Jump to content

Demba Ba


Demitri_C

Recommended Posts

So a guess, followed by Dougenomics, then another guess and then a conclusion.

To be honest I think the assumption on his salary and that he is likely to be unable to maintain his form for the entire four years and then that we would look to replace him before the end of his contract are pretty reasonable ones to make.

 

But ,  just to play along with me,  if you ,  for arguments sake,  take my assumptions on that basis do you think it would be a good deal or a rubbish deal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just not that simple - there is of course a definite figure of 'how much money we have overall' but do you honestly think that there aren't budgets for wages and budgets for transfer fees? Do you honestly believe that if we receive 18mil plus Ba, Lerner will say 'sorry Paul, he'll cost us 14.5mil over the next four years so you can only have what's left over'?

 

I'm not saying we should sign Ba, for the record, I'm saying that if Lambert wants him then he should get him in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Richard quite clearly said he was guessing the wages, a reasonable guess as well given the fact he is a first team player at Chelsea. The rest is basic maths based on that assumption and the transfer fee mooted in the article, you yourself have mentioned the same fee.

 

It is nothing to do with Dougenomics (although I like term) and everything to do with supporting his original opinion with logical reasoning.

 

That's not really how it works though - there are transfer budgets and there are wage budgets. Just because we would be paying that much off across four years doesn't mean that our present transfer budget would be affected as a result. 

 

I'm afraid your outline there is probably one of the reasons we got into the mess we did.

 

The way i have outlined it is exactly how it works,  or should work,  if you want to be able to run a "sustainable model"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Now who is guessing? :) I'm inclined to agree there are two budgets but you don't know that any more than Richard knows the figures he admitted he was guessing and you jumped on him for it. I'm inclined to agree there are two different budgets but ultimately they come from the same pot and I think it is reasonable to think both work together, you spend over budget on one and it reduces the other.

 

It is abundantly clear we are working to a relatively small budget in terms of both these days so an outlay of circa £14m on a 28 year old seems extremely unlikely and not particularly smart business to me.

 

 

I don't dispute that overspending on one will impact the other, that's obvious, but I simply don't think that Lerner would tell Lambert he can only spend 3.5m of the 18m because 14.5m is being spent on Ba over 4 years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I think everyone pretty much

 

I'm not saying we should sign Ba, for the record, I'm saying that if Lambert wants him then he should get him in.

 

And I think most would agree with that, we all want the manager to be able to sign the players we want him to sign.

 

It doesn't though mean we will all think they are the players we should sign.

 

Further, when it is idle speculation like this it doesn't mean every needs to assume that Lambert would want to sign him when, there are quite plausible reasons to think he wouldn't such as those laid out by Richard.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So a guess, followed by Dougenomics, then another guess and then a conclusion.

To be honest I think the assumption on his salary and that he is likely to be unable to maintain his form for the entire four years and then that we would look to replace him before the end of his contract are pretty reasonable ones to make.

 

But ,  just to play along with me,  if you ,  for arguments sake,  take my assumptions on that basis do you think it would be a good deal or a rubbish deal?

 

 

Your assumptions are that he'll be expensive and shit, so of course on that proviso it would look like a rubbish deal. 

 

Ba is not a bad player at all though - he's just under 1 in 2 in the Premier League.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Now who is guessing? :) I'm inclined to agree there are two budgets but you don't know that any more than Richard knows the figures he admitted he was guessing and you jumped on him for it. I'm inclined to agree there are two different budgets but ultimately they come from the same pot and I think it is reasonable to think both work together, you spend over budget on one and it reduces the other.

 

It is abundantly clear we are working to a relatively small budget in terms of both these days so an outlay of circa £14m on a 28 year old seems extremely unlikely and not particularly smart business to me.

 

 

I don't dispute that overspending on one will impact the other, that's obvious, but I simply don't think that Lerner would tell Lambert he can only spend 3.5m of the 18m because 14.5m is being spent on Ba over 4 years. 

 

 

Neither did Richard, he was talking about a £7m fee.

 

Anyway, it is highly unlikely that Lambert will get to spend the whole fee received for Benteke on new signings so in a sense I think Richard will be proven right. And no, I know we don't know that yet but I've reason to believe it will be the case, we will though have to wait and see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Demba Ba > Benteke at the moment. Maybe not in a years time, but Ba is still a top drawer player. The problem is his wages NOT his ability.

6 goals in 22 games and only 2 in 14 premier league starts at Chelsea would suggest otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Demba Ba > Benteke at the moment. Maybe not in a years time, but Ba is still a top drawer player. The problem is his wages NOT his ability.

6 goals in 22 games and only 2 in 14 premier league starts at Chelsea would suggest otherwise.

 

 

Or 42 in 93 since he's been in England... not exactly bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Neither did Richard, he was talking about a £7m fee.

 

Anyway, it is highly unlikely that Lambert will get to spend the whole fee received for Benteke on new signings so in a sense I think Richard will be proven right. And no, I know we don't know that yet but I've reason to believe it will be the case, we will though have to wait and see.

 

 

He said - '14.5M we have just signed up for and committed right there our of the 18M you have made on Benteke.  So feck all to then spend anywhere else'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone thinking we would sign this player hasn't been paying attention !!!

Doesn't fit any of PL's criteria.

FWIW I agree that Ba doesn't really fit the current mould of player that PL has been signing.

 

What do you think PL's criteria actually is? I see that term used a lot. I guess if I had to have a guess, I'd say young, hungry and unknown haha. What do you mean though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the loosest term you can use for Lambert's criteria is 'value for money' in the broad sense of initial cost, wage, potential re-sale. More often that not, that equates to 'buy young, cheap but promising'. It doesn't always though. As we saw with Vlaar and El Ahmadi. Older and at the time very necessary.

Ba is the exact opposite of PL's ethos.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...
Â