Ratings vs Chelsea

[jonathanhotspur]

It's a difficult market in this respect. There are very few unearthed gems floating around. If a kid in the Ivory Coast can do a step over, chances are European scouts have already got youtube clips and a dossier on him.

The closer to home you get the more attention this kid will have already garnered. (see Alan Halovic and Tin Jedvaj).

The price that players like Bale have gone for has raised the bar, even for potential. If there's the remotest chance they may be the next Bale, no selling club is going to say 10m any more. Bare in mind Lamela had just banged in 15 goals in 33 games playing as an auxiliary striker for a team at the top of Serie A. He works hard, tackles back and gets involved in the game too. You can see why at 21 he was over priced.

Is he the player we should have bought?

 

[felmani26]

It's a difficult market in this respect. There are very few unearthed gems floating around. If a kid in the Ivory Coast can do a step over, chances are European scouts have already got youtube clips and a dossier on him.

The closer to home you get the more attention this kid will have already garnered. (see Alan Halovic and Tin Jedvaj).

The price that players like Bale have gone for has raised the bar, even for potential. If there's the remotest chance they may be the next Bale, no selling club is going to say 10m any more. Bare in mind Lamela had just banged in 15 goals in 33 games playing as an auxiliary striker for a team at the top of Serie A. He works hard, tackles back and gets involved in the game too. You can see why at 21 he was over priced.

But what tangible element can you attribute to Lamela of what he has brought to this team? Whether you dismiss it or not, the price tag is incredibly pertinent as we are a club that can't afford to make huge mistakes on players commanding an extortionate fee and should any suitors come in, we will take a big hit for sure.

Yes, the lad has a lot of chutzpah but really, has he brought much in terms of bringing a coherent attacking plan together for Poch? Lamela was bought to be a crown jewel but currently he's just lost in translation with little in terms of end product.

Doesn't seem to be doing Chelsea much harm.

Except that Chelsea probably have the most in form defensive midfielder in Matic which provides the base for their attacks.

 

[SpurSince57]

I am annoyed with our transfer committee. He might be the type of player we should be buying but is he the player we should have bought?

He was a player both Villas-Boas and Baldini wanted (I've quoted Jason Burt's Telegraph article about AVB's departure umpteen times, so people can just go Google it themselves). The 'committee' had nothing to do with it, apart, presumably, from Levy okaying the outlay. Why didn't Villas-Boas play him? The guy was an idiot.

Did we overpay? Yes, almost certainly, but no-one's suggested a cheaper alternative. And really, a third of the way into what's effectively his first season is far too soon to be judging him.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Is he the player we should have bought?

Yes. No. Maybe.

There isn't always a simple answer.

I think we overpaid, but in GBP we probably paid something like 24/25m. 8 more than we paid for Modric a few years previous, and Lamela was bought more as a forward, and they always carry a premium. So how much did we over pay

I don't know how the deal was structured, that also has an impact on the scenario. We were also flush, with Bale windfall.

24/5m for a 21yo Argentinian who'd just averaged nearly 1 in 2 goals at the top of the Italian league (in other words he'd shown it on a decent stage), who assists, who sees the ball 30-40 times a game and will press and tackle. In a market where Bale went from what 9 goals to 21 and 90m ?

I understand the gamble.

 

[jonathanhotspur]

Yes. No. Maybe.

There isn't always a simple answer.

I think we overpaid, but in GBP we probably paid something like 24/25m. 8 more than we paid for Modric a few years previous, and Lamela was bought more as a forward, and they always carry a premium. So how much did we over pay

I don't know how the deal was structured, that also has an impact on the scenario. We were also flush, with Bale windfall.

24/5m for a 21yo Argentinian who'd just averaged nearly 1 in 2 goals at the top of the Italian league (in other words he'd shown it on a decent stage), who assists, who sees the ball 30-40 times a game and will press and tackle. In a market where Bale went from what 9 goals to 21 and 90m ?

I understand the gamble.

Do you think he is cut out for English football, Mr Conductor?

 

[Bus-Conductor]

But what tangible element can you attribute to Lamela of what he has brought to this team? Whether you dismiss it or not, the price tag is incredibly pertinent as we are a club that can't afford to make huge mistakes on players commanding an extortionate fee and should any suitors come in, we will take a big hit for sure.

Yes, the lad has a lot of chutzpah but really, has he brought much in terms of bringing a coherent attacking plan together for Poch? Lamela was bought to be a crown jewel but currently he's just lost in translation with little in terms of end product.

Except that Chelsea probably have the most in form defensive midfielder in Matic which provides the base for their attacks.

Dynamism, a better assist rate than Lennon last two years, tenacity, desire, a creative spark.

It's Poch's job to hone those facets and make them work in a collective as best he can.

As SS57 has said, he's a handful of games into what is effectively his first proper season. He's 22. We aren't exactly over blessed with creative players, I think we can (must) indulge his potential, after all we gave Lennon 9 fucking years. Watching Lamela is a breeze for me after that.

 

[SpurSince57]

Modric wasn't cut out for English football. Ardiles wasn't cut out for English football.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Do you think he is cut out for English football, Mr Conductor?

He's already better at English football than Lennon, so there is no dilemma for me form right now.

He has tenacity and ability so I don't see why not. But his type are mercurial and football is an impatient game sometimes.

 

[jonathanhotspur]

He's already better at English football than Lennon, so there is no dilemma for me form right now.

Best of a bad lot, then?

 

[felmani26]

Dynamism, a better assist rate than Lennon last two years, tenacity, desire, a creative spark.

It's Poch's job to hone those facets and make them work in a collective as best he can.

As SS57 has said, he's a handful of games into what is effectively his first proper season. He's 22. We aren't exactly over blessed with creative players, I think we can (must) indulge his potential, after all we gave Lennon 9 fucking years. Watching Lamela is a breeze for me after that.

Put it this way, would the much maligned (myself included) Sigurdsson have brought about a greater level of end product than dear Erik?

In other words, can Lamela and his output be easily replaced? I would say yes and I've got grave doubts whether he will ever reach a point with us where he's indispensable to our teams needs.

 

[eddiebailey]

Lamela provides moments of individual brilliance while tending to compromise our team play. What is not clear at the moment is whether he will develop into the next Ronaldo or the next Taarabt. The only way we are going to find out is if we keep playing him. If we hadn't paid so much management would probably take the view that that was a bad gamble, but the investment has been made so we just have to keep out fingers crossed and try not to get frustrated by him as he learns what being a Premiership footballer is about.

 

[vigospur]

I don't disagree with your assessment of the crowd...but to imply that we are better off having a poor team as a result is just nonsense. We as fans are easily please because of our lack of success. We haven't won at Chelsea since 1990 so them comfortably beating us at Stamford Bridge isn't exactly something that gets them off their seats, it's the equivalent of us beating QPR or Fulham at home.

What gets them off their seats? Hull, QPR, Sunderland, Swansea. .....They are bored and it shows.

 

[Spursidol]

Yes. No. Maybe.

There isn't always a simple answer.

I think we overpaid, but in GBP we probably paid something like 24/25m. 8 more than we paid for Modric a few years previous, and Lamela was bought more as a forward, and they always carry a premium. So how much did we over pay

I don't know how the deal was structured, that also has an impact on the scenario. We were also flush, with Bale windfall.

24/5m for a 21yo Argentinian who'd just averaged nearly 1 in 2 goals at the top of the Italian league (in other words he'd shown it on a decent stage), who assists, who sees the ball 30-40 times a game and will press and tackle. In a market where Bale went from what 9 goals to 21 and 90m ?

I understand the gamble.

The gamble was that by buying a 'good prospect' from an inferior league (and the Italien league is now very poor and less physical v Pl) he might be able to transfer his decent record in the Italian League to the PL.

Problem was that Baldini made the same gamble on Soldado (transfer a goal machine from a physically and defensively weak Spanish league ) to the PL.

Ditto Chirches etc.

As any one with any ounce of common sense can tell you, buying lots of players with the same gamble does not mitigate your risk - it magnifies it.

I'm hoping that Lamela makes it - but after the games the season, its clear it will take some time to coach him out of things like losimg the ball so much (a stat from a week or so ago was that he held the PL's worst stat on that), and physically he seems to need bulkng up - a ptrocess taking many months and far from guranteed to succeed, There are quite a few other issues he needs coaching in to be able to compete in PL - flaws which were covered up in the technically/slower inferior italkian league - and his total one footedness (which he tried to overcome with a Rabona) is something which is now unacceptable in Spurs Academy.

I understand the gamble - problem is the gamble at the price was one sided. If instantly successful a decent bet (but he's still only worth a £30m PL player), however as less than a great success. the gamble has failed. So for the gamble to succeed we need him to do MUCH better and live up to a £30m star - long way to go to do that.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Best of a bad lot, then?

No. A clearly talented, hard working footballer who is one of a bunch of players, some of whom also clearly have some talent, who aren't the finished article, having his first dozen or so games.

We haven't exactly had a conveyor belt of better players than Lamela - or with potential to be - over the last 10 years.

 

[SpurSince57]

Problem was that Baldini made the same gamble on Soldado (transfer a goal machine from a physically and defensively weak Spanish league ) to the PL.

We tried for Soldado in summer 2012, so nothing to do with Baldy. He was very much a Villas-Boas want.

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11675/7996800/soldado-reveals-spurs-snub

Why did Villas-Boas play him with inverted wingers? I have no idea. I suspect Villas-Boas didn't have too much of one either.

 

[Mr Pink]

Its still too early.

Providing we continue to develop, in terms of what we saw on Sunday, we need to be patient and give Lamela more time.

Its been chaotic for him since he arrived, not just being injured for the majority of last season but the changing of managers and its only now that we're starting to see real signs of Pochettino's style coming through.

For me the clock starts now on Lamela, not August a year ago.

At the very least reserve judgement until the end of the season because I think we'll do well in the second half of the season and that will only help him. All of them will benefit more from playing in a structure that provides more cohesion and hopefully, fluid football.

As confidence grows with the collective, individuals will prosper more.

 

[SpurSince57]

Lamela provides moments of individual brilliance while tending to compromise our team play. What is not clear at the moment is whether he will develop into the next Ronaldo or the next Taarabt. The only way we are going to find out is if we keep playing him. If we hadn't paid so much management would probably take the view that that was a bad gamble, but the investment has been made so we just have to keep out fingers crossed and try not to get frustrated by him as he learns what being a Premiership footballer is about.

He's already way, way beyond Taarabt, who's more of a party-trick 'freestyle' footballer than the real thing, but I agree, we have to persevere. I really don't get the negativity towards him when there's an abundance of love towards an equally expensive striker who struggles to get a shot on target, never mind in the back of the net.

 

[Spursidol]

We tried for Soldado in summer 2012, so nothing to do with Baldy. He was very much a Villas-Boas want.

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11675/7996800/soldado-reveals-spurs-snub

Why did Villas-Boas play him with inverted wingers? I have no idea. I suspect Villas-Boas didn't have too much of one either.

Sure, problem was that we bought 7 players witrh no PL experience - a risk on one but the risk multiplies rather than reduces with numbers.

So the risk of coming off was big - better to buy some with PL exerience and some without if we wanted 7 players.

But your right with buying those players and AVB - why buy them and not play to their stengths. AVB's a F***ing idiot.

 

[jonathanhotspur]

No. A clearly talented, hard working footballer who is one of a bunch of players, some of whom also clearly have some talent, who aren't the finished article, having his first dozen or so games.

We haven't exactly had a conveyor belt of better players than Lamela - or with potential to be - over the last 10 years.

Better than Lennon and Townsend, both of whom you think are crap?

 

[StartingPrice]

Do me a favour, and get serious...

Chelsea can afford the best, buying and paying multi-faceted players that can do it all, Hazard, Willian, Oscar, they're comfortable out wide or in the centre in a way the likes of Eriksen and Lamela aren't. Hazard does maintain the width, and always offers an outlet, Mourinho's kept banging away at him until he follows instructions to the letter.

Hazard and Oscar have had longer in the season, Willian has hardly featured until recently, and is older with more experience in different leagues. I don't think it is a valid comparison right now. Maybe at the end of their careers a meaningful comparison can be drawn - though I wouldn't be sure who would come out on top, just yet. Hazard is a fantastic player, obviously - but, ATM, what he has over Eriksen is consistency. As for Lamela, as said in his dedicated thread, there is a reason that the Italian clubs, including Roma - who'd just sold him FFS - have kept up an incessant agitation to get him back to Italy since virtually his first breath on English soil. It is because he is hugely gifted and they are seeing Italian football lose him. So, the only real questions for me are can Eriksen find consistency? and Is Lamela suited to English football? And for the latter question, I would refer you to SS's answer above.