[Archived] Kevin Davies - The Second Coming...?

[nicko]

Just checked on Kiessling...Bayer Leverkusen want around £10 million.

That's the price you have to pay for good, young strikers.

[tcj_jones]

You are wrong. Of course they can!! They did it with Mark Hughes for the best part of two years.

The only difference now is they have a justifiable to say no!

So the dialogue went something like this?

Williams: 'Here, this is your transfer budget for the summer window, spend it how you wish'.

Hughes: 'OK, I want to buy Roque Santa Cruz. Bayern want £3.5m'.

Williams: 'No, he's too injury prone. Next?'.

The board restricted the amount of money he had to spend, but did not dictate who to spend it on. Same with Ince when he paid £4m for Vince Grella. If Allardyce wants to pay £5m that he has already been allocated on Kevin Davies, then the board have to back his decision. If they don't trust his judgement, then they should sack him.

[Guest benmaxwell]

My list:

- Marc Janko (has a superb scoring range - 57 goals in 73 games)

- Darren Bent (still think he would do a better job then Davies and is a hell of a lot younger too)

- Danko Lazović (quality striker who im sure would take the PL by storm)

- Óscar Cardozo (could be expensive but quality - sure would love to play in the PL)

- Hugo Almeida (good pound for pound striker)

- Bafetimbi Gomis (would be my star choice - perfect Big Sam player - seen him play on several occasions and he looks quality - would be perfect foil for Benni)

- Fernando Cavenaghi (Superb scoring record in top flight of French football - Expensive - You have to spend money to make money)

- Nikola Žigić (good scoring record on loan last season - Valencia want rid - Might be a cheaper option then Crouch?)

So the dialogue went something like this?

Williams: 'Here, this is your transfer budget for the summer window, spend it how you wish'.

Hughes: 'OK, I want to buy Roque Santa Cruz. Bayern want £3.5m'.

Williams: 'No, he's too injury prone. Next?'.

The board restricted the amount of money he had to spend, but did not dictate who to spend it on. Same with Ince when he paid £4m for Vince Grella. If Allardyce wants to pay £5m that he has already been allocated on Kevin Davies, then the board have to back his decision. If they don't trust his judgement, then they should sack him.

It's obviously different for different players. Roque was what 25/26 when we signed him, it was only £3.5 million. That is a vast difference between outlaying £6+ million on a striker who probably only has 2-3 years remaining of his career. A career that hasn't exactly been that prolific goalscoring wise..

Hughes and Ince both moaned that they didn't get to spend the money they wish they had been allowed. Now we have the chance to spend some decent money, i really don't want it blown on one player who has a whole stack of negatives to acompany him...

Oh and can i just say thankyou to the person who sent me the highly abusive and personal PM this morning, was a lovely thing to wake up too!

[joey_big_nose]

It has to be likely we have at least enquired about PAVEL POGREBNYAK again right? Problem is he sounds like a bit of a tool... Good player though.

Nicko made a good point about Janko - why doesn't he start for a pretty poor Austrian side?

[herbergeehh]

Davies is number one, we just have to accept that. I hope he can win some people over if it happens, and I think everyone here accepts that Kevin Davies brings something to a team like ours. He doesn't excite you the way Roque Santa Cruz, Craig Bellamy or Benni McCarthy did, but he is a safe investment. We won't get our money back, but he'll contribute as a hard-working striker. It's not what we want from our new forward, because forwards are meant to be the most exciting signings of them all, especially with money in the bank. But from a footballing point of view, he's as safe a signing as they get - he'll always be a strongman up front, and he'll probably always score a few goals too.

edit: sorry, wrong thread

[joey_big_nose]

RADAMEL FALCAO GARCIA [River Plate] - A dream target, but still... 23 years old, linked with every big club in Europe last summer, but things seem to have gone quiet... Playing and scoring for Columbia, would be pricey, but it's about time we invested some proper money in the squad (and not on a 32-year-old "safe option"). CAN YOU NAME ANOTHER PLAYER SIGNED FROM ARGENTINA THAT HAS SETTLED AND BEEN A SUCCESS IN ENGLAND? NOR CAN I. THERE IS A REASON, THE LEAGUE IS TOO QUICK FOR THEM.

Mascerano, Tevez (although they played it Brazil before they signed for West Hame)? Plus why would an Argentinian be less likely to adapt than an Ecuadorian (Valencia?) or a Hoduran (Palacios).

These kind of arguments really make no sense whatsoever.

[Ronin]

As long as Sam gets the best out of Davies, as he did at Bolton this time around at Rovers, and he can ping the goals in then I'll be happy. Although primarily we need to get the midfield sorted so it can feed the strikers, or if we don't, we can bypass the midfield by playing hoofball As long as we're not struggling, like last season, in Sam we trust (hopefully).

[tcj_jones]

It's obviously different for different players. Roque was what 25/26 when we signed him, it was only £3.5 million. That is a vast difference between outlaying £6+ million on a striker who probably only has 2-3 years remaining of his career. A career that hasn't exactly been that prolific goalscoring wise..

True, RSC was a different player bought under different circumstances, but there are a lot of parrallels with Grella, do you not agree?

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. I believe that the board are there to sort the transfer budget, while the manager is brought in to spend it. Sometimes clubs don't always trust the manager's opinion in this respect and bring in a director of football to look for targets. However, this usually results with the manager leaving the club. The board appointed Allardyce and will have to support his decisions. If he wants Kevin Davies for £5m, he will be given the money to do so.

Hughes and Ince both moaned that they didn't get to spend the money they wish they had been allowed. Now we have the chance to spend some decent money, i really don't want it blown on one player who has a whole stack of negatives to acompany him...

Me neither mate. £13m could buy some real quality. Oh, and you know my views on re-sale value and spending big on ageing players.

[RibbleValleyRover]

A move for Davies doesn’t make sense.

We have Roberts who can hold the ball up and put pressure on the opposition backline (probably not as good as Davies at doing that but I don’t think the difference is that huge). If Di Santo comes in he could play the targetman role, looks strong, 6 foot 4 and good in the air. If we were really desperate in a game we could move big Chris up front, he has shown he can make an impact there.

If Davies reverts to previous seasons in terms of goalscoring then who is going to put the ball in the net enough times to make sure we stay up?

Benni- We know he can but if he can’t keep the weight off then Sam will drop him.

Roberts- Workrate great but finishing isn’t the strongest part of his game.

Di Santo (If he comes in)- Huge potential but asking him to come in and be our main goalscorer could be a big ask. He may need time to find his feet.

I’d rather spend the money on a goalscoring striker, preferably with a bit of pace.

A forward line of:

Benni

Roberts

Di Santo

Pacey, goalscoring striker

Looks like better options to me.

[Dunnfc]

Kevin Davies thread on "the wanderer" http://www.the-wanderer.co.uk/boards/viewt...p=469182#469182

Some intresting views on there.

[Kelbo]

A move for Davies doesn’t make sense.

We have Roberts who can hold the ball up and put pressure on the opposition backline (probably not as good as Davies at doing that but I don’t think the difference is that huge). If Di Santo comes in he could play the targetman role, looks strong, 6 foot 4 and good in the air. If we were really desperate in a game we could move big Chris up front, he has shown he can make an impact there.

If Davies reverts to previous seasons in terms of goalscoring then who is going to put the ball in the net enough times to make sure we stay up?

Benni- We know he can but if he can’t keep the weight off then Sam will drop him.

Roberts- Workrate great but finishing isn’t the strongest part of his game.

Di Santo (If he comes in)- Huge potential but asking him to come in and be our main goalscorer could be a big ask. He may need time to find his feet.

I’d rather spend the money on a goalscoring striker, preferably with a bit of pace.

A forward line of:

Benni

Roberts

Di Santo

Pacey, goalscoring striker

Looks like better options to me.

The problem Rovers have is not enough goals come from midfield, if the opposition stop the strikers then we dont score, our goals from midfield are almost non existant.

Sams style would get far more goals from midfield with the right signings, this would also divert the back fours attentions from our strikers and possibly more goals from them too!! Its no coincidence that when Samba was moved up top Pederson scored, Nelsen scored, Andrews scored its because defenders even iif they win the ball, they cant get a clean head on it and it drops for others. Players like Davies take the attention of two defenders and the spare men should capitalise on that,

thats a gameplan and one which has been successful for Wimbledon, Bolton, Man U, the old Arsenal double winning side were the same.

[thenodrog]

Please no. Can we have a petition?

Oh very good Al! We nearly got relegated by petition remember!

Petitions mirror democracy in that individuals of varying intellect all get an equal say. And that is one big flaw.

[LeChuck]

So for a combined cost of transfer money plus wages of £9m-ish, where else are we going to find a centre forward whom we can pretty well be assured can do a top class Premier League job for Rovers over the next two seasons?

I can't think of another club that would willingly pay £9 million for two seasons worth of work without expecting a return on that investment! Even Arsenal and Man Utd wouldn't consider doing that.

[thenodrog]

End of!

Well done! Am I alone in crossing my fingers in hoping that that is indeed your last word on the subject?

[RibbleValleyRover]

The problem Rovers have is not enough goals come from midfield, if the opposition stop the strikers then we dont score, our goals from midfield are almost non existant.

Sams style would get far more goals from midfield with the right signings, this would also divert the back fours attentions from our strikers and possibly more goals from them too!! Its no coincidence that when Samba was moved up top Pederson scored, Nelsen scored, Andrews scored its because defenders even iif they win the ball, they cant get a clean head on it and it drops for others. Players like Davies take the attention of two defenders and the spare men should capitalise on that,

thats a gameplan and one which has been successful for Wimbledon, Bolton, Man U, the old Arsenal double winning side were the same.

I get your point but equally a striker with the ability to run behind or at the opposition defence with pace can cause a lot of trouble, especially if working alongside a targetman. I could see Roberts or Di Santo working well with someone with a bit of pace.

Lets say we have £13 million to spend (according to the Lancashire Telegraph) ideally if we could bring in a pacey striker who can finish a bit, plus an attacking midfielder or box-to-box midfielder then i think we would be a better side and harder to play against.

[ROVERS]

Davies is a disater........... please........ like someone said earlier on, 13 mil is a huge some of money for us to use, and we better use it wisely.

what kinda resale value will davies be after 1 or 2 seasons? is it worth investing in him with almost 1/3 of the transfer money we got? to make it worse if nobody wants him in future and we have to handle his wages. (Liability)

we need to get players that will possibily have a resale value, doesn't matter if that person stays for even only 1 season, at least we make profits to continue shopping next next season. thats our only way to compete. Not bring in the 30s players and splurge big time on them. yes we will be safe next season, but what after next???

i am ok with free transfer of old players, but not spending big on old players.

[spencey7]

Mascerano, Tevez (although they played it Brazil before they signed for West Hame)? Plus why would an Argentinian be less likely to adapt than an Ecuadorian (Valencia?) or a Hoduran (Palacios).

These kind of arguments really make no sense whatsoever.

Agreed.

And to write off the talent in an entire league as "too slow" is a view concieved with all the logic and reason worthy of the BNP.

Nicko - Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Pogrebnyak "didn't want to come in January"? Anything besides hearsay? As I recall that entire frenzy was fabricated by the media.

[nicko]

Can someone tell me the re-sale value of the following:

Okocha? Djorkaeff? Hierro? Campo?

I know they didn't cost a fortune in the first place, but their wages were - at the time - absolutely massive. What were they worth to Bolton in terms of points and experience?

Priceless.

Djorkaeff kept them up first time, Okocha second time, Hierro took them to Europe and Campo was always there.

You can't beat players like that. The frees don't exist like that now, so you have to look at the next best thing.

[nicko]

Nicko - Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Pogrebnyak "didn't want to come in January"? Anything besides hearsay? As I recall that entire frenzy was fabricated by the media.

Rovers went for him, he was due to come in, but he changed his mind...it wasn't my story at the time [i didn't break it, that is] but there was a lot to it.

Wouldn't touch him with a barge pole myself. Pavlyuchenko looked great for Russia but was hopeless for Spurs...Arshavin will catch the eye but also drive you mad. The intensity of their club football is nowhere near the Premier League's.

Does that mean the KGB will be on my case?

It's the same with the SPL...and the SNP.

[Al]

At the end of the day we are a club of limited means and cannot afford £5mil or so of dead money. Others have suggested much younger strikers availible and even if we have to pay more now at least it is either a long term asset or we get money back when he moves on.

Davies, apart from being an unpopular player who's every error would be jumped on by the fans, is short termism in the extreme. Just the sort of thing that has put many businesses into receivership in the past.

I can see from Sam's point of view that if he can get short term success and then move on he will not care what happens to Rovers in 3 years time. Much like Hughes couldn't care less about us now.

JW must not allow Sam's ambitions to prejudice the long term well being of the club.

[Eddie]

That's the point though Nicko, they didn't cost much to bring in. If we signed Owen on relatively high wages I would be all for it. Davies coming in would be on relatively high wages and have a huge fee tagged along as well.

Here's the real question. Which is better:

1) Signing someone at a decent age who is then sold later on for the same amount or for a profit (see Bentley, Santa Cruz, Bellamy or even Anelka if you want to look at Allardyce at Bolton)

2) Signing an older player who when he leaves you are then not in a position financially to replace (see Cole, Okocha, Campo..)

I'm all for signing experienced players who can do a job, but you shouldn't spend a large part of your transfer budget on them, it just doesn't make sense. The best way for a club of our size to operate is to buy players who could be sold for a profit. If we were City, Spurs, Villa or a big four club I would be all for signing anyone who would make us 4 points better, but we just can't work like that on a consistent basis.

At the moment our squad is relatively old, we have plenty of players who are in their "prime" (26-29) and plenty of players in their early 30's, so we are looking at a few years when a lot of players will need to be replaced, why add to that?

We've seen in recent years how difficult it is to replace people like Duff, Bellamy and Bentley, even to replace Neill, why should the club look to spend money knowing that, even at best, it is only a short-term fix.

We are in a relatively rare positiion for this club, we won't have 15ish million to spend next summer, so why use it on buying players who for one don't get the fans even remotely excited and who, secondly, are hugely overpriced and will need to be replaced when we don't have nearly as much money?

If you can explain all of that to me, then you can convert me. Either that or if you can put your hand on your heart and say that adding Davies and Rothen to this squad will push us into the Champions League. Maybe with Davies we finish two places higher, which would be a significant impact for one player to have, but that is just 1.5 million back on the 5-6 million we spent on him. He's not going to excite the fans with his play, so it isn't even adding to the entertainment value at Ewood Park.

As myself and American have pointed out in the past, as well as some others, this club needs to be run in a "Moneyball"-Billy Beane sort of way and signing older players for high fees just isn't the way to go.

[Guest benmaxwell]

Can someone tell me the re-sale value of the following:

Okocha? Djorkaeff? Hierro? Campo?

Okocha, Djorkaeff, Hierro and Campo joined Bolton on a free transfer though, so recouping a fee wasn't as important as recouping a fee over a 32 year old center forward for £6 million. Yes they had huge wages, but it more then makes up for it with the lack of transfer fee. Davies would sign for £6 million and require a wage in the region of £35k's a week...

What about Marouane Chamakh? Good goalscoring record, good age, good quality and wants a move to England...

[daren]

That's not entirely fair on Pavluychenko, Spurs is exactly the worst club (bar possibly Newcastle) for him to end up in. He didn't get a lot of game time, and was thrown into it in a Spurs side that were not playing well. I am convinced that with some time on the pitch he'd score here. He didn't just score for Russia, he scored a fair few in European competitions as well. It's reasonably well known that players from abroad need time to adapt to the different pace in the Premiership, I think he was not given this time.

I thought you'd mentioned that Pogrebnyak didn't come because of our position around Jan? More out of interest than anything!

[gumboots]

Okocha, Djorkaeff, Hierro and Campo joined Bolton on a free transfer though, so recouping a fee wasn't as important as recouping a fee over a 32 year old center forward for £6 million. Yes they had huge wages, but it more then makes up for it with the lack of transfer fee. Davies would sign for £6 million and require a wage in the region of £35k's a week...

What about Marouane Chamakh? Good goalscoring record, good age, good quality and wants a move to England...

And Arsenal have been most recently linked fee 10 million

[ROVERS]

That's the point though Nicko, they didn't cost much to bring in. If we signed Owen on relatively high wages I would be all for it. Davies coming in would be on relatively high wages and have a huge fee tagged along as well.

Here's the real question. Which is better:

1) Signing someone at a decent age who is then sold later on for the same amount or for a profit (see Bentley, Santa Cruz, Bellamy or even Anelka if you want to look at Allardyce at Bolton)

2) Signing an older player who when he leaves you are then not in a position financially to replace (see Cole, Okocha, Campo..)

I'm all for signing experienced players who can do a job, but you shouldn't spend a large part of your transfer budget on them, it just doesn't make sense. The best way for a club of our size to operate is to buy players who could be sold for a profit. If we were City, Spurs, Villa or a big four club I would be all for signing anyone who would make us 4 points better, but we just can't work like that on a consistent basis.

At the moment our squad is relatively old, we have plenty of players who are in their "prime" (26-29) and plenty of players in their early 30's, so we are looking at a few years when a lot of players will need to be replaced, why add to that?

We've seen in recent years how difficult it is to replace people like Duff, Bellamy and Bentley, even to replace Neill, why should the club look to spend money knowing that, even at best, it is only a short-term fix.

We are in a relatively rare positiion for this club, we won't have 15ish million to spend next summer, so why use it on buying players who for one don't get the fans even remotely excited and who, secondly, are hugely overpriced and will need to be replaced when we don't have nearly as much money?

If you can explain all of that to me, then you can convert me. Either that or if you can put your hand on your heart and say that adding Davies and Rothen to this squad will push us into the Champions League. Maybe with Davies we finish two places higher, which would be a significant impact for one player to have, but that is just 1.5 million back on the 5-6 million we spent on him. He's not going to excite the fans with his play, so it isn't even adding to the entertainment value at Ewood Park.

As myself and American have pointed out in the past, as well as some others, this club needs to be run in a "Moneyball"-Billy Beane sort of way and signing older players for high fees just isn't the way to go.

I agree BIG TIME! but i guess we will still sign davies in the end if he is top of SAM list, and being top of SAM list means he may be even more then 5 mil........ i am so devastated! MR X is good Mr Y is Damn bad............ nice balance of excitment and sadness