Moses - can he lead us to the promised CL land?

[billyiddo]

Taking your three improvement players Austin, Mirallas and " a top CM" , how much do you think that would cost? Not much change out of 60m, I'll wager. And not much improve the either imo.

Mirallas is supposedly Lennon + 3m
Austin is around the 10m mark

Those two would provide superior cover to what we have had this season - both could in theory push for a starting place if they replicated their best form.

CM wise I don't know, McCarthy is valued at 20m so would use that as an idea of what we're looking to spend - so all together the same amount (give or take) as you're willing to spend on a forward because you have doubts Kane will be as good as last season, 3 positions improved (starting CM, and RWF/CF back up) vs one position we don't even need improving (starting CF) ...

 

[billyiddo]

I've already said that I would prefer to spend 30m on CF and CM positions rather than 4 average 15m players .

I know, but I was asking Parklane - hence why I quoted his post


Austin is off the back of a season comparative to that of Bentekes first for Villa - he's available at a good price, does the fact he's 'cheap' mean he is average?

 

[harr1984]

With Mitchell on board, I'd be hoping for us to come out with a few left field signings who wouldn't cost more than around £10m? Or is it still too early for his scouting to be coming to fruition?

 

[billyiddo]

With Mitchell on board, I'd be hoping for us to come out with a few left field signings who wouldn't cost more than around £10m? Or is it still too early for his scouting to be coming to fruition?

Nah you can only buy good players for big money

 

[Pirate55]

Mirallas is supposedly Lennon + 3m
Austin is around the 10m mark

Those two would provide superior cover to what we have had this season - both could in theory push for a starting place if they replicated their best form.

CM wise I don't know, McCarthy is valued at 20m so would use that as an idea of what we're looking to spend - so all together the same amount (give or take) as you're willing to spend on a forward because you have doubts Kane will be as good as last season, 3 positions improved (starting CM, and RWF/CF back up) vs one position we don't even need improving (starting CF) ...

We aren't going to agree on this. But if your strategy is implemented and we sign Mirallas, Austin and McCarthy then I fear for the coming season. Not enough class there. We will struggle. Time will tell.

 

[billyiddo]

We aren't going to agree on this. But if your strategy is implemented and we sign Mirallas, Austin and McCarthy then I fear for the coming season. Not enough class there. We will struggle. Time will tell.

I wasn't particularly putting forward McCarthy as who I wanted, just using the rumoured interest as a benchmark for the market we're shopping in, price wise, to answer your question.

Austin had as good a season as Benteke in his first (1 less goal 1 more assist iirc) when you were in favour of signing him at 24m - so it seems like I've just put forward an equal option for CF plus a solid EPL back up RWF and left money over for a starting CM for the same amount you would blow on just the CF position...in light of that I agree that we aren't likely to agree on this subject

 

[harr1984]

Nah you can only buy good players for big money

The finished articles that's true. But Dier was a snip and and confident will become a very good player, same from what I've heard of Wimmer. I'm sure there are young potentially very good midfielders and strikers out there for reasonable fees...

 

[Pirate55]

I wasn't particularly putting forward McCarthy as who I wanted, just using the rumoured interest as a benchmark for the market we're shopping in, price wise, to answer your question.

Austin had as good a season as Benteke in his first (1 less goal 1 more assist iirc) when you were in favour of signing him at 24m - so it seems like I've just put forward an equal option for CF plus two solid options for the same price you would blow on just the CF position...in light of that I agree that we aren't likely to agree on this subject

I have never been willing to settle for mediocrity in any walk of life. Some see things differently. That's life. Enjoy watching your sub par players. There is often a reason why they are cheap.

 

[the dza]

I have never been willing to settle for mediocrity in any walk of life. Some see things differently. That's life. Enjoy watching your sub par players. There is often a reason why they are cheap.

Chadli and Eriksen were cheap though, and see how well they have done compared to Lamela, Soldado and Pauliho, who all cost a lot more.

Kane is now one of the best players in the league -- but last pre-season, most of us would have been up in arms about having him as our first choice forward, insisting that we go and spend big money on 'quality' (again, see Soldado).

Lloris was another great value signing, infact all of our best players were cheap: Lloris, Rose, Bentaleb, Eriksen, Kane. That's half the first team for less than £20m total.

We need to sign the right players and promote the right players from within. For all we know, Pritchard is the next big star to emerge and someone like Moses would just be a contented backup player.

I wouldn't be disheartened if we don't spend big money, infact I'd worry if we were throwing it around like we did two summers ago.

 

[parklane1]

How do you think spending 30m on Benteke would have affected our ability to strengthen other areas of the team?

I was hoping that we could have done a deal with Ade, Townsend going the other way. So it would not have been in cash.

 

[jimmyb]

Nah you can only buy good players for big money

I don't believe that that has necessarily been the argument - until the last few posts, at least.

What some of us are saying is that we don't want Spurs to sign mediocre squad filler that barely improves us, if at all. We are saying that if we are to buy players, they should be players of a significantly higher quality than we already have in their position or at least with a significantly higher potential than we already have. These players might cost £30m. But equally, they might cost £5m. The focus should be on quality. Not price.

Simultaneously, we need to leave space for our highly promising academy graduates to progress to the first team.

 

[billyiddo]

I was hoping that we could have done a deal with Ade, Townsend going the other way. So it would not have been in cash.

As we seem to be operating on a sell to buy policy (or thereabouts) that would still have impacted our overall spending. Ade + Townsend would probably still have required a substantial money offering as well - 10m+ I'd have thought

 

[parklane1]

As we seem to be operating on a sell to buy policy (or thereabouts) that would still have impacted our overall spending. Ade + Townsend would probably still have required a substantial money offering as well - 10m+ I'd have thought

You summed it up with " as we seem" no one know what the policy is, however if Townsend is supposed to be worth 15mill ( which imo is stupid money) and lets say we could/should get 5 mill for Ade we would have had to find around 10 mill for Benteke. Its all pointless though as he seems to be on his way to L'pool ( and will be their best signing imo).

 

[billyiddo]

I have never been willing to settle for mediocrity in any walk of life. Some see things differently. That's life. Enjoy watching your sub par players. There is often a reason why they are cheap.

I don't want mediocrity either, but I don't enjoy getting fleeced or overspending on things when a little research leads me to something just as good for a third the price.

 

[billyiddo]

I don't believe that that has necessarily been the argument - until the last few posts, at least.

What some of us are saying is that we don't want Spurs to sign mediocre squad filler that barely improves us, if at all. We are saying that if we are to buy players, they should be players of a significantly higher quality than we already have in their position or at least with a significantly higher potential than we already have. These players might cost £30m. But equally, they might cost £5m. The focus should be on quality. Not price.

Simultaneously, we need to leave space for our highly promising academy graduates to progress to the first team.

I agree with this, especially 'the focus should be on quality, not price'

There are plenty of players out there Who would improve us that wouldn''t break the bank - both first team players and back ups - but it seems some people think you have to spend big in order to improve...

 

[Pirate55]

I agree with this, especially 'the focus should be on quality, not price'

There are plenty of players out there Who would improve us that wouldn''t break the bank - both first team players and back ups - but it seems some people think you have to spend big in order to improve...

.....And others who believe you can build a team capable of sustaining a challenge for a top four place on a shoestring budget just with a little "research" . Therein lies the way of false dawns and continued heartbreak, with minimal entertainment from robotic players along the way. Sigh

 

[billyiddo]

.....And others who believe you can build a team capable of sustaining a challenge for a top four place on a shoestring budget just with a little "research" . Therein lies the way of false dawns and continued heartbreak, with minimal entertainment from robotic players along the way. Sigh

I'm not sure what your trying to say here seeings as both approaches are working on the same 'shoestring budget', unless you've been working on some kind of alternate reality where we're stacked with cash, in which case this has been a bigger waste of time than usual

 

[milo]

I don't believe that that has necessarily been the argument - until the last few posts, at least.

What some of us are saying is that we don't want Spurs to sign mediocre squad filler that barely improves us, if at all. We are saying that if we are to buy players, they should be players of a significantly higher quality than we already have in their position or at least with a significantly higher potential than we already have. These players might cost £30m. But equally, they might cost £5m. The focus should be on quality. Not price.

Simultaneously, we need to leave space for our highly promising academy graduates to progress to the first team.

Part of our problem last season was lack of squad depth who were comfortable playing how Poch wanted. If we can improve on first team players, of course we should, but we can also improve by clearing out the unwanted players and bringing in good understudies.

 

[GrimsbyYid]

Pirate, you core coming across a bit bratty about other people's opinions. I also think you're talking gibberish so you'll probably be equally dismissive with what I have to say.

For me, the last thing we need to be doing is spending 30m on a striker. Presuming we're working to a budget. To justify by predicting that Kane won't have as good a season is so painfully cynical... We don't buy a 30m striker to either sit in the bench, or replace our young star, or just in the off chance he isn't as good this season. That is so dumb.

As for not challenge going top 4, we don't need superstars, we were close last season with a new manager and poison running through the club. Plus Mason in the middle. Get a central midfielder, Kane from the. Eh inning of the season, already an improved defence, our young squad one year older and more experienced, a couple of great addition on wing and back up striker and we can easily be fighting.

 

[Pirate55]

I'm not sure what your trying to say here seeings as both approaches are working on the same 'shoestring budget', unless you've been working on some kind of alternate reality where we're stacked with cash, in which case this has been a bigger waste of time than usual

Not at all. We were discussing how best to spend our budget for new players. Our strategy on how to so differs.