Alex Scott

punkrockcherry said:
You're damned if you don't and you're damned if you do!
Click to expand...

When you look at the kind of players we've signed or strongly linked with, our scouting team must be doing something right.

Although I guess they coukd be playing football manager like me, as I've signed Scott for the past couple of editions on each save I've started. Also signed kluivert once and he too ended up being superb for afcb despite struggling elsewhere ;)

Think I sold them both for around 50 mill a few years later! :D. Scott typically costs 12to 15 mill if you buy him 1st pre season. If you wait till Jan window or beyond, asking price usually inflates to around 20 as he starts delivering excellent performances and attributes start rapidly improving (basically has potential to be leading pl player according to scouts/coach reports and gets a+ rating from scouts 'sign whstever the cost' ;), which putside of watford players like joao pedro and max arons, not many get at champ level in the game...both scott and arons usually end up in england squad after a few seasons).


Sorry to go further OT but weirdly Palace signed Lerma from me last couple of editions, but I sold for around 15-25 mill esch time after extending his contract;)
 
Last edited:
Kudos said:
yet if we spunk £25M on him and he doesn't work out I'm sure it's all the boards fault.
Click to expand...
To me it’s less of a gamble than say 20m on Traore because he is used to the pace and physicality of British football. If he produces twice as much as Traore has done since Jan it won’t exactly be a lot will it, and I’m sure he can.
 
Neil Dawson said:
To me it’s less of a gamble than say 20m on Traore because he is used to the pace and physicality of British football. If he produces twice as much as Traore has done since Jan it won’t exactly be a lot will it, and I’m sure he can.
Click to expand...

Tbf traore has been injured and unfit most the time, plus adaption phase as doesn't speak English as far as I know.

He's played several seasons in Itaky including as a regular for an excellent Sassulo team, who have/had some outstanding players he's played alongside... so they're no mugs,/minnows where he's had some easy ride and played by default.

Do agree there's risk with signing this kind of player, as despite clear ability/high potential, some players simply don't adjust to certain countries/leagues. West Ham and others like Everton have spunked a lot of money on players who've flopped and gone on to excel in Italy, Spain etc.

I wouldn't be too harsh on traore yet as like I say had fitness issues plus adaption phase. Now he's been here 6 months, has pre season under his belt, hopefully we'll see his undoubted ability come forwards.

He's very much in the Brooks mould, but wide left on behind striker. More about agility, balance, technique than raw pace. Very exciting prospect if we cam get those 2 fit Nd playing at their best. Plus with kluivert, Outtara (then Anthony and Christie) all battling for those spots too...Guess given that depth we'll perhaps see traore play centrally behind the striker fairly frequently perhaps?
 
Neil - I’m not sure what Traorè has to do with Alex Scott other than as another tenuous link about random players that allows you yet another opportunity to have a go at said player and by implication the Recruitment Team. Hamed played 7 games last season, getting used to a new Country, Team, League and playing whilst fasting through Ramadan plus carrying a knock. I‘m pleased you don’t jump to hasty conclusions and that you make allowances for individual circumstances Neil or you might come across as a binary thinking, knee jerk kangaroo court juror with a Viking sized double headed axe to grind.
I won’t enter into a dialogue with you about it - you’ve expressed your opinion and I’ve expressed mine - case closed.
 
BFC1 said:
Neil - I’m not sure what Traorè has to do with Alex Scott other than as another tenuous link about random players that allows you yet another opportunity to have a go at said player and by implication the Recruitment Team. Hamed played 7 games last season, getting used to a new Country, Team, League and playing whilst fasting through Ramadan plus carrying a knock. I‘m pleased you don’t jump to hasty conclusions and that you make allowances for individual circumstances Neil or you might come across as a binary thinking, knee jerk kangaroo court juror with a Viking sized double headed axe to grind.
I won’t enter into a dialogue with you about it - you’ve expressed your opinion and I’ve expressed mine - case closed.
Click to expand...
Not how debate works but feel free not to reply.

My point was if Scott is 5m more than Traore in my opinion he is worth it as less of a risk for all the reasons you list as to why he wasn’t a plug and play so we are agreeing.

I’ve no idea how Traore will turn out, none of us do, I’m just saying that in terms of impact I think Scott is more of a plug and play as he’s done it in a very physical and similar league, won’t need to learn the language, won’t he fasting a key stage of the season and less likely to get injured when exposed to the rigours of the game.

So if you are going to spend 20m on Hamed you should spend 25m or whatever on Scott.
 
MB1980 said:
Tbf traore has been injured and unfit most the time, plus adaption phase as doesn't speak English as far as I know.

He's played several seasons in Itaky including as a regular for an excellent Sassulo team, who have/had some outstanding players he's played alongside... so they're no mugs,/minnows where he's had some easy ride and played by default.

Do agree there's risk with signing this kind of player, as despite clear ability/high potential, some players simply don't adjust to certain countries/leagues. West Ham and others like Everton have spunked a lot of money on players who've flopped and gone on to excel in Italy, Spain etc.

I wouldn't be too harsh on traore yet as like I say had fitness issues plus adaption phase. Now he's been here 6 months, has pre season under his belt, hopefully we'll see his undoubted ability come forwards.

He's very much in the Brooks mould, but wide left on behind striker. More about agility, balance, technique than raw pace. Very exciting prospect if we cam get those 2 fit Nd playing at their best. Plus with kluivert, Outtara (then Anthony and Christie) all battling for those spots too...Guess given that depth we'll perhaps see traore play centrally behind the striker fairly frequently perhaps?
Click to expand...
My assessment of Traore is on what we’ve seen so far. There is no doubt he has potential and was highly thought of in Italy and if he starts to achieve that my assessment will change accordingly.
 
Neil Dawson said:
My assessment of Traore is on what we’ve seen so far. There is no doubt he has potential and was highly thought of in Italy and if he starts to achieve that my assessment will change accordingly.
Click to expand...
So...Scott a better gamble than Traore because he's used to the physicality of the British game..even though Traore has played at a higher standard and against better players.
My concern on Scott is...do we need another wide player, although after j a on Saturday perhaps we do!
 
nd9cherry said:
So...Scott a better gamble than Traore because he's used to the physicality of the British game..even though Traore has played at a higher standard and against better players.
My concern on Scott is...do we need another wide player, although after j a on Saturday perhaps we do!
Click to expand...

He's not predominantly a wide right player although he can play there and has done for City.

He's right footed for a start and we, as do most top level teams, play with inverted wingers.

Obviously I don't know for sure, but I'm pretty confident he'll only play centrally for us. Particularly as we already are well stacked on the wings, and far from it centrally.
 
Neil Dawson said:
My assessment of Traore is on what we’ve seen so far. There is no doubt he has potential and was highly thought of in Italy and if he starts to achieve that my assessment will change accordingly.
Click to expand...

But statistically he has been good so far - the highest combined xG and xA per 90 minutes of anyone in our squad, which he achieved playing against some of the better sides in the division. In fact his numbers, in the top flight, with all the adaptation issues already identified, were significantly better than Alex Scott's numbers for Bristol City, even in the areas where Scott supposedly excels (progressive carries and passes).
 
Neil Dawson said:
Not how debate works but feel free not to reply.

My point was if Scott is 5m more than Traore in my opinion he is worth it as less of a risk for all the reasons you list as to why he wasn’t a plug and play so we are agreeing.

I’ve no idea how Traore will turn out, none of us do, I’m just saying that in terms of impact I think Scott is more of a plug and play as he’s done it in a very physical and similar league, won’t need to learn the language, won’t he fasting a key stage of the season and less likely to get injured when exposed to the rigours of the game.

So if you are going to spend 20m on Hamed you should spend 25m or whatever on Scott.
Click to expand...

checks the ‘how debates work’ rulebook lmao
 
Blimey, the NeilDawson baiting on here is starting to get as tiresome as the Waz stuff was around Forest. He's got an opinion and is standing behind it. Time will tell if he's right or wrong.

If we end up signing Scott for £25m in a couple of weeks time then he has a point as we could have bid that weeks ago. If we end up signing him in his position, or someone else, for a sum under that then there's an argument to be had about the cost of getting players later as opposed to paying more to get them in early.

We did it with Mings. He was linked as the hot Championship player that would move on that summer for around £6-8m. We went in early with a bid of £8m rising to £10m. Ipswich knew there was no point hanging on for a better bid even though it was early in the window so accepted. We got the player in early but arguably overpaid by 30%.

Now we're faced with quite a squad rebuild with multiple needs so overpaying on anyone seems a dangerous tactic as it will take extra chunks from our budget.

If I'm honest, I'm still not clear on why we signed Kluiverrt but happy to give the signing the benefit of the doubt and hope it will make sense by the end of the window. It felt like an area we were reasonably well stocked, unless someone is being sold (Billing?).

That doesn't mean it's incorrect to comment that the board could have played this window differently.
 
nd9cherry said:
So...Scott a better gamble than Traore because he's used to the physicality of the British game..even though Traore has played at a higher standard and against better players.
My concern on Scott is...do we need another wide player, although after j a on Saturday perhaps we do!
Click to expand...
He can play central both defensively and offensively
 
kirsikka said:
Blimey, the NeilDawson baiting on here is starting to get as tiresome as the Waz stuff was around Forest. He's got an opinion and is standing behind it. Time will tell if he's right or wrong.

If we end up signing Scott for £25m in a couple of weeks time then he has a point as we could have bid that weeks ago. If we end up signing him in his position, or someone else, for a sum under that then there's an argument to be had about the cost of getting players later as opposed to paying more to get them in early.

We did it with Mings. He was linked as the hot Championship player that would move on that summer for around £6-8m. We went in early with a bid of £8m rising to £10m. Ipswich knew there was no point hanging on for a better bid even though it was early in the window so accepted. We got the player in early but arguably overpaid by 30%.

Now we're faced with quite a squad rebuild with multiple needs so overpaying on anyone seems a dangerous tactic as it will take extra chunks from our budget.

If I'm honest, I'm still not clear on why we signed Kluiverrt but happy to give the signing the benefit of the doubt and hope it will make sense by the end of the window. It felt like an area we were reasonably well stocked, unless someone is being sold (Billing?).

That doesn't mean it's incorrect to comment that the board could have played this window differently.
Click to expand...

We don't know what other options they are persuing though do we? We may end up paying the original asking price but if it's more that we think he's worth then it should only be paid if there are no other options.

I think the transfer window has to be judged after it has closed. Of course it's not ideal to not start the season with a full squad but that is how it always is.

We had all the same criticisms in January about signings not being sorted early enough but as your comprehensive 'results are in' thread showed it was an excellent window in terms of filling in the gaps in the squad. The gaps in our squad are fairly clear and we shall see if they do as well.
 
kirsikka said:
Blimey, the NeilDawson baiting on here is starting to get as tiresome as the Waz stuff was around Forest. He's got an opinion and is standing behind it. Time will tell if he's right or wrong.

If we end up signing Scott for £25m in a couple of weeks time then he has a point as we could have bid that weeks ago. If we end up signing him in his position, or someone else, for a sum under that then there's an argument to be had about the cost of getting players later as opposed to paying more to get them in early.

We did it with Mings. He was linked as the hot Championship player that would move on that summer for around £6-8m. We went in early with a bid of £8m rising to £10m. Ipswich knew there was no point hanging on for a better bid even though it was early in the window so accepted. We got the player in early but arguably overpaid by 30%.

Now we're faced with quite a squad rebuild with multiple needs so overpaying on anyone seems a dangerous tactic as it will take extra chunks from our budget.

If I'm honest, I'm still not clear on why we signed Kluiverrt but happy to give the signing the benefit of the doubt and hope it will make sense by the end of the window. It felt like an area we were reasonably well stocked, unless someone is being sold (Billing?).

That doesn't mean it's incorrect to comment that the board could have played this window differently.
Click to expand...
Don’t stress Kirsikka. I’m used to my five foaming fanboys now…

I think Kluivert may appear centrally as a back for Solanke but agree we are signing too many wide players because we don’t rate the ones we’ve already signed, some recently.
 
“Now we're faced with quite a squad rebuild with multiple needs so overpaying on anyone seems a dangerous tactic as it will take extra chunks from our budget.“

Obviously why we’re playing a waiting game for our best targets and the reason we haven’t panicked into getting all our signings in by now just to have all our numbers in for the season start
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;