Jhon Durán

[VillaChris]

56 minutes ago, villan-scott said:

Not quite a loan then by the sound of it. 

Guessing it's quicker to fly to Barcelona and then catch a connection to Brum than via New York?

I do think someone like Girona would be a good loan for him, they played some very decent football last season and weren't far off qualifying for europe.

Archer will surely be ahead in pecking order so really can't see him playing many minutes at all if he stays.

[Kingman]

Had forgotten about him 

[YLN]

5 hours ago, Villatillidie95 said:

if he buried that sitter against west ham we would have got 6th place wouldnt we?

Also if Luke Shaw didn't punch the ball out of the air for no reason in the 99th minute against Brighton, I'd have won €2000.

Plenty of blame to go around.

[grantholtgolazo]

Don’t want to underestimate Emery but if Duran is capable of slotting into the squad at the level we are aiming for this soon, I’d be genuinely shocked. 

[GlobalVillan]

11 hours ago, Tomaszk said:

Mad how different people see the game.

Can't believe someone could see that.

Well, reading this thread I can see Im far from the only one who thinks that.

I can't actually believe someone couldn't see that he isnt ready for the Premier League. He looked slow and cumbersome and contributed nothing in the little time he was on the pitch. Granted, he didn't play a lot, but there are reasons for that.

I'd much rather play Archer if we didn't sign another striker but I'd rather we signed a striker than play either of them tbh.

 

 

[alreadyexists]

To be fair to Duran, Archer is two years older than him, something that makes quite a bit of difference at that age. Archer has also had a couple of successful loans, and I think Duran needs a loan, but they’re both at different stages of youth development so it isn’t really fair to compare them. 
I fully expect Duran to be loaned out (which will do him the world of good) and Archer to get senior minutes this season. 

[KevinRichardsonsMoustache]

Archer and Dhuran are v different players but they’ll be fighting for one spot. Archer has that killer instinct but has spent his loan spells working on the physical side of things. Dhuran needs to work on the finishing and actually needs to dial back his physicality (i.e. trying to avoid killing an opposing defender for nicking the ball off him). 
 

There’s an immaturity to Dhuran’s play - a sort of petulance - that worries me. Bit like Wesley. Then I see what he can do physically at such a young age and I imagine him developing into a Benteke-like figure. He’s so young and raw that he could go either way.

[Tomaszk]

1 hour ago, GlobalVillan said:

Well, reading this thread I can see Im far from the only one who thinks that.

I can't actually believe someone couldn't see that he isnt ready for the Premier League. He looked slow and cumbersome and contributed nothing in the little time he was on the pitch. Granted, he didn't play a lot, but there are reasons for that.

I'd much rather play Archer if we didn't sign another striker but I'd rather we signed a striker than play either of them tbh.

You said remotely ready, and I don't think he's too far off being able to be a part of the squad. Probably once he just has a relatively regular progression from 19 year old to 20 year old.

We'll have to disagree again if you think he looked slow. He definitely had his confidence sapped a bit from those first few early appearances when he looked lively.

Every day in training will be an education for the lad.

[Demitri_C]

I am going to assume that both archer and duran will get opportunities in the pre season to impress. Unai will then make the decision to which will get loaned out and which will be kept on

[GlobalVillan]

1 hour ago, Tomaszk said:

You said remotely ready, and I don't think he's too far off being able to be a part of the squad. Probably once he just has a relatively regular progression from 19 year old to 20 year old.

We'll have to disagree again if you think he looked slow. He definitely had his confidence sapped a bit from those first few early appearances when he looked lively.

Every day in training will be an education for the lad.

Looks like we will have to disagree then because one of my main frustrations was hiw much he slowed down the attack when on the break. 

I wouldn't be at all confident of him changing the game if we needed to bring him on to get us a goal.

I still think it was a bizarre signing if I'm honest and nothing as yet has happened to change that. 

But like I said, a loan out for a season or two may make all the difference.

[Tomaszk]

50 minutes ago, GlobalVillan said:

I still think it was a bizarre signing if I'm honest and nothing as yet has happened to change that. 

We can agree there!

Hoping the team have seen something we haven't on the pitch yet. £13m was it? That's not a teeny tiny sum for a shot to nothing. That's nearly double what Brighton paid for Mitoma and Caicedo.

[Villatillidie95]

The BBC reported it as £18 mil at the time iirc, think it was a club signing aswell. It did seem quite strange at the time, I think if he had a bit more game time we would have seen him get a couple of goals, very raw but also looked a bit of a powerhouse who had some pace 

[Tom13]

2 hours ago, Demitri_C said:

I am going to assume that both archer and duran will get opportunities in the pre season to impress. Unai will then make the decision to which will get loaned out and which will be kept on

Backup striker slot?

Only one winner

[mikeyjavfc]

I don't really understand this transfer. We all laughed when Chelsea paid £20m Chukwuemeka but we seem to have paid c. £18m for a player totally unready for the first team.  He is young so he has time on his side but I fail to see how we arrived at £18m for such a raw player, who will probably spend the first 18 months of his contract on loan or not seriously being considered for the first team. He has 6months under his belt now of Emery coaching so hope we can see something from him soon if this is going to work out. This is giving me Fabio Silva vibes, albeit he was double(!) the money of Duran.

[PieFacE]

I think he's looked quite promising in the few cameos he's had. Looking forward to seeing him more in the cups this season. 

[useless]

The people who laughted at Chelsea paying £20m for Chukwuemeka mostly only did so out of bitterness because he left us, many of the same kind of people probably suggesting we buy Alex Scott for a bigger fee and Scott as good as he is isn't as good as Chukwuemeka, £20m for Chukwuemeka was cheap; of course from the point of view that if they'd have waited they could have had him on a free transfer months later then the fee seems over the top, but many top clubs in Europe wanted him, so one of them was always going to buy him before it got to that to stop the others getting him on a free transfer.

If Chelsea were to send if him to Championship next season and if he was to do well, which I've no doubt whatsoever he would, then already he would be worth more than what they paid for him, £20m wouldn't even be enough to buy Iroegbunam or Aaron Ramsey after their good seasons in the Championship, people think we can get twenty million plus for Archer, maybe we can, but that rather makes my point for me, for if you ask most clubs who they would rather have between Chukwuemeka and Archer I bet most would say Chukwuemeka, taking nothing away from Archer, just that Chukwuemeka is a very good player and easily worth the money Chelsea paid for him, and I don't think they actually paid the full £20m was closer to twelve or fifteen, which for them makes it even more of a good deal, if it doesn't work out that fee is nothing to them, if they have to pay the extra then will be more than worth it.

Duran is younger than Chukwuemeka, still very young for a Premier League player, or a player at any level, and has already proven he can score and assist at Major League level which isn't as high a level as the Premier League, but it's still way higher than say U21 football which is the level most players Duran's age are playing at, and has also scored at senior international level, for his age he's ahead of most.

When we signed him all I kept seeing were comments like it's a good signing because it's the kind of signing Brighton would make, and after he's played not even two games worth of football it's suddenly not a good signing or whatever, he hasn't played enough for us yet to be judged.

 

[TRO]

4 minutes ago, useless said:

The people who laughted at Chelsea paying £20m for Chukwuemeka mostly only did so out of bitterness because he left us, many of the same kind of people probably suggesting we buy Alex Scott for a bigger fee and Scott as good as he is isn't as good as Chukwuemeka, £20m for Chukwuemeka was cheap; of course from the point of view that if they'd have waited they could have had him on a free transfer months later then the fee seems over the top, but many top clubs in Europe wanted him, so one of them was always going to buy him before it got to that to stop the others getting him on a free transfer.

If Chelsea were to send if him to Championship next season and if he was to do well, which I've no doubt whatsoever he would, then already he would be worth more than what they paid for him, £20m wouldn't even be enough to buy Iroegbunam or Aaron Ramsey after their good seasons in the Championship, people think we can get twenty million plus for Archer, maybe we can, but that rather makes my point for me, for if you ask most clubs who they would rather have between Chukwuemeka and Archer I bet most would say Chukwuemeka, taking nothing away from Archer, just that Chukwuemeka is a very good player and easily worth the money Chelsea paid for him, and I don't think they actually paid the full £20m was closer to twelve or fifteen, which for them makes it even more of a good deal, if it doesn't work out that fee is nothing to them, if they have to pay the extra then will be more than worth it.

Duran is younger than Chukwuemeka, still very young for a Premier League player, or a player at any level, and has already proven he can score and assist at Major League level which isn't as high a level as the Premier League, but it's still way higher than say U21 football which is the level most players Duran's age are playing at, and has also scored at senior international level, for his age he's ahead of most.

When we signed him all I kept seeing were comments like it's a good signing because it's the kind of signing Brighton would make, and after he's played not even two games worth of football it's suddenly not a good signing or whatever, he hasn't played enough for us yet to be judged.

 

I am not sure, I agree with your view, between Chuk and Cam.......At the end of the day, you have to be effective....and Cam is, I am not sure Chuk is effective to the same degree.

I think Duran, needs to be in the first team squad.....its ok doing your learning on the training ground or lower level football, but at some stage you have to swim, with the sharks....if thats what the job is.

Its like the police on the street, its another world from the traing centre.

I am pleased Jhon Duran is being welcomed back in to the fold, because I believe that is the only way he will learn.

as an example, Ollie and Jacob ar far better players now, imo than when the made their debuts.

[ChicagoVillan1983]

9 hours ago, mikeyjavfc said:

I don't really understand this transfer. We all laughed when Chelsea paid £20m Chukwuemeka but we seem to have paid c. £18m for a player totally unready for the first team.  He is young so he has time on his side but I fail to see how we arrived at £18m for such a raw player, who will probably spend the first 18 months of his contract on loan or not seriously being considered for the first team. He has 6months under his belt now of Emery coaching so hope we can see something from him soon if this is going to work out. This is giving me Fabio Silva vibes, albeit he was double(!) the money of Duran.

You’re not buying the footballer he is now, you’re buying the option that he will turn into an excellent world class footballer in the future.

The idea is that you find enough of these opportunities that you get lucky on one of them. Just because we paid 18 million and he for some reason turned out to be a total dud then it doesn’t mean it was a bad call. Maybe you only get back 9 million for him.

You have to judge transfers like this at a total program level over a substantial period of time. It’s like picking stocks -  not every single one is going to hit and make money. But if you know what you are a doing and buy enough of them at the right prices (and don’t put all your eggs in one basket) then you’ll come out good in the long run… It’s just math.

[mikeyjavfc]

13 minutes ago, ChicagoVillan1983 said:

You’re not buying the footballer he is now, you’re buying the option that he will turn into an excellent world class footballer in the future.

The idea is that you find enough of these opportunities that you get lucky on one of them. Just because we paid 18 million and he for some reason turned out to be a total dud then it doesn’t mean it was a bad call. Maybe you only get back 9 million for him.

You have to judge transfers like this at a total program level over a substantial period of time. It’s like picking stocks -  not every single one is going to hit and make money. But if you know what you are a doing and buy enough of them at the right prices (and don’t put all your eggs in one basket) then you’ll come out good in the long run… It’s just math.

Yeah I understand this was a risk reward type signing but it is just the fee that baffles me I guess. At £18m he must be in the top ~1% or so for transfer fees made for an 18 year old in world football? About the same as what Dortmund paid for Haarland. That’s not a petty cash signing like those lads we seem to pick up from West Brom every window. For those figures I would expect him to be a lot closer to first team than he seems to be, but maybe he will hit the ground running this season and it’ll all make sense. 

[MotoMkali]

37 minutes ago, ChicagoVillan1983 said:

You’re not buying the footballer he is now, you’re buying the option that he will turn into an excellent world class footballer in the future.

The idea is that you find enough of these opportunities that you get lucky on one of them. Just because we paid 18 million and he for some reason turned out to be a total dud then it doesn’t mean it was a bad call. Maybe you only get back 9 million for him.

You have to judge transfers like this at a total program level over a substantial period of time. It’s like picking stocks -  not every single one is going to hit and make money. But if you know what you are a doing and buy enough of them at the right prices (and don’t put all your eggs in one basket) then you’ll come out good in the long run… It’s just math.

He's got all the attributes, he's fast, he's strong, he's big and gets up amazingly. His left foot is am actual rocket. That crossbar strike against city is maybe the best struck ball I've ever seen. He's got good vision. He needs to reduce his one footedness and be more comfortable dribbling the ball especially on the counter and he needs to improve his consistency on his touch and his passes with both feet. But those are all doable. He's got stuff that's you can't teach.