Paul Lambert

[Risso]

He's had £40m to spend.  Whether you think that's enough is a matter of opinion.  What isn't in doubt though, is that of that, the amounts spent on Bowery (£500K) Lowton (£3m), Sylla (£2m), Tonev (£2.5m), Bennett (£2.75m), Helenius (£1.2m) and Luna (£2m) has been largely wasted, as Lambert himself doesn't think they're good enough this season and they've all contributed next to nothing this season.

 

That's over a quarter of his funds pissed up the wall.  Why spend nearly £6m on two players in Bennett and Luna who were no better than a player like Lichaj who we let go for nothing?  Even with the much trumpeted "rebuilding the squad from scratch", it's hard not to think that 2 or 3 decent players, rather than all that dross would have been a much better idea.  No point in buying cheap tat if they're not going to play.  Add in the £7m on Kozak (who I'm not arguing is a bad player), and that's £20m that could and should have been spent much more wisely.

[briny_ear]

Martinez would undoubtedly have done better. He had a proven track record of miracle working with Wigan, There's not much point in discussing this, however, since I doubt very much if he would have been happy to swap one job consisting of a season-long struggle to keep an under-funded club afloat in the premier league for another. Doubt whether Rodgers or Moyes would have been interested either.

[Wainy316]

It's not transfer fees that's the problem though it's wages.  He is tasked with finding players that will play for pittance which generally tends to be crap players.

[sharkyvilla]

I'd still bet if we sold Lambert's players tomorrow we would make a profit. Ok that's probably largely due to Benteke and Guzan being worth £35m or so together, plus Okore probably being a bargain. He's done pretty well compared to the disasters of our past. That shows some kind of success in the transfer market IMO.

[shaggy]

Mantis.

His record in the transfer market has been appalling. Benteke and Vlaar have been great and Bertrand has been good but other than that that's it.

His signings have been the main contributing factor to those battles against relegation because they haven't produced enough consistent performances to keep us out of trouble.

[Mantis]

Martinez would undoubtedly have done better. He had a proven track record of miracle working with Wigan, There's not much point in discussing this, however, since I doubt very much if he would have been happy to swap one job consisting of a season-long struggle to keep an under-funded club afloat in the premier league for another. Doubt whether Rodgers or Moyes would have been interested either.

Do you mean done better over all or done better in the transfer market?

 

I'd still bet if we sold Lambert's players tomorrow we would make a profit. Ok that's probably largely due to Benteke and Guzan being worth £35m or so together, plus Okore probably being a bargain. He's done pretty well compared to the disasters of our past. That shows some kind of success in the transfer market IMO.

 

I think we'd make at least double, probably triple. The ones we'd lose money on would be the cheap players, we'd make massive profits on players like Bacuna, Westwood, Benteke and Vlaar.

 

Mantis.

His record in the transfer market has been appalling. Benteke and Vlaar have been great and Bertrand has been good but other than that that's it.

His signings have been the main contributing factor to those battles against relegation because they haven't produced enough consistent performances to keep us out of trouble.

 

Appalling based on what exactly? Because if you take into account what he's had to spend on both wages and transfer fees then calling his record "appalling" is flat out wrong. Risso made a good point, although I'm not sure he intended it that way. You could say around 75% of the money Lambert's spent has been spent wisely (although IMO Lowton and Sylla were ok buys given that they were very good last season) - that's a really good record.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Mantis

[shaggy]

I'd still bet if we sold Lambert's players tomorrow we would make a profit. Ok that's probably largely due to Benteke and Guzan being worth £35m or so together, plus Okore probably being a bargain. He's done pretty well compared to the disasters of our past. That shows some kind of success in the transfer market IMO.

It's relative to performance though. You can't gage a player by what he cost. He must be judged on performances and those performances as a whole by the majority of Lambert's signings have been dreadful.

[lapal_fan]

Martinez would undoubtedly have done better. He had a proven track record of miracle working with Wigan, There's not much point in discussing this, however, since I doubt very much if he would have been happy to swap one job consisting of a season-long struggle to keep an under-funded club afloat in the premier league for another. Doubt whether Rodgers or Moyes would have been interested either.

Pure speculation - we'll never know.

 

Plus he turned us down by declaring that he wouldn't come to us when we were looking for a new manager.  At the time a few people were saying "well if he doesn't want to come f**k him".

[avfc1982am]

Lambert is one of the best managers in the league plus he's not a complete clearing in the woods like some. I think he's being unfairly judged. Can you honestly see Martinez, Rodgers, Moyes do better with the squad we have available?

He is being judged on results as it is a results based job. He has done a poor job so far and honestly i think quite a few managers could get more out of the squad than lambert, not just the 3 you mentioned.

[shaggy]

Martinez would undoubtedly have done better. He had a proven track record of miracle working with Wigan, There's not much point in discussing this, however, since I doubt very much if he would have been happy to swap one job consisting of a season-long struggle to keep an under-funded club afloat in the premier league for another. Doubt whether Rodgers or Moyes would have been interested either.

Do you mean done better over all or done better in the transfer market?

 

I'd still bet if we sold Lambert's players tomorrow we would make a profit. Ok that's probably largely due to Benteke and Guzan being worth £35m or so together, plus Okore probably being a bargain. He's done pretty well compared to the disasters of our past. That shows some kind of success in the transfer market IMO.

 

I think we'd make at least double, probably triple. The ones we'd lose money on would be the cheap players, we'd make massive profits on players like Bacuna, Westwood, Benteke and Vlaar.

 

Mantis.

His record in the transfer market has been appalling. Benteke and Vlaar have been great and Bertrand has been good but other than that that's it.

His signings have been the main contributing factor to those battles against relegation because they haven't produced enough consistent performances to keep us out of trouble.

 

Appalling based on what exactly? Because if you take into account what he's had to spend on both wages and transfer fees then calling his record "appalling" is flat out wrong. Risso made a good point, although I'm not sure he intended it that way. You could say around 75% of the money Lambert's spent has been spent wisely (although IMO Lowton and Sylla were ok buys given that they were very good last season) - that's a really good record.

Appalling based on performance-results.

[Mantis]

 

I'd still bet if we sold Lambert's players tomorrow we would make a profit. Ok that's probably largely due to Benteke and Guzan being worth £35m or so together, plus Okore probably being a bargain. He's done pretty well compared to the disasters of our past. That shows some kind of success in the transfer market IMO.

It's relative to performance though. You can't gage a player by what he cost. He must be judged on performances and those performances as a whole by the majority of Lambert's signings have been dreadful.

 

Disregarding the fact that the majority of them haven't been "dreadful", yes you do need to take into account how much they cost and what the manager had to spend, otherwise the managers with the most money to spend will inevitably end up being the best in the transfer market when we all know that often isn't the case.

[lapal_fan]

Mantis.

His record in the transfer market has been appalling. Benteke and Vlaar have been great and Bertrand has been good but other than that that's it.

His signings have been the main contributing factor to those battles against relegation because they haven't produced enough consistent performances to keep us out of trouble.

No they haven't been appalling, that's your interpretation.  Lowton was nearly POTS last year, Sylla came in a did a good job etc etc

 

For the 1st 10 games, everyone thought Luna was wonderful.

 

Bennett against Chelsea was arugably MOTM - when he came he weighed about 4 stone, now he's bulked up and looks much better imo.

 

KEA has done much better this year, than last year. For many of these players it's still too early to judge them.  A lot of them have either came up a league or two or have come from a completely different country and have been thrown into this situation. 

 

The cost of any individual player is arbitury, it's their wages which accounts for more in our situation.. Not many existing professional footballers in the premier league would come to Villa on 10k a week, when most of them ar comfy on their bums for 20k.

 

The quality of player we've bought is largely down to wages, not one of fee's.

[blandy]

 

He's had £40m to spend.  Whether you think that's enough is a matter of opinion.  What isn't in doubt though, is that of that, the amounts spent on Bowery (£500K) Lowton (£3m), Sylla (£2m), Tonev (£2.5m), Bennett (£2.75m), Helenius (£1.2m) and Luna (£2m) has been largely wasted, as Lambert himself doesn't think they're good enough this season and they've all contributed next to nothing this season.

 

That's over a quarter of his funds pissed up the wall.  Why spend nearly £6m on two players in Bennett and Luna who were no better than a player like Lichaj who we let go for nothing?  Even with the much trumpeted "rebuilding the squad from scratch", it's hard not to think that 2 or 3 decent players, rather than all that dross would have been a much better idea.  No point in buying cheap tat if they're not going to play.  Add in the £7m on Kozak (who I'm not arguing is a bad player), and that's £20m that could and should have been spent much more wisely.

I don't think that's any kind of an argument, if I'm honest. I mean even if I were to accept your comments on those players as the only valid view of them (I don't) I don't see that someone shopping in the bargain basement and "wasting" over a quarter of their money is anything to complain about. It suggests a thhree quarters, or thereabouts, hit rate.

Lihaj was a right back, no left back.

Kozak looked like a galoot to me, and IMO was a waste of money, but injury means we can't really know either way, yet.

So basically, while I don't think his transfer record is something outstanding, I don't think it's a fair stick to beat him with. He's done OK, perhaps a bit better than that. I suspect a few of the players will go on to get a lot better, too, in time.

[Isa]

He has spent approximately £25m on Lowton, KEA, Westwood, Bowery, Bennett, Sylla, Luna, Tonev, Helenius and Kozak.

I rest my case...

[Mantis]

Westwood, Kozak and even Lowton and Sylla weren't bad purchases and Helenius hasn't really had a chance, which is a completely different criticism of Lambert.

[MessiWillSignForVilla]

I really don't get all this stuff about Martinez and how he would have been able to do so much better instead of Lambert.

 

One of the main criticisms of Lambert, and the main one imo, is that our defence for two years has been shocking. Despite it improving this season, it still is pretty shoddy. Now, I'd like an example of a good defence that Martinez has built? The defences were always the worst part of his Wigan teams, and the Everton defence? He has Moyes to thank for building such a solid base to build a team upon. Simply put, he's not very good at it.

 

As for signings, his best have been loans that we wouldn't have been able to get, and actual transfers have been pretty poor, other than McCarthy, all his permanent signings never start or even play.

 

Martinez has done a very good job at Everton, nowhere near as Herculean as it's made out to be, after all he's just filled in the gaps of Moyes' squad and encouraged them to attack more, but he's still done a good job. 

 

But if he'd come to Villa? He wouldn't have sorted out the defence, he'd probably be signing just as many duds as Lambert is and we'd have been relegated by now, imo. But we'd be playing pretty football, so there's that...

Edited April 24, 2014 by MessiWillSignForVilla

[StanBalaban]

He has spent approximately £25m on Lowton, KEA, Westwood, Bowery, Bennett, Sylla, Luna, Tonev, Helenius and Kozak.

I rest my case...

I count nearer £20m and I'm not sure what your case is?

[Isa]

Westwood, Kozak and even Lowton and Sylla weren't bad purchases and Helenius hasn't really had a chance, which is a completely different criticism of Lambert.

Yes and who's fault it is that Helenius hasn't had a chance? When you are on a budget, don't waste money on a player you have no intention of playing. Simples!

Edited April 24, 2014 by Isa

[PieFacE]

He's had £40m to spend.  Whether you think that's enough is a matter of opinion.  What isn't in doubt though, is that of that, the amounts spent on Bowery (£500K) Lowton (£3m), Sylla (£2m), Tonev (£2.5m), Bennett (£2.75m), Helenius (£1.2m) and Luna (£2m) has been largely wasted, as Lambert himself doesn't think they're good enough this season and they've all contributed next to nothing this season.

 

That's over a quarter of his funds pissed up the wall.  Why spend nearly £6m on two players in Bennett and Luna who were no better than a player like Lichaj who we let go for nothing?  Even with the much trumpeted "rebuilding the squad from scratch", it's hard not to think that 2 or 3 decent players, rather than all that dross would have been a much better idea.  No point in buying cheap tat if they're not going to play.  Add in the £7m on Kozak (who I'm not arguing is a bad player), and that's £20m that could and should have been spent much more wisely.

There isn't a manager in the world who's going to find players of this type of value who will all be good enough. That's just how football works, and it's the risks we have taken as a club to try and purchase players who still need development, develop them and sell them on. Every signing isn't going to work out, but it's low risk if it doesn't. 

 

You could argue maybe he should have spent that money on 2 players, but what if they got injured? 

 

If we sold all those players I very much doubt we'd make a loss on them, so, it's alright isn't it? 

Edited April 24, 2014 by PieFacE

[Big_John_10]

So buying poor players for cheap money is classed as performing well in the transfer market?