Sheaf (1 Viewer)

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

How many of those actually “held us back” Adaramola was out the door before he could! The aim of a good transfer policy is to make more than you spend while the team improves. You can’t argue that that’s not happened. If we’re making money and the team is improving, in what was were transfers holding us back?

If a player is shit, and we have a certain budget, surely that player who is shit is taking the wages and space of one that could have a positive impact? Do you agree with that? Given that this scout has ended up with a pretty lacklustre career since leaving us, I would say that it is a pretty fair viewpoint to say that signing a few stars worth some money isn't conducive to the full picture of what it takes to being a good scout.

 

---

[andrew.roberts]

I think replacing Sheaf will be more difficult than we think. Without being spectacular, for me he's the glue that holds the side together and we've looked like a completely different team when he's not been in it.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Strongly disagree. Vik in particular wasn’t a technically strong player, Sheaf oozes class, you can see he’s been trained at a high level. Vik and Gus were all action and had some outstanding traits, but technically I’d agree Sheaf is better. That doesn’t necessarily mean a “better player”, but I’d argue most suited to higher level football.

Given that the fee Sheffield United are asking for Hamer, and given that it is very similar to what we are allegedly asking for in order to let Sheaf go, which one would you choose if you were a buying club? I can't believe for one minute anyone would not take Hamer as first choice.

 

[torchomatic]

I will be very sad to see Sheaf go but if we get a proper price for him and spend it well on 3/4 really good Championship level players it could turn out to be good for us.

My thoughts exactly. We could get at least three good quality championship players for that kind of dosh. I'll be a little bit disappointed if we don't sell him. Speculate to accumulate and all that.

 

[shmmeee]

Given that the fee Sheffield United are asking for Hamer, and given that it is very similar to what we are allegedly asking for in order to let Sheaf go, which one would you choose if you were a buying club? I can't believe for one minute anyone would not take Hamer as first choice.

Different players. So it would depend what my team needs.

 

[PVA]

Every club signs a few duds of course, but we have had a lot. We have traditionally been operating a very tight ship, so in order to be good at your job, you need to be a strong all rounder and recruit within pretty fine margins for the entire squad. Not just a few top players. We struggled to do that with Badlan, and that was obvious for anyone paying attention at the time. The fact he is now at Aberdeen having been sacked from Blackpool isn't a surprise to me personally, and whilst we did get some decent players when he was here, like I said, there was a ton of shit which held us back.

Bakayoko
Kastaneer
Charlie Wakefield
Allassani
Junior Brown
Morgan Williams
David Meyler
Jobello
Hillsner
Da Costa
Adaramola

I could go on but you get the point.

I’m not sure the signings of the likes of Williams, Alessani, Wakefield etc ‘held us back’. They were young players we took a punt on when we didn’t have a pot to piss in.

And even when you ignore the obvious ones of Hamer, Gyokeres, Sheaf etc, there’s still a long list of signings that were crucial to our success:


Godden
Fadz
Walsh
Rose
Ostigard
Dabo
Bidwell
Maatsen
Callum Doyle

…to name a few.


We signed 62 players during his time at the club. Of course there’s some shit in there, we were shopping in the bargain bin of the outlet store for a big chunk of it.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

I think replacing Sheaf will be more difficult than we think. Without being spectacular, for me he's the glue that holds the side together and we've looked like a completely different team when he's not been in it.

That's a bit of a myth really.

Sheaf has played 28 full games (three others he made a 12, 32, and 42 minute cameo respectively).

28 games with Sheaf: 34 points = 1.214 (points per game)

18 games without Sheaf: 30 points = 1.666 (points per game)

Form is an indicator as well, and in the 8 games he played since coming back from injury, we claimed only 6 points. Of course that was our playoff hopes down the toilet. We also went on a four game losing streak directly after he came back from his injury in October too. I'm not for a minute saying there's only one denominator, there's obviously a multitude of reasons outside of this as well. I just cannot get on board with the argument we're lost without him. The stats say very much otherwise. If someone wants to pay us a lot of money then I personally think we should take it and reinvest. If some of the figures talked about are accurate, then we could do some serious damage in the transfer market with that.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

I’m not sure the signings of the likes of Williams, Alessani, Wakefield etc ‘held us back’. They were young players we took a punt on when we didn’t have a pot to piss in.

And even when you ignore the obvious ones of Hamer, Gyokeres, Sheaf etc, there’s still a long list of signings that were crucial to our success:


Godden
Fadz
Walsh
Rose
Ostigard
Dabo
Bidwell
Maatsen
Callum Doyle

…to name a few.


We signed 62 players during his time at the club. Of course there’s some shit in there, we were shopping in the bargain bin of the outlet store for a big chunk of it.

I agree he signed some good players. I've already covered this. He also signed a lot of shit. Bargain bin or not, that's your job. You're recruiting for a whole squad, not just a couple of superstars. His career trajectory says a lot at this current moment in time.

 

[Deleted member 9744]

Strongly disagree. Vik in particular wasn’t a technically strong player, Sheaf oozes class, you can see he’s been trained at a high level. Vik and Gus were all action and had some outstanding traits, but technically I’d agree Sheaf is better. That doesn’t necessarily mean a “better player”, but I’d argue most suited to higher level football.

I can’t believe anyone could possibly believe that Sheaf is better technically than Gyokeres or Hamer. Gyokeres was outstanding technically and skillwise. His control and ability to go past players far exceeds Sheaf before we even start talking about pace and goalscoring. Hamer had better tackling, ball control, passing and shooting. Sheaf is also lacking in pace, which the other two aren't and his shooting is poor.

Don't get me wrong, Sheaf is good but he's nowhere near those two. He might make it in the PL but his lack of speed might be exposed.

 

[Ccfcisparks]

That's a bit of a myth really.

Sheaf has played 28 full games (three others he made a 12, 32, and 42 minute cameo respectively).

28 games with Sheaf: 34 points = 1.214 (points per game)

18 games without Sheaf: 30 points = 1.666 (points per game)

Form is an indicator as well, and in the 8 games he played since coming back from injury, we claimed only 6 points. Of course that was our playoff hopes down the toilet. We also went on a four game losing streak directly after he came back from his injury in October too. I'm not for a minute saying there's only one denominator, there's obviously a multitude of reasons outside of this as well. I just cannot get on board with the argument we're lost without him. The stats say very much otherwise. If someone wants to pay us a lot of money then I personally think we should take it and reinvest. If some of the figures talked about are accurate, then we could do some serious damage in the transfer market with that.

You don't point out that in the 18 games without sheaf, we only played 6 games against teams in the top half at the end of the season, and none of the top 4.

Also in those 6 games against top half teams without Sheaf we won none of them.

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

You don't point out that in the 18 games without sheaf, we only played 6 games against teams in the top half at the end of the season, and none of the top 4.

Also in those 6 games against top half teams without Sheaf we won none of them.

Stats are dangerous
His fellow professionals voted him player of the season
If West Ham pay £20m they agree

 

[Ccfcisparks]

Stats are dangerous
His fellow professionals voted him player of the season
If West Ham pay £20m they agree

they can be skewed anyway to suit a view or opinion

 

[SkyBlueMatt]

You don't point out that in the 18 games without sheaf, we only played 6 games against teams in the top half at the end of the season, and none of the top 4.

Also in those 6 games against top half teams without Sheaf we won none of them.

The teams we beat when Sheaf wasn't in the squad were:

QPR (22nd)
Blackburn (20th)
Sheff Wed (23rd)
Millwall (18th)
Stoke(19th)
Rotherham (24th)

 

[Old Warwickshire lad]

Stats are dangerous
His fellow professionals voted him player of the season
If West Ham pay £20m they

But Pete,don’t you know.Stats are the only thing that matter.
Only dinosaurs still watch how players perform.

 

[SkyBlueMatt]

Godden also has a better PPG ratio than Wright & Simms.

Sign him up!

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

But Pete,don’t you know.Stats are the only thing that matter.
Only dinosaurs still watch how players perform.

They are key metrics as moneyball and Brighton as well as a whole host of other documents could point to
If someone could bottle what managers like Ferguson and robins and absolutely McKenna do in moulding a team I think we’d reallly hit the jackpot

so stats are dead important and some much more so than others but there’s so much more in judging a players value and skill

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Not the point, but ok.

Well it is, he had a good hit rate.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

You don't point out that in the 18 games without sheaf, we only played 6 games against teams in the top half at the end of the season, and none of the top 4.

Also in those 6 games against top half teams without Sheaf we won none of them.

I've just posted the facts as they are, you guys can do whatever you want to interpret them or soothe yourselves.

 

[Ccfcisparks]

I've just posted the facts as they are, you guys can do whatever you want to interpret them or soothe yourselves.

So you don’t think the quality of opponent is a valuable metric for the stats you posted?

 

[Flying Fokker]

The club has a 5 year plan and in the next 5 seasons, the expectation is to make the playoffs 3 of those seasons. We were in the playoff race more or less till the end. Objectively, it was a success because we met expectations.

There’s a worrying trend of how teams who lose the playoff final specifically can spiral. When you have a turnover of 17 players in one window as well as losing your two best players, this season could’ve ended in disaster to be frank.

Going into next season, Top 6 becomes an expectation and failure to meet that we can say the season is a failure.

We’re 1 year into the 4 Edit:5 year plan. So Play-offs is a priority.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

So you don’t think the quality of opponent is a valuable metric for the stats you posted?

Where did I say that it isn't? Again, we are inventing things.

Of course it is a valuable metric, but not a big enough one to completely invalidate the stats, or even come close, which will be the next step by the denial brigade once we're done trying to put words in my mouth. You can talk about injuries to other players, the wind measured in knots on particular match days, or the interfering road closures before kick of on the A444 if you want. I honestly don't care. The facts are there, swallow them however you want to.

 

[Deleted member 9744]

The club has a 5 year plan and in the next 5 seasons, the expectation is to make the playoffs 3 of those seasons. We were in the playoff race more or less till the end. Objectively, it was a success because we met expectations.

There’s a worrying trend of how teams who lose the playoff final specifically can spiral. When you have a turnover of 17 players in one window as well as losing your two best players, this season could’ve ended in disaster to be frank.

Going into next season, Top 6 becomes an expectation and failure to meet that we can say the season is a failure.

I never understand why people say things are objective when they are clearly subjective. Whether or not the season was a success is a subjective view and depends what your measurements are.

For me the key is league position and whether we have finished higher than the season before, as we had done in all other Robins' seasons since he returned. You judge it on whether it's still possible to meet the five year plan. Fair enough but that's not everyone's judgement.

 

[Offhegoes]

Just a sign of modern football. Players will always try to look for more money (as we all do) or higher divisions to play in.
Had we gone up, we might of kept O'Hare, and this Sheaf talk wouldn't of even started.
Sheaf though, fair enough. Cracking player who can control that midfield and I can see him being a solid Premier League player.
If we get anything over 12m then a job well done. He's developed well here, and getting close to the peak of his career.
I think we all know that if through his sale the squad is improved with players like Sakamoto, Thomas, MVE & Wright then we'll be in a better place for the promotion push next season.

 

[covboy9]

If ten mill is on table for sheaf I’d take it in a flash he’s never gonna be worth more

good player but replaceable

 

[Balli001]

If ten mill is on table for sheaf I’d take it in a flash he’s never gonna be worth more

good player but replaceable

Good job our chairman doesnt share your opinion then

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

If ten mill is on table for sheaf I’d take it in a flash he’s never gonna be worth more

good player but replaceable

We’ve turned down more by all accounts

 

[Grendel]

Where did I say that it isn't? Again, we are inventing things.

Of course it is a valuable metric, but not a big enough one to completely invalidate the stats, or even come close, which will be the next step by the denial brigade once we're done trying to put words in my mouth. You can talk about injuries to other players, the wind measured in knots on particular match days, or the interfering road closures before kick of on the A444 if you want. I honestly don't care. The facts are there, swallow them however you want to.

The debate will end I guess when we see where he ends up and what clubs are prepared to pay.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

Don't bother debating him. All his opinions seem to be based on the false premise we can just go out and sign guaranteed championship quality players for 1-2m a pop.

I never said all our quality signings would be 1-2 mil a pop, obviously quality doesn’t come cheap and I’ve been an advocate of us spending £15 mil+ on 3-4 decent players rather than relying on players that clearly aren’t good enough.

I also don’t see how you can say you shouldn’t have a debate with me when you came up with some strange stats the other day about how we shouldn’t buy a keeper unless they’re either over £5 mil or were from a league 1 team or weren’t born on month with a letter R in it. Perhaps I’m not being logical in your eyes but I really don’t see many others disagreeing that a quality keeper is essential and spending at least £15 mil this season is needed if we’re to make it into the prem next season.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

Strongly disagree. Vik in particular wasn’t a technically strong player, Sheaf oozes class, you can see he’s been trained at a high level. Vik and Gus were all action and had some outstanding traits, but technically I’d agree Sheaf is better. That doesn’t necessarily mean a “better player”, but I’d argue most suited to higher level football.

I definitely agree with you about Sheaf being a more technical player, he wouldn’t be easy to replace, but in terms of having an impact on games I think Hamer and Gyokeres were massively more impactful. I think Sheaf is only really good at stopping the opposition (which is clearly important) but I feel that Hamer in particular was good at almost everything, getting the ball, passing, assists, shooting, Hamer has been a massive miss to us has been much harder to replace than Sheaf will be (although I still think it won’t be easy to replace him).

 

[skybluecam]

I never said all our quality signings would be 1-2 mil a pop, obviously quality doesn’t come cheap and I’ve been an advocate of us spending £15 mil+ on 3-4 decent players rather than relying on players that clearly aren’t good enough.

I also don’t see how you can say you shouldn’t have a debate with me when you came up with some strange stats the other day about how we shouldn’t buy a keeper unless they’re either over £5 mil or were from a league 1 team or weren’t born on month with a letter R in it. Perhaps I’m not being logical in your eyes but I really don’t see many others disagreeing that a quality keeper is essential and spending at least £15 mil this season is needed if we’re to make it into the prem next season.

Already explained that my point was in response to you saying we should spend 1-2m on someone not from league one.

Depends what you mean by quality. Ipswich have gone up and Hladky has had a similar season to Collins.

The majority of your comments are just overly simplistic.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

The club has a 5 year plan and in the next 5 seasons, the expectation is to make the playoffs 3 of those seasons. We were in the playoff race more or less till the end. Objectively, it was a success because we met expectations.

There’s a worrying trend of how teams who lose the playoff final specifically can spiral. When you have a turnover of 17 players in one window as well as losing your two best players, this season could’ve ended in disaster to be frank.

Going into next season, Top 6 becomes an expectation and failure to meet that we can say the season is a failure.

I don’t massively disagree with you tbf but I would say that if our objective was to make top 6 and we didn’t then the season hasn’t been a “success”.

I think we’ve done fine this season, not awful at all, and it was a tricky season with the likes of Leicester, Leeds, Southampton, Ipswich etc all playing well, however I think we need to start whacking down some cash AND not sell our best players if we want to get into the prem. We spent a lot of money this season but we lost 2 amazing players so I’m not sure if we progressed as much as people think? We just need a better starting line up (no Godden, no Eccles, no Dasilva, no Allen, no Collins etc) and way more depth, that’s the long and short of it for me anyway.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

Already explained that my point was in response to you saying we should spend 1-2m on someone not from league one.

Depends what you mean by quality. Ipswich have gone up and Hladky has had a similar season to Collins.

The majority of your comments are just overly simplistic.

Maybe my comments are simplistic but I sort of view our aims as simplistic tbh. Yes the process isn’t simplistic but the type of players we need and the money we should be spending (in my view anyway) is simplistic.

I don’t think there’s much need for stats of where a player should come from or how much we should spend based on championship precedence, we just need good players and if it costs £20 mil then try and sell Sheaf and if not then King should be looking to add to the £6-7 mil profit he made this season. We all pay good money to see our team play, especially with the attendances we get we deserve to see some quality and become a team that others are properly afraid of playing.

(Btw I don’t have any beef with you, I think we just view transfers in a different way and that’s fine.)

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Maybe my comments are simplistic but I sort of view our aims as simplistic tbh. Yes the process isn’t simplistic but the type of players we need and the money we should be spending (in my view anyway) is simplistic.

I don’t think there’s much need for stats of where a player should come from or how much we should spend based on championship precedence, we just need good players and if it costs £20 mil then try and sell Sheaf and if not then King should be looking to add to the £6-7 mil profit he made this season. We all pay good money to see our team play, especially with the attendances we get we deserve to see some quality and become a team that others are properly afraid of playing.

How do you think ‘good players’ are identified?

 

[skybluecam]

Maybe my comments are simplistic but I sort of view our aims as simplistic tbh. Yes the process isn’t simplistic but the type of players we need and the money we should be spending (in my view anyway) is simplistic.

I don’t think there’s much need for stats of where a player should come from or how much we should spend based on championship precedence, we just need good players and if it costs £20 mil then try and sell Sheaf and if not then King should be looking to add to the £6-7 mil profit he made this season. We all pay good money to see our team play, especially with the attendances we get we deserve to see some quality and become a team that others are properly afraid of playing.

I mean this comment sums it up really. "We just need good players" is actually hilarious.

Also, King hasn't made £7m profit at all.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

How do you think ‘good players’ are identified?

I’m not the bloke who does the identifying, I’m just a fan who wants to see his team perform to a high standard every week and become accustomed to the shite we’ve seen over the first 15-ish games and the last 5-6 games of the season. I feel like I’m in an interview for a job at the CBS arena atm, please stop