struggle to bring in others.

 

We simply can't afford to pay decent sums for players and keep fringe guys like Senderos.

More simply MW's signing policy has left us hamstrung. He has added zero value. Shouldn't be given a single penny more he has wasted millions and hasn't managed to get one department of the team to look strong.

[trublusince1982 243]

Yes, they took transfers out of his hands because the owner, Matthew Benfield, decided he wanted to use the "Moneyball" philosophy and make all transfer dealings from statistics. Warburton argued that he agreed, to an extent, about using statistical analysis in transfer dealings but that, in football, you couldn't take the human element out of these decisions.

 

But if you wish to paint it as a "his signings were crap so the owners didn't trust him" situation then you are at liberty to do so - it just doesn't make it true.

 

Indeed, look at just how well his successors managed to do with the moneyball philosophy - Brentford went downhill, and in a hurry, when Warburton left.

If they rated his approached they wouldn't have been looking for ways to drastically change it. Why do you think they decided to change approach? Because it was working so well?

 

His transfer record at Brentford was very poor. He had a couple of successes but the amount of players who completely failed far out weighed the good actually

[Frankie 8,186]

More simply MW's signing policy has left us hamstrung. He has added zero value. Shouldn't be given a single penny more he has wasted millions and hasn't managed to get one department of the team to look strong.

 

I'm not so sure. His budget/menu from last season's windows will have been different from this.

 

Have his signings been great? No, many have lost their way and perhaps the jump from last season to this has been too big for some. However, I'd also argue there's still a future for a few as well and the nature of our club and its recent issues have made our dealings very difficult for the manager and his Head of Recruitment.

 

I'm not so sure we've wasted millions either. Yes, the gamble on Barton was a disappointment and the monies spent on MOH and Garner hardly repaying in spades either. However, I reckon Tav, Waggy and Wes would all bring in a few bob if/when they leave and the careful development of McKay has made him an excellent asset.

 

With that in mind, perhaps there's an argument MW's transfer work has been around 50/50 which although disappointing is also perhaps typical of most manager's record in the market.

[trublusince1982 243]

I'm not so sure. His budget/menu from last season's windows will have been different from this.

 

Have his signings been great? No, many have lost their way and perhaps the jump from last season to this has been too big for some. However, I'd also argue there's still a future for a few as well and the nature of our club and its recent issues have made our dealings very difficult for the manager and his Head of Recruitment.

 

I'm not so sure we've wasted millions either. Yes, the gamble on Barton was a disappointment and the monies spent on MOH and Garner hardly repaying in spades either. However, I reckon Tav, Waggy and Wes would all bring in a few bob if/when they leave and the careful development of McKay has made him an excellent asset.

 

With that in mind, perhaps there's an argument MW's transfer work has been around 50/50 which although disappointing is also perhaps typical of most manager's record in the market.

It's all perspectives I suppose. I wouldn't say he is anywhere near 50/50.

Don't see anyone bidding for Tav or waghorn unless performances drastically change . Would say seeing them moved on to free up wages is more likely than for profit at this point in time. Same with senderos, hill, krancjar, O'halleron, Wilson, maybe crooks and of course gilks.

 

Hill has shown a return of sorts with his performances.

[Frankie 8,186]

Let's look at the current squad and the players MW/FMcP have brought in - I've tried to be conservative with value:

 

KEEPERS

 

Foderingham: Cost: £Free | Value: £2m+

Alnwick: Cost: £100K | Value: ????

 

DEFENDERS

 

Tavernier: Cost: £200K | Value: £750K

Hodson: Cost: £Nominal | Value: £250K

Kiernan: Cost: £200K | Value: £500K

Wilson: Cost: £Free | Value: £500K

Hill: Cost: £Free | Value: £0

Senderos: Cost: £Free | Value: £0

 

MIDFIELDERS

 

Halliday: Cost: £Free | Value: £200K

Krancjar: Cost: £Free | Value: £0

Crooks: Cost: £Free | Value: £50K

Windass: Cost: £Free | Value: £1m

Holt: Cost: £65K | Value: £500K

Rossiter: Cost: £Free | Value: £1m

 

FORWARDS

 

Waghorn: Cost: £200K | Value: £1m

Garner: Cost: £1m | Value: £1m

Forrester: Cost: £Free | Value: £200K

O'Halloran: Cost: £500K | Value: £200K

Dodoo: Cost: £Free | Value: £500K

 

That's a lot of players and it's fair to say there's not been a huge amount of value in the squad. However, the circumstances of moving from one division to another and no European football means the budget is tight and this means quality is always going to be inconsistent.

 

I don't think MW's record is that great (and I question McP's contribution in that regard also) but he's certainly not wasted millions (as it stands) and I think there have been enough successes (even partial ones) to trust the manager if and when more money does become available.

[Frankie 8,186]

Generally the manager seems to have spent around £2-2.5m - not including any pay off for Barton which I'm hoping was nominal.

 

I think the value of Wes, Tav and Waggy gives him a surplus. And as much as people like Kiernan and Wilson have been inconsistent, I still think they'll retain value all things considered. Then you have younger lads like Dodoo, Rossiter and Windass who could be considered rough diamonds and worth good wedges ala McKay if they can force their way into the team on a more regular basis.

[Frankie 8,186]

It's all perspectives I suppose. I wouldn't say he is anywhere near 50/50.

Don't see anyone bidding for Tav or waghorn unless performances drastically change . Would say seeing them moved on to free up wages is more likely than for profit at this point in time. Same with senderos, hill, krancjar, O'halleron, Wilson, maybe crooks and of course gilks.

 

Hill has shown a return of sorts with his performances.

 

Tav and Waggy are good players but, granted, can look as bad as you or I on their poor days before looking world-beaters on their better games. In that sense I think clubs will retain an interest in them for decent cash so would consider them assets.

 

Gilks was sold for a reasonable fee I'm told - certainly enough to offset the cost of Alnwick somewhat. The others you mention have struggled but no manager has a 100% record so such is life.