Danny Ings

[SuperLuka]

At the right price and wages he would have been a great signing. I was disappointed he went to Villa but since finding out he's on 150k for 4 years, we were right not to offer him that.

 

[gibbospurs]

It’s not nonsense. If Kane stays he plays. As does Son and one of Lucas/Berg. You don’t pay a guy £150k/week to be backup.

Kane can’t “walk” next week.

It’s like reading a different reality sometimes.

Ndombele is a stupid fucking example. Because at the time we signed him, the world thought we’d smashed it.

Thing is stoof unfortunately you do have to pay that for quality. Back up or not. If Kane stays and turns his ankle again which happens every year we have an 18 year old as cover. It’s ridiculous how we never have a decent striker in to push Kane or to rest him.

 

[dontcallme]

Thing is stoof unfortunately you do have to pay that for quality. Back up or not. If Kane stays and turns his ankle again which happens every year we have an 18 year old as cover. It’s ridiculous how we never have a decent striker in to push Kane or to rest him.

Not an invalid point but if we are going to buy a stopgap then someone on a 4 year contract isn't the right signing for that.

A Cavani style signing on a 1-2 year deal on a high salary is one thing. But a good player for 2 years out of a 4 year contract is not a good idea.

 

[gibbospurs]

Not an invalid point but if we are going to buy a stopgap then someone on a 4 year contract isn't the right signing for that.

A Cavani style signing on a 1-2 year deal on a high salary is one thing. But a good player for 2 years out of a 4 year contract is not a good idea.

How do you know he will only be decent for 2 years? Imo it was a great bit of business from villa. Pretty sure him and Kane could easily play together also. Especially against park the bus teams who we always struggle with.

 

[bbunc]

99% sure it was only a 3 year contract. Club has option for 4th but would only exercise if it’s gone well.

I’ll be flabbergasted if we end up with another attacker anywhere close to his skill/effectiveness, let alone his HG status. At some point you have to pay for goals.

 

[chrisd2k]

Not sure why this thread is still in the transfer section?

 

[he is you know!]

At the right price and wages he would have been a great signing. I was disappointed he went to Villa but since finding out he's on 150k for 4 years, we were right not to offer him that.

Not an invalid point but if we are going to buy a stopgap then someone on a 4 year contract isn't the right signing for that.

A Cavani style signing on a 1-2 year deal on a high salary is one thing. But a good player for 2 years out of a 4 year contract is not a good idea.

Don't disagree with principle, but it's 3 years isn't it? That's what transfermkt has it as.

 

[dontcallme]

How do you know he will only be decent for 2 years? Imo it was a great bit of business from villa. Pretty sure him and Kane could easily play together also. Especially against park the bus teams who we always struggle with.

Not guaranteed but we are talking about a 28 year old with a history of injury issues. Everything about the signing suggested great in the short term but in the not too distant future will be expensive deadwood.

 

[dontcallme]

Don't disagree with principle, but it's 3 years isn't it? That's what transfermkt has it as.

I read 4 year somewhere but it seems it might be 3 year with a 1 year extension option.

 

[gibbospurs]

I read 4 year somewhere but it seems it might be 3 year with a 1 year extension option.

Hardly a massive risk. No player is gonna sign a 2 year deal at any age.

 

[gibbospurs]

Not guaranteed but we are talking about a 28 year old with a history of injury issues. Everything about the signing suggested great in the short term but in the not too distant future will be expensive deadwood.

I have zero evidence but I’m assuming clubs insure their assets of injury?? I’m guessing it would be an expensive policy but there must be something in place ??

 

[spids]

Not guaranteed but we are talking about a 28 year old with a history of injury issues. Everything about the signing suggested great in the short term but in the not too distant future will be expensive deadwood.

Are you talking about Kane or Ings?

 

[mr ashley]

Not guaranteed but we are talking about a 28 year old with a history of injury issues. Everything about the signing suggested great in the short term but in the not too distant future will be expensive deadwood.

I think anyone who read that we were linked to him, saw him go to Villa instead and instantly score in both games whilst their start striker is injured has a fair point to wonder why we passed up the opportunity.

And whilst the wage and contract length might be a bit steeper than hoped, if we had signed him on the same 3 yr deal I’m confident we would have had a queue of bottom half clubs looking to take on loan / buy him when he was in the final year as he would still be a proven goal scorer who knew the league.
Do you think he’s gone to Villa to be a backup to Ollie Watkins? I doubt it. I expect them to change their formation to play both in certain games. Just like we would. And rotate both to ensure neither get burnt out. Just like we needed with Kane and son last season

All this noise about “ooh, not sure at that price” - well it doesn’t look as if vlahovic or any other potential signings are available for any less money does it?

So unless there is some underlying medical issue that is kept under wraps (that Villa have gambled on), I think not signing Ings is a big mistake on our part.

*if we end the window with vlahovic and lautaro of course I will take it all back*

 

[dontcallme]

I have zero evidence but I’m assuming clubs insure their assets of injury?? I’m guessing it would be an expensive policy but there must be something in place ??

I highly doubt it would cover £150k a week salary.

 

[dontcallme]

I think anyone who read that we were linked to him, saw him go to Villa instead and instantly score in both games whilst their start striker is injured has a fair point to wonder why we passed up the opportunity.

And whilst the wage and contract length might be a bit steeper than hoped, if we had signed him on the same 3 yr deal I’m confident we would have had a queue of bottom half clubs looking to take on loan / buy him when he was in the final year as he would still be a proven goal scorer who knew the league.
Do you think he’s gone to Villa to be a backup to Ollie Watkins? I doubt it. I expect them to change their formation to play both in certain games. Just like we would. And rotate both to ensure neither get burnt out. Just like we needed with Kane and son last season

All this noise about “ooh, not sure at that price” - well it doesn’t look as if vlahovic or any other potential signings are available for any less money does it?

So unless there is some underlying medical issue that is kept under wraps (that Villa have gambled on), I think not signing Ings is a big mistake on our part.

*if we end the window with vlahovic and lautaro of course I will take it all back*

Getting a bottom half club to take on his £150k a week salary once he is in decline is a big ask. Look at the troubles we currently have selling our ageing deadwood.

Vlahovic is a similar amount but due to his age there is a good opportunity for sell on value or even profit if he reaches a good level.

Ings will almost certainly leave Villa for free or for a nominal fee. This means over 3 years he will cost them around £45m-50m in transfer fee and salary. As he is better than what Villa have they might see this as worth it.

I believe the likes of Son and the players we're looking at are better and have better longevity.

Our success has been in buying players before their prime and developing them. I for one am glad we are going back to this.

 

[dontcallme]

Are you talking about Kane or Ings?

Damiao.

 

[mr ashley]

Getting a bottom half club to take on his £150k a week salary once he is in decline is a big ask. Look at the troubles we currently have selling our ageing deadwood.

Vlahovic is a similar amount but due to his age there is a good opportunity for sell on value or even profit if he reaches a good level.

Ings will almost certainly leave Villa for free or for a nominal fee. This means over 3 years he will cost them around £45m-50m in transfer fee and salary. As he is better than what Villa have they might see this as worth it.

I believe the likes of Son and the players we're looking at are better and have better longevity.

Our success has been in buying players before their prime and developing them. I for one am glad we are going back to this.

I don’t agree that it would be a big ask, simply because he would still be a proven goal scorer in the PL. Teams will always take a chance on this type of player- look at welbeck for example.
He wouldn’t be deadwood- that’s the point.

If we sold ings for a nominal fee / free and had Scarlett ready to replace him, then that’s fine for me - as long as (and here’s the caveat that seems to be missed whilst we do our accountancy) - he contributes to keeping us in CL and challenging for the league.

IF it’s true that being in the CL is the holy grail, then baulking at a contract like Ings doesn’t really make sense for me.

Btw , our success hasn’t just been based on buying players before they reach their prime. Van der vaart is a good example of a short term deal that worked wonders for us. I saw this as a similar deal

 

[dontcallme]

I don’t agree that it would be a big ask, simply because he would still be a proven goal scorer in the PL. Teams will always take a chance on this type of player- look at welbeck for example.
He wouldn’t be deadwood- that’s the point.

If we sold ings for a nominal fee / free and had Scarlett ready to replace him, then that’s fine for me - as long as (and here’s the caveat that seems to be missed whilst we do our accountancy) - he contributes to keeping us in CL and challenging for the league.

IF it’s true that being in the CL is the holy grail, then baulking at a contract like Ings doesn’t really make sense for me.

Btw , our success hasn’t just been based on buying players before they reach their prime. Van der vaart is a good example of a short term deal that worked wonders for us. I saw this as a similar deal

VDV is one example care to mention others?

I could mention an excessively longer list of younger players that were successful for us, both on the pitch and financially.

 

[DFF]

What’s this back up talk? He would easily fit it into our narrow front 3 with Son and Kane. In fact I saw him play down the right a number of times yesterday. 150k/week for a PL proven goal scorer is pretty much the going rate. He’s far better value for wages than Bergwijn, Moura, Alli, Sissoko, Ndombele. He’d pretty much be guaranteed to replace and surpass Bale’s goal return, how much was Bale on? How much does missing out on CL cost? Penny wise, pound foolish.

 

[DiVaio]

What’s this back up talk? He would easily fit it into our narrow front 3 with Son and Kane. In fact I saw him play down the right a number of times yesterday. 150k/week for a PL proven goal scorer is pretty much the going rate. He’s far better value for wages than Bergwijn, Moura, Alli, Sissoko, Ndombele. He’d pretty much be guaranteed to replace and surpass Bale’s goal return, how much was Bale on? How much does missing out on CL cost? Penny wise, pound foolish.

He would play like 50% of minutes Ndombele played last season, how is it far better value for wage ?