James Maddison (now playing for Tottenham Hotspur)

[Ikon]

2 minutes ago, STM said:

 

My subtle point is that I wouldn't sell Bruno for 100m but we signed him for less than 40m in January.

 

So if we signed Bruno for less than 40m just a few months ago, why would we now pay 60m for someone of comparable talent?

Its not easy to only do bargains like Bruno. Few and far between imo. Never mind ones that seem willing to come. Bruno was a ridiculously good deal for a ridiculous players. Not many of them out there.

 

Even he could have flopped really. Maddison is next to no risk. Plus a proven scorer which always cost more 

 

 

Edited August 2, 2022 by Ikon

[STM]

1 minute ago, gdm said:

Leicester wanted Bruno we would be going mental on here if they bid anything under £60m

Well that's kind of my point.

 

The people in charge of transfers are looking for value. We signed Bruno, for waaaaaay less than what he worth to us. I think Botman will turn out the same.

 

They aren't fluke deals, we have people running the club who know how to get a good deal. It takes time and patience and sometimes walking away from a good player.

[gdm]

2 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Again, disclaimer that I like Maddison, but I just find it pretty hard to fathom how we can all be universal in thinking £35m-ish for Jack Harrison is ridiculous (which it is) in a position we desperately need, but £60m is the going rate for a player in a position we don't. 

 

Both 25, both English, and both with very similar minutes per goal (344 vs 304)

 

Maddison is obviously the better player, but to that extreme an extent?

 

 

 

You keep saying this ‘in a position we don’t need’ Howe obviously has a plan for him. Let him worry about that. 

[KaKa]

8 minutes ago, nufc123 said:

But also a bigger risk.

 

This is true. But I think a lot of people would take that risk.

[STM]

Just now, Ikon said:

Its not easy to only do bargains like Bruno. Few and far between imo. Never mind ones that seem willing to come. Bruno was a ridiculously good deal for a ridiculous players. Not many of them out there.

I doubt Ashworth and Co see it that way. It's good scouting, good research, good timing and good negotiations. 

 

For now, it's these deals we are looking at.

[gdm]

7 minutes ago, STM said:

 

My subtle point is that I wouldn't sell Bruno for 100m but we signed him for less than 40m in January.

 

So if we signed Bruno for less than 40m just a few months ago, why would we now pay 60m for someone of comparable talent?

Bruno came from an inferior league. We got lucky getting Bruno at that price. You answered it yourself, half a season in the premier league and his value has went up massively. 
 

also Lyon can replace him cheaper than Leicester can replace Maddison 

 

Also why not use Paqueta as a more suitable comparison. Play in much the same position, similar numbers of goals and assists and Lyon wanted around £50m for him 

 

 

Edited August 2, 2022 by gdm

[snakzz]

Who is it «best» for Leicester to sell? Madders or Fofana?

[RUHRLYASLEEVESUP]

Whats £60M to us these days ?

Pocket change

 

[Ikon]

4 minutes ago, STM said:

I doubt Ashworth and Co see it that way. It's good scouting, good research, good timing and good negotiations. 

 

For now, it's these deals we are looking at.

Well I wouldn’t have a clue either way how they see it. I reckon they see that we have the chance to get a top class player that is next to no risk. They might even be prepared to high enough because of this. Impossible to say really. I was just saying how I see it. That it’s not easy to get “cheap” players as proven and next to no risk whatsoever like Maddison. 
 

(my guess and how I see it)

 

 

Edited August 2, 2022 by Ikon

[KaKa]

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Again, disclaimer that I like Maddison, but I just find it pretty hard to fathom how we can all be universal in thinking £35m-ish for Jack Harrison is ridiculous (which it is) in a position we desperately need, but £60m is the going rate for a player in a position we don't. 

 

Both 25, both English, and both with very similar minutes per goal (344 vs 304)

 

Maddison is obviously the better player, but to that extreme an extent?

 

 

 

 

People are just looking at the price purely from the calibre of player.

 

Personally, I think the offer we've put in for Maddison is a realistic value, but it just doesn't work that way for English players, who you only really tend to get for realistic prices when they are in their last year, contract wise.

 

 

[STM]

1 minute ago, gdm said:

Bruno came from an inferior league. We got lucky getting Bruno at that price. You answered it yourself, half a season in the premier league and his value has went up massively. 
 

also Lyon can replace him cheaper than Leicester can replace Maddison 

 

I don't agree we got lucky. We saw a deal and snapped it up. There will be others.

 

However I completely agree with your second point. Leicester have the ability to hold out more than Lyon.

 

The foreign market, if you get your scouting correct can save you money.

 

Be interesting to see how this plays out.

[Rich]

Reckon we're at the "wait a few days and then submit a final take it or leave it offer" stage now?

[Fantail Breeze]

9 minutes ago, STM said:

 

My subtle point is that I wouldn't sell Bruno for 100m but we signed him for less than 40m in January.

 

So if we signed Bruno for less than 40m just a few months ago, why would we now pay 60m for someone of comparable talent?

 

Bruno has been fantastic for six months, Maddison has been consistently fantastic for four years at this level/in this league.

 

It’s not difficult to see why one would currently cost more than the other.

 

 

Edited August 2, 2022 by Fantail Breeze

[Kid Icarus]

3 minutes ago, gdm said:

You keep saying this ‘in a position we don’t need’ Howe obviously has a plan for him. Let him worry about that. 

Howe himself has said that RW and ST are the priority and that resorting to other positions is the alternative, hardly controversial 

[STM]

Just now, Fantail Breeze said:

 

Bruno has been fantastic for six months, Maddison has been consistently fantastic for four years at this level/in this league.

 

It’s not difficult to see why one would currently cost more than the other.

 

 

 

Read again what you've written. It makes no sense.

[KaKa]

3 minutes ago, gdm said:

Bruno came from an inferior league. We got lucky getting Bruno at that price. You answered it yourself, half a season in the premier league and his value has went up massively. 
 

also Lyon can replace him cheaper than Leicester can replace Maddison 

 

I don't like labelling it as luck.

 

I think it was a prime example of good scouting and negotiating, which is what a really good recruitment team does. And this is why a number of folks are pretty confident that we'll end the summer in really good shape.

[Shearergol]

41 minutes ago, jack j said:

Is he honestly worth 60 Million though

Not for me tbh like....

Would put him in the top 50 transfer fees of all time

 

 

 

That’s only because transfer fees have gone wild. It’s nothing we as a club can really control 

[toontownman]

3 minutes ago, snakzz said:

Who is it «best» for Leicester to sell? Madders or Fofana?

Depends on the fee they get.

 

Maddison makes more sense as is, last two years of his contract and could wind down and go for nothing or certainly much less with each passing window.

 

That said if Maddison is willing to re-sign then Fofana if they get north of 70/80m for him might be more appealing. Depends who they think is harder to replace and what they would do with the funds.

[Ste]

2 minutes ago, Rich said:

Reckon we're at the "wait a few days and then submit a final take it or leave it offer" stage now?

 

Probably, with the added risk of another team entering negotiations if they haven't already.

[Ikon]

I know for sure as hell that I’d rather get Maddison and then CHO on loan than go big for Diaby and have the midfield we have now, or a much lesser midfield player on loan. 
 

Can’t underestimate the effect a signing like Maddison would have. Both on the rest of the team as well as the whole vibe around the place. Other players would grow massively in belief. Mental aspect is important too, not just the player we sign, but others. 

[The Prophet]

3 minutes ago, Rich said:

Reckon we're at the "wait a few days and then submit a final take it or leave it offer" stage now?

 

Definetly. Though a lot of this just seems like public posturing.

[Fantail Breeze]

2 minutes ago, STM said:

Read again what you've written. It makes no sense.

 

Makes sense.

[STM]

Just now, KaKa said:

 

I don't like labelling it as luck.

 

I think it was a prime example of good scouting and negotiating, which is what a really good recruitment team does. And this is why a number of folks are pretty confident that we'll end the summer in really good shape.

 

Precisely. We've signed two quality players for less than 40m each. For the stage we are at, the might not want to lump 60m on one player, despite him being mint.

 

Just bare in mind that 60m we effectively signed Botman, Trippier and Pope. When you look at it like this, you can see why they won't go there.

[Gallowgate Toon]

Offer that same deal for Harvey Barnes and job's a good'un.

[gdm]

3 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Howe himself has said that RW and ST are the priority and that resorting to other positions is the alternative, hardly controversial 

No one said it controversial. Point I’m making is you keep saying we don’t need him. Howe & the club clearly disagree with your view. Howe might see him playing slightly to the right with trippier over lapping. He might see him in the forward line on the right or he might see him as a number 10. Point is we don’t know but if we are bidding £50m there is obviously a plan. It’s not being done on a whim