Dan James

[CHAPELALLMAN]

Would you have sold Bamford after we'd just 9th and he'd just scored 16 PL goals though ?

Big decision to offload at that point with no other striker available to us.

Also we could have probably sold Meslier and Harrison at that point, plus what about Alioski who left on a free so where does it stop ?

Bamford had already had major injury problems from the moment he joined us. Remember that clip of Bielsa running over and hugging him when it looked as though he might actually be fit enough to play again ? Plus that lean spell of 10 games or so without a goal in the championship, which resulted in the club panicking and signing JKA, with everything that ensued from that decision....

Yes, he had that one good season in the PL, however we were gambling to believe that it would continue into the following season. He had already been injury prone, and clearly went through long goal droughts even in the championship. At the very least, they should have given him just a 2 year contract - not 5 years. A 5 year contract on such high wages was pure gambling.

Harrison - it was really obvious that we should have taken the £25m offered at the time. He often tended to frustrate.

[Musicman1965]

How quickly things can change in football. Dan has had a poor season plagued by injury and the promise of playing in Prem alongside his team mates has been a nightmare. Now the doubt for the Villa game. Just a season to forget really.

[The Subhuman]

Never look backwards

Sounds like shocking advice in most things

[Cjay]

Would you have sold Bamford after we'd just 9th and he'd just scored 16 PL goals though ?

Big decision to offload at that point with no other striker available to us.

Also we could have probably sold Meslier and Harrison at that point, plus what about Alioski who left on a free so where does it stop ?

That's part of a well run club though, knowing when to sell.

Harrison and Meslier could both have been sold for £20mil each according to Kinnear.

Now we probably get £5mil the pair.

It's an area we need to improve on imo.

If someone offered £30mil for DCL in the summer for example would selling make sense? On the one hand he's probably our top scorer, on the other he's 29 with an inconsistent at best career and long injury history so would selling make sense? Peak value.

Likewise someone like Dan James, was giving him a new expensive contract the right call or should we have tried to get a good offer for him in the summer?

Knowing when to sell is a skill in itself.

[weasel]

That's part of a well run club though, knowing when to sell.

Harrison and Meslier could both have been sold for £20mil each according to Kinnear.

Now we probably get £5mil the pair.

It's an area we need to improve on imo.

If someone offered £30mil for DCL in the summer for example would selling make sense? On the one hand he's probably our top scorer, on the other he's 29 with an inconsistent at best career and long injury history so would selling make sense? Peak value.

Likewise someone like Dan James, was giving him a new expensive contract the right call or should we have tried to get a good offer for him in the summer?

Knowing when to sell is a skill in itself.

It is but like others have mentioned a lot depends on how stable the club is and if they already have the replacements at the club or about to sign. Brentford seem good at doing this, they know that players will leave but have the replacement ready.

A good example of us not being prepared is when we sold KP. We sold him at probably his max value in terms of where his career was at. Yes maybe we could have got a few million but we sold him at the right time. However we had a scattergun replacement strategy.

[Jammy 07]

That's part of a well run club though, knowing when to sell.

Harrison and Meslier could both have been sold for £20mil each according to Kinnear.

Now we probably get £5mil the pair.

It's an area we need to improve on imo.

If someone offered £30mil for DCL in the summer for example would selling make sense? On the one hand he's probably our top scorer, on the other he's 29 with an inconsistent at best career and long injury history so would selling make sense? Peak value.

Likewise someone like Dan James, was giving him a new expensive contract the right call or should we have tried to get a good offer for him in the summer?

Knowing when to sell is a skill in itself.

Maybe you should answer your own question regarding DCL first ?

Regarding Meslier there was little reason to suspect such a hot young prospects value would decline after a decent enough first season in the PL. Maybe better management by taking him out of the firing line earlier would happen helped both him and his value. Farke then worked wonders with him before the same problem occurred again.

So always very difficult to know when is the absolute right time to cash in.

[Jammy 07]

My own thoughts regarding DCL is he will have a buy out clause in the region of £20M and that will be regardless of which division we’re in.

He did sign on a free after all.

So for £20M this summer then no I’d definitely rather keep him.

[Cjay]

It is but like others have mentioned a lot depends on how stable the club is and if they already have the replacements at the club or about to sign. Brentford seem good at doing this, they know that players will leave but have the replacement ready.

A good example of us not being prepared is when we sold KP. We sold him at probably his max value in terms of where his career was at. Yes maybe we could have got a few million but we sold him at the right time. However we had a scattergun replacement strategy.

That's true and it probably goes together.

As you say having the replacement lined up or already signed puts you in a very good position and minimises disruption.

It's not easy hence why very few clubs do it effectively.

But short of a sugar daddy owner which we haven't got it's probably something we need to get very good at.

[Cjay]

Maybe you should answer your own question regarding DCL first ?

Regarding Meslier there was little reason to suspect such a hot young prospects value would decline after a decent enough first season in the PL. Maybe better management by taking him out of the firing line earlier would happen helped both him and his value. Farke then worked wonders with him before the same problem occurred again.

So always very difficult to know when is the absolute right time to cash in.

Regarding DCL then yeah I'd say it is sensible otherwise you run the risk his fitness issues come back or his form drops and consequently his value.

And you end up in a similar situation to Paddy where you have now 30+ year old striker on £100k a week unable to provide much.

If we are able to bring in £20-30mil for him in the summer I think that's good business.

I'd say similar with Nmecha for similar reasons.

You could probably bring in £40-50mil for them of pure psr profit.

True on Meslier and it isn't easy but it's something teams like Brighton and Brentford have shown can be very effective.

I feel sorry for Mes in a way, I don't think our goalkeeping coaches have been great and I think he was left in the firing line far too long by multiple coaches from Bielsa to Farke.

His confidence was destroyed.

Shame really.

But seeing these things before they happen is again part of what we need to get better at.

[weasel]

Regarding DCL then yeah I'd say it is sensible otherwise you run the risk his fitness issues come back or his form drops and consequently his value.

And you end up in a similar situation to Paddy where you have now 30+ year old striker on £100k a week unable to provide much.

If we are able to bring in £20-30mil for him in the summer I think that's good business.

I'd say similar with Nmecha for similar reasons.

You could probably bring in £40-50mil for them of pure psr profit.

True on Meslier and it isn't easy but it's something teams like Brighton and Brentford have shown can be very effective.

I feel sorry for Mes in a way, I don't think our goalkeeping coaches have been great and I think he was left in the firing line far too long by multiple coaches from Bielsa to Farke.

His confidence was destroyed.

Shame really.

But seeing these things before they happen is again part of what we need to get better at.

I do feel with Messlier that managers were probably told to play him so as to keep his value up. Probably not Bielsa because he was strongwilled but think it was likely only Sam Allardyce who said, 'Listen you f*cking clowns (Orta et al) keep him in and Leeds are definitely going down.' The club knew that by us dropping him it was reducing his value and not what the 'model' was.

I think that continued with Farke, basically the club wanted Messleir to keep playing. Likely though got to the point where Farke and the club agreed that Messlier could cost us promotion and we had to see the bigger picture.

People saying to sell Bamford cos of his fitness injuries after the first prem season seem to have selective memory. At that point Bamford had been mainly injury free for 2 full seasons and had gone from a reasonable season to a very good season in terms of scoring. So he was injury free and had been improving. As such signing him to a longer contract (I think he only had a year left) was a bit of a coup for us and made a lot of sense. If he'd have another good season we could have sold him for a fortune, it wasn't to be though but there was no reason to suggest that a player who had missed just a handful of games in 2 seasons would become injury prone.

[CHAPELALLMAN]

I do feel with Messlier that managers were probably told to play him so as to keep his value up. Probably not Bielsa because he was strongwilled but think it was likely only Sam Allardyce who said, 'Listen you f*cking clowns (Orta et al) keep him in and Leeds are definitely going down.' The club knew that by us dropping him it was reducing his value and not what the 'model' was.

I think that continued with Farke, basically the club wanted Messleir to keep playing. Likely though got to the point where Farke and the club agreed that Messlier could cost us promotion and we had to see the bigger picture.

People saying to sell Bamford cos of his fitness injuries after the first prem season seem to have selective memory. At that point Bamford had been mainly injury free for 2 full seasons and had gone from a reasonable season to a very good season in terms of scoring. So he was injury free and had been improving. As such signing him to a longer contract (I think he only had a year left) was a bit of a coup for us and made a lot of sense. If he'd have another good season we could have sold him for a fortune, it wasn't to be though but there was no reason to suggest that a player who had missed just a handful of games in 2 seasons would become injury prone.

Such a reasonable season in the championship that the club felt compelled to risk signing JKA in case we missed out on promotion....? And that was in a free scoring Bielsa side.

And his good PL season was achieved without the pressure of playing in front of crowds during the covid period - that's not by chance, as his issue as "barndoor Bamford " was always having adequate composure to be a really top striker....

And the longer a historically injury prone player goes without incurring further long term injuries, the more the odds stack against you. We didn't play the odds well through giving him a 5 year contract.

[weasel]

Such a reasonable season in the championship that the club felt compelled to risk signing JKA in case we missed out on promotion....? And that was in a free scoring Bielsa side.

And his good PL season was achieved without the pressure of playing in front of crowds during the covid period - that's not by chance, as his issue as "barndoor Bamford " was always having adequate composure to be a really top striker....

And the longer a historically injury prone player goes without incurring further long term injuries, the more the odds stack against you. We didn't play the odds well through giving him a 5 year contract.

Bear in mind Bielsa kept Bamford in the side rather than playing Nketiah which is why Arsenal recalled him. As such the JKA signing was because we needed another striker to challenge Bamford and be there in case Bamford got injured.

So fast forward and Bamford has had an injury free championship season in a high octane Bielsa side (I think he missed one match). He then has a much better scoring season in the prem. The talk was that he found it easier in the prem as he had more space and we weren't facing sides playing the low block. Conisdering he had again been fairly much injury free it appeared his body was now used to the Bielsa demands and even an argument that as he was now used to it he had reached a level of comfort with the Bielsa demands and that had played a big part in him scoring more as he was able to get into the right positions quicker, not knackered when a chance fell his way etc.

At that point everything pointed to him being on an upward curve and even if he regressed a bit was still likely to get double figures.

In hindsight yes it was the perfect time to sell.

[CHAPELALLMAN]

Bear in mind Bielsa kept Bamford in the side rather than playing Nketiah which is why Arsenal recalled him. As such the JKA signing was because we needed another striker to challenge Bamford and be there in case Bamford got injured.

So fast forward and Bamford has had an injury free championship season in a high octane Bielsa side (I think he missed one match). He then has a much better scoring season in the prem. The talk was that he found it easier in the prem as he had more space and we weren't facing sides playing the low block. Conisdering he had again been fairly much injury free it appeared his body was now used to the Bielsa demands and even an argument that as he was now used to it he had reached a level of comfort with the Bielsa demands and that had played a big part in him scoring more as he was able to get into the right positions quicker, not knackered when a chance fell his way etc.

At that point everything pointed to him being on an upward curve and even if he regressed a bit was still likely to get double figures.

In hindsight yes it was the perfect time to sell.

Even without the benefit of hindsight, it was never a good idea to give an injury prone striker a 5 year contract. He scored a total of 12 league goals over the next four seasons after being given that contract...The club must have paid him about £9.5m in wages over those 4 seasons ( including a wage haircut in the two championship seasons ) so that's about £800k per goal.

Still, this was a relative snip compared to the £40m we ended up paying for JKA in return for his 48 minutes on the pitch. And - as you rightly pointed out - the club ended up in that situation because Nketiah couldn't get any game time, despite Bamford going through a 10 game goal drought which at the time caused panic at the club. That recall by Arsenal ultimately cost the club £40m...

[weasel]

Even without the benefit of hindsight, it was never a good idea to give an injury prone striker a 5 year contract. He scored a total of 12 league goals over the next four seasons after being given that contract...The club must have paid him about £9.5m in wages over those 4 seasons ( including a wage haircut in the two championship seasons ) so that's about £800k per goal.

Still, this was a relative snip compared to the £40m we ended up paying for JKA in return for his 48 minutes on the pitch. And - as you rightly pointed out - the club ended up in that situation because Nketiah couldn't get any game time, despite Bamford going through a 10 game goal drought which at the time caused panic at the club. That recall by Arsenal ultimately cost the club £40m...

He wasn't injury prone though. He had the bad injury just after signing for us but then had 2 years of hardly missing a game. So it is all about hindsight.

[CHAPELALLMAN]

He wasn't injury prone though. He had the bad injury just after signing for us but then had 2 years of hardly missing a game. So it is all about hindsight.

These were his injuries from just before joining the club up until the end of the 2020/21 season ;

2021

Leg injury
From 15 March to 1 April

Leg injury
From 31 January to 3 February

2019

Leg injury
From 26 December to 1 January
Leg injury
From 9 March to 13 March

2018

Knee injury
From 23 December to 4 February
Cruciate ligament injury
From 7 September to 10 December
Head injury
From 14 April to 28 April
Hamstring injury
From 13 April to 14 April

2017
Illness
From 18 January to 21 January

2016
Back injury
From 15 May to 27 July

[Cjay]

I do feel with Messlier that managers were probably told to play him so as to keep his value up. Probably not Bielsa because he was strongwilled but think it was likely only Sam Allardyce who said, 'Listen you f*cking clowns (Orta et al) keep him in and Leeds are definitely going down.' The club knew that by us dropping him it was reducing his value and not what the 'model' was.

I think that continued with Farke, basically the club wanted Messleir to keep playing. Likely though got to the point where Farke and the club agreed that Messlier could cost us promotion and we had to see the bigger picture.

People saying to sell Bamford cos of his fitness injuries after the first prem season seem to have selective memory. At that point Bamford had been mainly injury free for 2 full seasons and had gone from a reasonable season to a very good season in terms of scoring. So he was injury free and had been improving. As such signing him to a longer contract (I think he only had a year left) was a bit of a coup for us and made a lot of sense. If he'd have another good season we could have sold him for a fortune, it wasn't to be though but there was no reason to suggest that a player who had missed just a handful of games in 2 seasons would become injury prone.

It seems a bit far fetched to suggest Meslier only stayed in the team because the owners told the managers to play him?

Wouldn't reflect well on those managers tbh, makes them weak yes men.

Whether it's true in which case the managers look weak or whether they just refused to drop him out of loyalty or stubbornness I felt sorry for him in the end.

I don't think he was protected well or coached well in his time here, he actually got worse as a goalie imo.

Fair point about Bamford.

But forget the injury aspect it's also about knowing when peak value is as well.

Was Bamford whose best seasons had been in empty stadiums likely to repeat his form? He wasn't even prolific then, the data will have told the club he was actually underperforming. Was it not inevitable his form would go ?

How would his body hold up long term? We know a lot of the players were exhausted by Bielsa, played injured at times as well.

Was it only a matter of time for his body to start to fail?

He was 27/28 then at peak value.

It's never easy of course to judge but that is part of it.

Assessing and deciding when is the right time.

[CHAPELALLMAN]

These were his injuries from just before joining the club up until the end of the 2020/21 season ;

2021

Leg injury
From 15 March to 1 April

Leg injury
From 31 January to 3 February

2019

Leg injury
From 26 December to 1 January
Leg injury
From 9 March to 13 March

2018

Knee injury
From 23 December to 4 February
Cruciate ligament injury
From 7 September to 10 December
Head injury
From 14 April to 28 April
Hamstring injury
From 13 April to 14 April

2017
Illness
From 18 January to 21 January

2016
Back injury
From 15 May to 27 July

And then in the second part of 2021 ;

Hamstring injury
From 7 December to 31 December

Ligament injury
From 20 September to 1 December

And then in 2022 the injuries even escalated - possibly caused by Bielsa's intensive training methods ;

Groin injury
From 5 December to 12 January

Muscle injury
From 5 November to 1 December

Muscle injury
From 13 August to 30 August

Coronavirus
From 22 May to 3 June

Knee injury
From 18 March to 22 May

Foot injury
From 20 January to 5 March

Hip injury
From 2 January to 20 January

[CHAPELALLMAN]

It seems a bit far fetched to suggest Meslier only stayed in the team because the owners told the managers to play him?

Wouldn't reflect well on those managers tbh, makes them weak yes men.

Whether it's true in which case the managers look weak or whether they just refused to drop him out of loyalty or stubbornness I felt sorry for him in the end.

I don't think he was protected well or coached well in his time here, he actually got worse as a goalie imo.

Fair point about Bamford.

But forget the injury aspect it's also about knowing when peak value is as well.

Was Bamford whose best seasons had been in empty stadiums likely to repeat his form? He wasn't even prolific then, the data will have told the club he was actually underperforming. Was it not inevitable his form would go ?

How would his body hold up long term? We know a lot of the players were exhausted by Bielsa, played injured at times as well.

Was it only a matter of time for his body to start to fail?

He was 27/28 then at peak value.

It's never easy of course to judge but that is part of it.

Assessing and deciding when is the right time.

Agree with all that.

[weasel]

These were his injuries from just before joining the club up until the end of the 2020/21 season ;

2021

Leg injury
From 15 March to 1 April

Leg injury
From 31 January to 3 February

2019

Leg injury
From 26 December to 1 January
Leg injury
From 9 March to 13 March

2018

Knee injury
From 23 December to 4 February
Cruciate ligament injury
From 7 September to 10 December
Head injury
From 14 April to 28 April
Hamstring injury
From 13 April to 14 April

2017
Illness
From 18 January to 21 January

2016
Back injury
From 15 May to 27 July

Yeah like I said no real injuries of not until the first year with us (2018-2019) when he had the 3 months and then 2 months out. He then had 2 seasons where judging from your records he probably missed 4 or 5 matches in total. That would be enough to suggest he was over the injuries that he had in his first year with us.

Thankyou for providing the factual evidence to back up what I had been saying. Hoping you're not a lawyer!

[weasel]

It seems a bit far fetched to suggest Meslier only stayed in the team because the owners told the managers to play him?

Wouldn't reflect well on those managers tbh, makes them weak yes men.

Whether it's true in which case the managers look weak or whether they just refused to drop him out of loyalty or stubbornness I felt sorry for him in the end.

I don't think he was protected well or coached well in his time here, he actually got worse as a goalie imo.

Maybe not 'forced' to play Messlier but I would say definitely the owners would have wanted Messlier to play as he was a £25m asset who's value would plummett if dropped (espeically for a 'journeyman' keeper). I think it is a different scenario this season which is why Farke dropped Perri far quicker than he did Messlier. For the most part Messlier wasn't going to cost us promotion until it got to the point where he really could have - whereas this season every point is vital which is why Perri was dropped, we don't have the luxury of being able to afford to drop points.