Summer Transfer chat

[Ramperbamper]

A small, agile and nippy LB in the Logan mould would be cracking for us. As it is, there's always been other areas of the team which have needed addressed as a higher priority, so we've made do with Consi.

 

Good presence in the opposition box too let's remember.

 

 

[LA-Don]

I can agree to disagree too! He's not shite.

 

Considine is a gutsy footballer who tries his best (one of the few who does) who has been completely mismanaged.

 

He's not the quickest, either in feet nor in mind so he is always going to exposed at LB against a competent right flanker. The fact McInnes shoehorns him into LB is covering up the manager's appalling record of recruiting attacking strength, Shinnie being sacrificed away from his best position.

 

We will never know now but Considine should have been developed as the left half of a Centre Back pairing. He showed his greatest promise whilst as a young loon next to Russell Anderson. He's been a great servant and would have been an even greater one if he had been managed properly.

 

You’ll remember Russel Anderson being pretty shit for a period too, when we played him at right back. Considine is no left back but gets away with it when we play the weaker teams. I expect Hibs, Celtic, Rangers, maybe Hearts too, to expose him yet again. Can’t fault his effort and commitment, plus many are blinded by the fact he scored a hat trick, but I still think he’s the weakest link in our team. As a central defender I can’t really comment, can’t even remember him being given a decent run there.

[A llad insane]

Considines oy problem is his lack of pace.  He's a great defender full stop.  When he is at left back though his most underrated skill is his crossing, he can put in a cracking ball from deep or the byline.  Would much prefer shinnie at lb though as he is the complete package though I would concede we miss his midfield influence but Ferguson looks more than capable of filling that void.

 

 

Totally agree with this, i.m.o we are a poorer team when Andy is not in it. Mabye slowed up now for full back but a more than able centre back, problem for him is we now have 2 excellent c/b's in Devlin/McKenna.

 

If he finds himself shunted out of club, it would be a crying shame, arguably our best & most loyal player for last decade.

[Elgindon]

 

Agreed,great servant,down to earth loon,though I think he could be in his last season at left back.Happy with him in defence,think he performs better when the other defender is more prominent

[RicoS321]

We can agree to disagree. My opinion is that Considine is shite. And from what I saw in the very limited playing time from Hoban is that he is faster and more skilled than Andy. There have been many a right footer at left back, that point means little, although Hoban certainly looked solid with his left.

 

I think that your assessment of Hoban is based on your dislike of Considine rather than Hoban's strengths. Hoban was significantly poorer than Considine in the Burnley legs playing in the same position. Anyone at those games would agree. Not to be harsh on Hoban who was visibly playing on his wrong foot (his body shape was just weird on numerous occasion).

 

You mention he gets exposed against the bigger teams, but that didn't happen once in the run in post-split. The reason? Because he was played at the left of the back four and sat on top of the winger. Every time last season in which he struggled was when he played left of a 3 or left of a five (for about 15 minutes), which was all pre-split games against the Huns and Tims and once against Hearts. We played to his weaknesses, it was atrocious tactics. It's the equivalent of playing Logan at centre half and wondering why he's not winning headers. He was great post split, and great against Burnley. Nobody in the entire world is blinded by the fact that he scored a hat-trick 2 years ago, that's just a weird thing to say.

[LA-Don]

I think that your assessment of Hoban is based on your dislike of Considine rather than Hoban's strengths. Hoban was significantly poorer than Considine in the Burnley legs playing in the same position. Anyone at those games would agree. Not to be harsh on Hoban who was visibly playing on his wrong foot (his body shape was just weird on numerous occasion).

 

You mention he gets exposed against the bigger teams, but that didn't happen once in the run in post-split. The reason? Because he was played at the left of the back four and sat on top of the winger. Every time last season in which he struggled was when he played left of a 3 or left of a five (for about 15 minutes), which was all pre-split games against the Huns and Tims and once against Hearts. We played to his weaknesses, it was atrocious tactics. It's the equivalent of playing Logan at centre half and wondering why he's not winning headers. He was great post split, and great against Burnley. Nobody in the entire world is blinded by the fact that he scored a hat-trick 2 years ago, that's just a weird thing to say.

 

We know enough about Considine, I don’t think you can give a fair assessment of Hoban yet. Played two games in a week after being signed the day before the first Burnley game. Baptism of fire to an extent. Time will tell.

[Lencarl]

Celtic are not going to renew the Christie contract. Sunderland are reported to be interested in loan deal with a view to buy in January.

 

 

IF Aberdeen are interested now is the time to make a move for him.

 

It was reported that Christie was keen to move after his loan deal finished with Aberdeen and agreed a pay cut to join the Dons but Celtic blocked the move.

 

 

He is still a young player spend a couple of years with Aberdeen before moving South for the big

bucks.

 

P.S...Papers reporting that Celtic have made a move for Scott McKenna.

[Reidzer 1314]

No way will they get that, they are only entitled to what they have paid into his training thus far and I doubt that is anywhere near £500k.

 

It will go to a tribunal and they will get maybe £200k at most.

 

Aye. Called it...sort of 

[CvB]

weegie press going with a timmy bid for McKenna. Nothing to stop them bidding I suppose, but if it's true I hope we tell them to ram it.

 

McKenna himself must know that he can do better than that in a year or so....unless it's a "boyhood dream" or such pish.

[Reidzer 1314]

I can genuinley belive that Celtic will ask the question in regards to McKenna but I very much doubt they will be willing to pay what we want for him.

[Ramperbamper]

Can't see him going there. We probably benefit from the English window being shut, otherwise firm Celtic interest would likely generate bids from down south too.

[Ten Caat]

Weegie press have just seen the videocelts story.....

 

 

[RicoS321]

We know enough about Considine, I don’t think you can give a fair assessment of Hoban yet. Played two games in a week after being signed the day before the first Burnley game. Baptism of fire to an extent. Time will tell.

 

I didn't give an assessment of Hoban, you did. You said he was a better right-footed left back than Considine. I'm saying that is a ridiculous conclusion to draw after one game where he was clearly worse than Considine was the following week by any objective measure. That's not a criticism, I think Hoban will do well in holding midfield or defensive cover as he looks to be a decent player.

[baggy89]

I can genuinley belive that Celtic will ask the question in regards to McKenna but I very much doubt they will be willing to pay what we want for him.

 

This.

 

They'd need to at least get close to what they paid for Edouard + a % of future sell on fee, they'll offer £800k and Christie (or similar).

 

Arrogant, tight Cunts.

[CvB]

A rodgers exit strategy perhaps? Bidding for a player with an amount he knows will get turned down and then point to John McGinn and McKenna as examples of the board not allowing to sign the targets he wants?

 

Anyway, celtic GTF.

[RicoS321]

This.

 

They'd need to at least get close to what they paid for Edouard + a % of future sell on fee, they'll offer £800k and Christie (or similar).

 

Arrogant, tight Cunts.

 

I think that's a little absurd. McKenna will not be going for £9M or anything like that. I've always said that £3.5M would be a very good offer for McKenna, and there's nothing happened since that'd change that. Surely McGinn's transfer fee has brought us down to earth a little on what can be expected? The good thing is that time is on our side, and we don't need to sell in this window. There's no bidding war from England (championship) so now is not a good time to sell. If he continues his form then we should expect bids in January. If the Tims put in a decent bid now (upward of £3M) then expect us to begin negotiations to get that higher.

 

As CvB points out, the Rodgers exit strategy sounds plausible. That could be a decent thing for us (assuming we're selling, which in itself is not a good thing) as we can really pressure the bid. There is only so long that they can continue to miss out on targets without sending their support into hysterics. I say we hold them to £5M, just for a laugh.

[Lencarl]

Christie is worth £500K.

 

Scott McKenna is worth £2-£3 Million ( forget the £10 Million Crap).

 

Milne will agree a £2.5 Million fee with Celtic and Christie thrown in as part of the deal.

[rocket_scientist]

A rodgers exit strategy perhaps? Bidding for a player with an amount he knows will get turned down and then point to John McGinn and McKenna as examples of the board not allowing to sign the targets he wants?

 

Anyway, celtic GTF.

 

Good post. Considering all possibilities is the path to truth and enlightenment. That sounds like a religious mantra but it's just common sense really, not that sense is very common.

 

There's obviously disharmony at the piggery but what is Rodgers up to? After two trebles is he thinking his stock is at its highest and he wants to move on? Does he not think he's capable of winning a third? Is he scared of Gerrard? Is the Liverpool connection in his thinking?

 

Something terrible went on whilst Brenda was at Anfield. The likes of Rush and Dalglish detest the man. Nobody's spoken about the specifics but we do know he ran off with some woman and that her ex committed suicide recently so that might have something to do with it?

 

He's a horrible smug cunt full of his own importance. He can't crack a smile. There's something revealing in his thin lips and that restricted mouth. He's a wrong un. Celtic and Rodgers can GTF.

[Ten Caat]

McKenna's true value probably is £3 million. However we have him on a 5 year contract and he is now a Scotland regular who has captained his country. So we can ask £5 million no problem and if Celtic (or any other team) refuse to pay that we can tell them to get fucked.

 

Of course the one big unknown is what the speculation will do or already is doing to McKenna's head. Hopefully he won't try to force a move through at least at this point.

[baggy89]

I know transfer fees are based on wages (to a large extent) but as has been said we are in a strong position re:length of contract.

 

If Goldson is allegedly worth £3 million, a player who a bottom of the table EPL side has already decided is not good enough, and Tavernier is allegedly worth £3 million to a Championship side...

 

The fee's paid by english clubs for center backs is ridiculous, there is no way we should be going to the table for a potential £3 million offer from any league rival, at this time.

[RicoS321]

I know transfer fees are based on wages (to a large extent) but as has been said we are in a strong position re:length of contract.

 

If Goldson is allegedly worth £3 million, a player who a bottom of the table EPL side has already decided is not good enough, and Tavernier is allegedly worth £3 million to a Championship side...

 

The fee's paid by english clubs for center backs is ridiculous, there is no way we should be going to the table for a potential £3 million offer from any league rival, at this time.

 

But it is based on wages, that's the entire point. Tavernier has a contract that runs until 2021, which is three years. If he's on £15K per week (made up figure) then Rangers have already valued Tavernier at £2.25M. That is the value they have assigned to him based on their contract offer. There are two types of player. One that the parent club would like to keep (or is a first team player) and one that they don't want. Tavernier is a player that they want to keep as he plays every week. That means that the buying club will have to pay more than the £2.25M that Rangers are already contracted to pay him in order to get that player because the minimum £2.25M valuation has already been assigned to that player by Rangers' willingness to pay him that. How much more is the only sticking point here, and that's when potential, necessity to buy, necessity to sell, richness of the buying club etc all come in. I don't know who Goldson is, but I expect he's being paid X amount of money which is the value assigned to him by his parent club.

 

McKenna will only have been assigned a value of ~£1M by AFC based on his current contract. They may have minimum transfer clauses etc to mitigate this, but that's what AFC are valuing him at based on their contract club wage structure. That he's got a 5 year contract, we have no desire to sell, no need to sell and the player seems happy enough, plus the fact that he has the potential to be worth siginificantly more in the future if developed correctly, then a high end of £3.5M would be possibly manageable. Unless I'm way off in what we're paying McKenna, or if they've worked in some sort of grading that pulls his salary up massively in a few years then I think that'd be about right. "Player X cost n, so Player Y most cost t" is not a formula that exists.

[tlg1903]

Given the length of the deal we can pretty much demand what we like unless there is a set release fee. I don't think Celtic can afford him at the moment 2bh.

[Guest kiriakovisthenewstrachan]

Don't believe that wages has anything to do with a players sell on value.

 

We could get Nicky Maynard back on £20,000 a week and sign him up for 5 years.  He doesn't then become worth £5M because there is no chance anyone would ever pay that for him.

 

Based on the wages assumption no one would ever be sold for less than their contract value which we know is incorrect.  If a player is on a decent wage but plays rubbish for a season or two he ends up getting shipped out for peanuts.

 

A player is worth what someone is willing to pay for him and what the selling club is willing to accept. 

 

On the Tavernier v McKenna comparison, the hun can probably "afford" to turn down £3M for him whereas we would probably snap someone's hand off for that kind of fee.  I don't see that wages has anything to do with it.

 

 

[sallan2000]

Considering our highest ever incoming fee was £1.75 million for Eoin Jess to Coventry City in 1996, if an offer of £3 million came in, I fear we would grab it with both hands....

[RicoS321]

Don't believe that wages has anything to do with a players sell on value.

 

We could get Nicky Maynard back on £20,000 a week and sign him up for 5 years.  He doesn't then become worth £5M because there is no chance anyone would ever pay that for him.

 

Based on the wages assumption no one would ever be sold for less than their contract value which we know is incorrect.  If a player is on a decent wage but plays rubbish for a season or two he ends up getting shipped out for peanuts.

 

A player is worth what someone is willing to pay for him and what the selling club is willing to accept. 

 

On the Tavernier v McKenna comparison, the hun can probably "afford" to turn down £3M for him whereas we would probably snap someone's hand off for that kind of fee.  I don't see that wages has anything to do with it.

 

Except that's nonsense, as outlined in what I posted above. Do you genuinely think that the huns and tims regularly command significant fees for players that we'd say our no better than average because clubs in England are stupid? Or is it a conspiracy? Or they're doing it because it's the fashionable thing to do (pay elevated fees) down South.

 

A player is valued at what someone is willing to pay for them. If we had offered Maynard £20K for 5 years, then that is what we have valued him at because that was what we were willing to pay for him at the renewal of contract or purchase time. Whether or not somebody else is trying to buy him or not is irrelevant. But you missed the key part: there are two types of player, one that we want to keep and one that we don't. If we want to keep Maynard, then £5M is the minimum we'd expect a club to pay for him as that's what we are willing to invest on him. That value will reduce as the contract expires. If we don't want to keep Maynard, then we'd accept less than £5M in order to get that cost off our books. But your point doesn't work, because we're talking about players that parent teams do want, and so do other teams, which begins the bidding process. You also rarely get extreme examples like you mention precisely because transfers are wages linked (you don't want to pay someone significantly more than their peers).