mark davies

[truewhite15]

I doubt anybody on here knows whether we'd pay more than Swansea or vice versa.

I doubt that because I doubt even the managers and chairmen of the clubs know that at the minute, so it's guesswork at best.

What we can talk about is the state of the market, the length of his contract, the need (or otherwise?) to replace him.

Well, the state of the market means that he is worth an awful lot more than the £5M that some would bite hands off for.

He's under contract and then some, so we can expect full market value if we decide to sell

IMO, we don't need to replace him directly, as the football we need to play to improve doesn't necessarily require a Mark Davies when we have an Eagles, or any other attacking midfielder. If we were to sell, the money should go on luring an Ivan Campo or an Abdoulaye Faye, which last season has shown ARE necessary for our return to the top flight.

[lovethesmellofnapalm]

Mark Davies passes the ball well?
when exactly?

a string puller in midfield?

sell- please.
alternatives
get a Whelan (Stoke) type in - there'll be a few knocking about

[truewhite15]

Mark Davies passes the ball well?
when exactly?

a string puller in midfield?

sell- please.
alternatives
get a Whelan (Stoke) type in - there'll be a few knocking about

Off you go then. Name some, who are in our price range, and will be available.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Mark Davies passes the ball well?
when exactly?

He passed more accurately more frequently than anybody else at the club last season, according to WhoScored.com - 922 completed passes out of 1057 (87.2%). Ignoring the minor contributions of Josh Vela and Tyrone Mears (welcome but statistically irrelevant over the sample size), that's about 10% more accurate than any other player we still possess.

Most dribbles, too, at 1.3 per game. And only KD and Klasnic scored more goals.

[Tombwfc]

Really, if it was the case that we needed some money to buy players, then fair enough. That doesn't appear to be the case though. There's no indication that we have any intention of selling him, and yet we continue to chase additional midfielders.

I'm much happier with Pratley, Andrews, Vela, Mark Davies + mystery Owen Coyle signing (who has a 90% chance of coming from Scotland, America or Burnley), than Pratley, Andrews, Vela + two mystery Owen Coyle signings. Given the managers success rate with his signings, the latter is frightening.

Better the devil you know. Ask them if they want Pratley back.

[Lord Kangana]

So you' be happy with Coyle signing, Coyle signing, youth player (and hey, why don't we throw in Stuart Holden) Coyle signing and Mark Davies, rather than Coyle signing, Coyle signing, Youth player, Coyle signing, Coyle Signing, Coyle signing?

Thats a mighty fine hair you're splitting there.

And even if there were any validity to that, I doubt theres space on the wage bill to accomodate another shoo-in (for you, DSB) first team player. With or without the secret horde of cash you speak of.

[steviewander]

Need Rory Delap to replace him!!

[Tombwfc]

So you' be happy with Coyle signing, Coyle signing, youth player (and hey, why don't we throw in Stuart Holden) Coyle signing and Mark Davies, rather than Coyle signing, Coyle signing, Youth player, Coyle signing, Coyle Signing, Coyle signing?

Thats a mighty fine hair you're splitting there.

And even if there were any validity to that, I doubt theres space on the wage bill to accomodate another shoo-in (for you, DSB) first team player. With or without the secret horde of cash you speak of.

I didn't say I'd be happy, I said I'd be happier. I'd rather not be stuck with many of the players he's bought. Me wanting to keep Davies is more about damage limitation than anything.

Also, every single comment that's come from the club (and the fact we've just turned down a reasonable offer for one of our players) suggests that there's room to bring more players in.

[Lord Kangana]

Cool. Nice to see that all our eggs are safely in one basket. It'll be interesting to see how much shit Coyle takes when the great white hype of Mavies turns out to be an overweight, undermotivated passenger.

And that Bruce Rioch was a reet c*nt for booting out Tony Kelly and selling Andy Walker an all.

[a1]

Cool. Nice to see that all our eggs are safely in one basket. It'll be interesting to see how much shit Coyle takes when the great white hype of Mavies turns out to be an overweight, undermotivated passenger.

fat mark is probably unhypnotizable , and thats the sole reason he's "being let go"/whatever .

that he's the only one that can run with the ball at his feet, is irrelevant to teamcoyle. #FatMarkThinksPingPongIsStupid #CurchOfCoyle

[Prufrock]

I'm not opposed to holding out for the best price, not even opposed to keeping him, just think he would need to show an awful lot more than he has so far to be worth 5M or even half that to us!

Well, he's clearly worth more than half that to us, since we've had an offer of £5million.

Hyperbole, eh? It's literally the WORST THING EVER.

Thats his transfer value. I'm talking about whether his contributions on the pitch can be replaced with 5M or less, which for me they can. We might not get someone with the same "ability" on the ball, but NRC did more last season and came on a free, as did Eagles who cost ironically half of that 5M!!!!!!!!

Did we not pay Reo-Coker owt, then?

I ask again, how do you put a price on someone's on-pitch performance, if not on the value that you can get by selling them? What mechanism do you use? Other than saying "It's obvious he's not worth XYZ"?

In fairness, it isn't that ludicrous to say that if we find a player as good as Mark Davies who is worth (factoring in age, wages, needing to settle down etc...) £x, then Mark Davies's value is anything >£x.

Anyway, I'm of the school that he is a good player but really nowhere near that good, so anywhere north of £5m would be decent. Then I remember we were told £7m wasn't enough for Zaha, so they can keep fecking going.

I don't understand football anymore. Someone has implanted an improbability drive and we are stuck inside.

[BWFC_Insane]

So you' be happy with Coyle signing, Coyle signing, youth player (and hey, why don't we throw in Stuart Holden) Coyle signing and Mark Davies, rather than Coyle signing, Coyle signing, Youth player, Coyle signing, Coyle Signing, Coyle signing?

Thats a mighty fine hair you're splitting there.

And even if there were any validity to that, I doubt theres space on the wage bill to accomodate another shoo-in (for you, DSB) first team player. With or without the secret horde of cash you speak of.

I didn't say I'd be happy, I said I'd be happier. I'd rather not be stuck with many of the players he's bought. Me wanting to keep Davies is more about damage limitation than anything.

Also, every single comment that's come from the club (and the fact we've just turned down a reasonable offer for one of our players) suggests that there's room to bring more players in.

We were planning to pay Sanchez 25K a week, to join, plus a joining fee.

We do clearly have funds available.

Its a fair point about "not needing to sell".

But I guess if Coyle thinks Davies will never live up to his promise, in a year he could be virtually worthless in the market, if he has a quiet season. So as always either way its a gamble....and a call has to be made one way or t'other!

[Puskas]

In fairness, it isn't that ludicrous to say that if we find a player as good as Mark Davies who is worth (factoring in age, wages, needing to settle down etc...) £x, then Mark Davies's value is anything >£x.

Perhaps. But again, how are we judging worth, if not in terms of what someone is prepared to pay for them?
BWFCi seems to want to judge it purely by the transfer fee we paid (but doesn't seem to want to factor in the fact that we paid only £1million for Davies, so if he is a very similar player to Eagles, surely Eagles should only be worth £1million, and we should sell him if anyone offers more than that...)

Then I remember we were told £7m wasn't enough for Zaha, so they can keep fecking going.

Precisely. How much did Jordan Henderson go for? And people are saying they'll "bite the hand off" anyone who offers more than a few million for someone who's possibly our best (fit) midfielder.

Meanwhile:

But I guess if Coyle thinks Davies will never live up to his promise, in a year he could be virtually worthless in the market,

But what on earth makes you think Coyle believes that? The evidence seems to be quite the reverse - Coyle wants to keep him, and has already rejected one bid, as we're discussing. As for future value - well, maybe all our players will have a poor year, and they'll all be worthless next year. Should we sell them all?

[BWFC_Insane]

In fairness, it isn't that ludicrous to say that if we find a player as good as Mark Davies who is worth (factoring in age, wages, needing to settle down etc...) £x, then Mark Davies's value is anything >£x.

Perhaps. But again, how are we judging worth, if not in terms of what someone is prepared to pay for them?
BWFCi seems to want to judge it purely by the transfer fee we paid (but doesn't seem to want to factor in the fact that we paid only £1million for Davies, so if he is a very similar player to Eagles, surely Eagles should only be worth £1million, and we should sell him if anyone offers more than that...)

Then I remember we were told £7m wasn't enough for Zaha, so they can keep fecking going.

Precisely. How much did Jordan Henderson go for? And people are saying they'll "bite the hand off" anyone who offers more than a few million for someone who's possibly our best (fit) midfielder.

Meanwhile:

But I guess if Coyle thinks Davies will never live up to his promise, in a year he could be virtually worthless in the market,

But what on earth makes you think Coyle believes that? The evidence seems to be quite the reverse - Coyle wants to keep him, and has already rejected one bid, as we're discussing. As for future value - well, maybe all our players will have a poor year, and they'll all be worthless next year. Should we sell them all?

1st) I was saying Eagles contributed a lot more last season, certainly in tangible terms. So in that case would be worth more.

2nd) I'm not saying Coyle believes that. But every player has a price and if Swansea hit what Coyle believes is a "too good to turn down" price then why would we keep him? Coyle has to decide on that. Its not black or white stuff, its shades of grey. He might think that Mark Davies is useful as a player, but will never fully realise his potential. He might want money to bring in for example, someone he thinks is better but can only afford if we get £xM for Davies. My point was its not simply a case of "what Coyle thinks a player is worth" its also about the risk of turning down a big bid you might never get again......especially when the model appears to be, buy relatively low and sell high. A £5M profit on Davies could be reinvested to improve us. In a year he could be worth nowhere near that, or double it.

[Puskas]

1st) I was saying Eagles contributed a lot more last season, certainly in tangible terms. So in that case would be worth more.

Except that no one's bid more for him. And I'd be surprised if anyone did - although would be hard pressed to say why (hype? Possibly...)

A £5M profit on Davies could be reinvested to improve us. In a year he could be worth nowhere near that, or double it.

It would take a rather larger bid than £5million to turn a £5million profit on him. Everyone has their price, true, and if we got a truly daft bid, we should take it. But I don't understand the eagerness of some folk to sell at the first bid that comes in...

[BWFC_Insane]

1st) I was saying Eagles contributed a lot more last season, certainly in tangible terms. So in that case would be worth more.

Except that no one's bid more for him. And I'd be surprised if anyone did - although would be hard pressed to say why (hype? Possibly...)

A £5M profit on Davies could be reinvested to improve us. In a year he could be worth nowhere near that, or double it.

It would take a rather larger bid than £5million to turn a £5million profit on him. Everyone has their price, true, and if we got a truly daft bid, we should take it. But I don't understand the eagerness of some folk to sell at the first bid that comes in...

But thats my point, Davies might be worth £6M to Swansea because he fits their plans, but less to us, because Eagles creates more, or LCY etc.....worth is a bit subjective. If for example Davies ends up playing only half the games because we sign another midfield player, and we turned down £6M it would be a poor decision.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Ah but Zaha's a young player in demand under a long contract whereas Mavies is... oh.

[Puskas]

But thats my point, Davies might be worth £6M to Swansea because he fits their plans, but less to us, because Eagles creates more, or LCY etc.....worth is a bit subjective. If for example Davies ends up playing only half the games because we sign another midfield player, and we turned down £6M it would be a poor decision.

But if in those games he plays, he scores some crucial goals/creates chances/etc, and we go up...?

My point is that I really don't think you can quantify value like that - there are too many factors to account for. The only real way of doing it is what people are prepared to pay. And, given the current market, players like Mark Davies can go for considerably more than £5million.
If we turn the offer down and he plays badly, you can call it a poor decision. If we accept the offer, he plays brilliantly for Swansea and gets sold to Liverpool for £20million the year later, is it also a poor decision? Or, indeed, how well would he have to play for it to be a good decision to keep him at £5million? What about at £6million? And so on...

[boltonboris]

What if he has a shit season but scores the winner in the play-off final? What then?

This is giving me a headache

[Bruce Rioja]

We were planning to pay Sanchez 25K a week, to join, plus a joining fee.

How do you know that?