Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
moore_94

Patson Daka

By moore_94, in Transfer Talk

Recommended Posts

coolhandfox

coolhandfox

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, tom27111 said:

Our only hope is that some Turkish team comes in. (There must be other nations with transfer windows still open?)

 

If not, just negotiate a pay off with him. Seriously. 

 

Should go down as one our worst signings ever.

 

People still think "there's a player in there" and "he's got potential if we play to his strengths"

 

Wake up.

 

His goal scoring record is almost identical to Ade Akinbiyi.

 

 

 

 

He has 3 season left on his contract if he's on 60k a week that's 3m odd a season, so over 3 years that's 9m.

 

Not a chance we are going to pay him off lol

Edited by coolhandfox
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
inckley fox

inckley fox

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, tom27111 said:

 

Or he could just run down the rest of his contract, collecting his wages, leaving for free and offering absolutely nothing.

 

We could negotiate paying a percentage of his wages, releasing him, allowing him to get wages and a signing on fee from some other mugs.

I understand why you'd think that, and it is something that we've done in the past with certain players - Pantsil, Abe, Moreno, Berner would be some of the more recent ones - but I can't think of one example of us having done this with a big-money signing who has multiple years left on his contract. 

 

It's very possible that the story of payments for Daka depending on a 75th appearance is true, but it's not unthinkable that it's wrong either, and/or that he could go on to play an important role for us this year. He's been a goal machine at a sub-EPL-level foreign league, and if he banged in 15+ for us, which is not out of the realms of possibility, he'd command a decent fee. If we loan him out to an EPL club in January, which is also very likely, and he hits 7 or 8 goals (again, not improbable given that we haven't exactly played to his strengths to date) then you'd expect a player of his age to be attracting offers of 10-15m. And, of course, in one of these scenarios we do very well AND get money back for him if we want; in the other we still alleviate the wage burden AND have a half-decent chance of receiving offers.

 

A dissolution of contract, apart from being quite unusual for a player of his pedigree and age, would likely cost us 2-4m up front - a good deal more than we'd be paying for his wages this season. So all we'd be achieving would be to deprive ourselves of a player, and a chance at recouping a sizeable fee, in exchange for not having to pay him anything in future seasons.

 

I get that some people feel that he's unlikely to be a success for us (or anyone else!), that they don't want him moping about the place, and that they'd prefer us to have some wage space freed up for future seasons. But I also understand why most businesses would do the opposite of that.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wasyls Pec Deck

Wasyls Pec Deck

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, inckley fox said:

I understand why you'd think that, and it is something that we've done in the past with certain players - Pantsil, Abe, Moreno, Berner would be some of the more recent ones - but I can't think of one example of us having done this with a big-money signing who has multiple years left on his contract. 

 

It's very possible that the story of payments for Daka depending on a 75th appearance is true, but it's not unthinkable that it's wrong either, and/or that he could go on to play an important role for us this year. He's been a goal machine at a sub-EPL-level foreign league, and if he banged in 15+ for us, which is not out of the realms of possibility, he'd command a decent fee. If we loan him out to an EPL club in January, which is also very likely, and he hits 7 or 8 goals (again, not improbable given that we haven't exactly played to his strengths to date) then you'd expect a player of his age to be attracting offers of 10-15m. And, of course, in one of these scenarios we do very well AND get money back for him if we want; in the other we still alleviate the wage burden AND have a half-decent chance of receiving offers.

 

A dissolution of contract, apart from being quite unusual for a player of his pedigree and age, would likely cost us 2-4m up front - a good deal more than we'd be paying for his wages this season. So all we'd be achieving would be to deprive ourselves of a player, and a chance at recouping a sizeable fee, in exchange for not having to pay him anything in future seasons.

 

I get that some people feel that he's unlikely to be a success for us (or anyone else!), that they don't want him moping about the place, and that they'd prefer us to have some wage space freed up for future seasons. But I also understand why most businesses would do the opposite of that.

The problem is though that in Enzo’s system Daka wouldn’t do well. His game is very one dimensional and he wouldn’t adapt, though he is a tidy finisher given time and space. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ely fox

Ely fox

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, STUHILL said:

Will no doubt get the gossip on why the fcuk up tomorrow! :rolleyes: 

 

Hopefully, wasn't at our end. I like Daka and he doesn't deserve to be messed about just because he has no first touch.

I’ve never seen the ball bounce off someone so much before at that level. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chelmofox

Chelmofox

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, tom27111 said:

 

Or he could just run down the rest of his contract, collecting his wages, leaving for free and offering absolutely nothing.

 

We could negotiate paying a percentage of his wages, releasing him, allowing him to get wages and a signing on fee from some other mugs.

Jesus effing christ. Nacho barely plays AND runs his contract down and he is the second coming of Messi, Daka barely plays and he is the second coming of Myra Hindley.  

 

I don't see what all this talk of talk of severing contracts or releasing him is achieving. Yes we wanted him gone and by the sound of it there were decent suitors who could have nibbled, but sometime deals fall through. Not Daka's fault. It might be our fault, it might be Millwall's fault. It happens. But the interest was there, and if we play our cards right we can recoup something next window.

 

Maybe there is a chance of a nibble somewhere in the next few weeks but i doubt it. I suppose the Saudi league might fancy it but predominantly they are looking for superstar strikers.

 

I really think we are going to have to reintegrate as this is the best way for interest to be regained at the next window. 

Edited by Chelmofox
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chelmofox

Chelmofox

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Wasyls Pec Deck said:

The problem is though that in Enzo’s system Daka wouldn’t do well. His game is very one dimensional and he wouldn’t adapt, though he is a tidy finisher given time and space. 

And Nacho has largely looked like dog turd and Vardy has spent most of the time looking at best a nuisance, and at worst very lonely. As the system becomes seconds nature, there is nothing to suggest that Daka cannot become another option for us.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AjcW

AjcW

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, STUHILL said:

Will no doubt get the gossip on why the fcuk up tomorrow! :rolleyes: 

 

Hopefully, wasn't at our end. I like Daka and he doesn't deserve to be messed about just because he has no first touch.

I’d like to think it wasn’t us. They’ve got a 25 man squad now with Sinisterra coming in and Moore wouldn’t leave. 

Edited by AjcW
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...