Érik Lamela

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
AberdeenYid said:
Halfway through typing a huge answer to this, decided I couldn't be fucked, so just going to say, yes it is.
Click to expand...

It really isn't. There's enough cheap bargains and enough expensive flops to show that. The fee is based on a lot of things; the financial position of both clubs, the importance of the player, his nationality, his age and so on.

A club in Romania is going to sell the exact same player for a lot less than a club in England would.

If a player is English his fee is going to be more than if he was Romanian.

Smaller clubs will always milk every penny out of United, Real Madrid etc because they know they have cash to spend.

So, no. Fee isn't strictly related to quality.
 
Jayc1 said:
It really isn't. There's enough cheap bargains and enough expensive flops to show that. The fee is based on a lot of things; the financial position of both clubs, the importance of the player, his nationality, his age and so on.

A club in Romania is going to sell the exact same player for a lot less than a club in England would.

If a player is English his fee is going to be more than if he was Romanian.

Smaller clubs will always milk every penny out of United, Real Madrid etc because they know they have cash to spend.

So, no. Fee isn't strictly related to quality.
Click to expand...
English players are better than Romanian ones.

Except for Hagi.

So, yes it is.
 
AberdeenYid said:
Halfway through typing a huge answer to this, decided I couldn't be fucked, so just going to say, yes it is.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Right or wrong , Money talks in this business. A transfer fee is a reflection of a players potential worth and a club's assumption on the players productivity at the club. 2 prem goals thru 2 full seasons at the club is very poor return on spurs sizeable investment in Lamela however you spin it.
 
Last edited:
The point isn't whether he has justified his £30m price tag. That money is in the past now. It's about there being no point in selling him for say £15m and replacing him for a similar price. If he had signed for £15m there would barely even be a discussion about selling someone who effectively has only had one full season to adjust, and isn't dong THAT badly under the circumstances. When people say you shouldn't judge the player by the price tag it's not with regard to a return on the investment, but in the current context of whether or not he should be sold. For the amount we would receive for him now, he shouldn't be.
 
PhillyHotspur said:
Exactly. Right or wrong , Money talks in this business. A transfer fee is a reflection of a players potential worth and a club's assumption on the players productivity at the club. 2 prem goals thru 2 full seasons at the club is very poor return on spurs sizeable investment in Lamela however you spin it.
Click to expand...
Yeah but imagine he has another 8 seasons like this one, right. That means he's worth 3 million a season. And he's definitely had a better contribution than most if not all of the players we could have got to replace him for 3 million.
Alternatively, he could improve. Get 10 goals and 10 assists next season, and the season after. and 15 goals the season after that. Then we could sell him for roughly what we paid. Then his entire contribution was essentially free.
You can't look at it based solely on the money. Is a £5 sandwich better than a £2.50 sandwich, depends entirely on what you consider a good sandwich, right? If you could afford both you wouldn't judge it by the price.
Yeah he may not have scored many goals in the league, but he is our highest creator of goals in the league. Some people like more meat some people like more salad.
 
We shouldn't consider Lamela's fee in evaluating him. However, we certainly should consider his fee in evaluating Levy and the scouting department.

And the fee we paid for Lamela should have absolutely no impact on whether or not we'd be willing to sell him at any particular price. The only considerations should be what fee we could get for him now vs. what he means to the squad now and in the future. The money we spent on him should have no bearing on how we handle him going forward.
 
Jayc1 said:
People really need to stop using transfer fees as a measurement to judge a player by. Lamela has nothing to do with his transfer fee and you shouldn't judge him by it; fee isn't indicative to quality. All this tells us is he probably wasn't worth £30 mil when you consider Aguero cost £38 mil, which is pretty useless when trying to judge the player himself.

His competition is Lennon and Townsend, these are the people he should be viewed against.

Lennon - 2 goals and 2 assists this year. 1 goal and 3 assists last year.
Townsend - 2 goals and 2 assists this year. 1 goal and 0 assists this year
Lamela - 2 goals and 7 assists this year. 0 goals and 1 assist last year.

Therefore Lamela is the best option we have. He's the youngest out of the three and has also performed to a higher level (At Roma) than Lennon or Townsend ever have in their careers. I've got faith he'll go up a notch next year.

It's not worth the risk of taking £10 mil loss and then he becomes an amazing player elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Are these League only stats yeah? He's had more appearances and minutes overall for a start.

He gets last year as a freebie, he gets this year as a settling period, on fire early next season or fuck off.

Ignore the price tag people say, ok let's ignore it, why the fuck would he be getting a 3 year grace period if he cost £10m instead of £30m? Doubt he would. His price tag is as much his saviour as his problem if you ask me.
 
Anthony Beale said:
Yeah but imagine he has another 8 seasons like this one, right. That means he's worth 3 million a season. And he's definitely had a better contribution than most if not all of the players we could have got to replace him for 3 million.
Alternatively, he could improve. Get 10 goals and 10 assists next season, and the season after. and 15 goals the season after that. Then we could sell him for roughly what we paid. Then his entire contribution was essentially free.
You can't look at it based solely on the money. Is a £5 sandwich better than a £2.50 sandwich, depends entirely on what you consider a good sandwich, right? If you could afford both you wouldn't judge it by the price.
Yeah he may not have scored many goals in the league, but he is our highest creator of goals in the league. Some people like more meat some people like more salad.
Click to expand...
I thought most of Lamela's season this year was sub-par. Too many giveaways, not enough take-ons, 2 measly Prem goals and basically his biggest strength being his work-rate (albeit after his continually gives the ball away). His Assists total was strong and I can see him possibly succeeding in the CAM role. However, seems like Spurs are committed to Eriksen on that front so we'll likely get a lot of the same next year. I'd rather cash in now while he has some legitimate value and find a player much better suited for the Prem and that wing role. .
 
I think these days, at 23 you really need to be producing regularly.

I still think he has the look about him that he has never really played much in a team dynamic.... Great individual close control etc, but his head is usually down, and passes are often left a bit short or otherwise wayward.

I'd probably keep him another year to see if he can improve, it wont harm his value any further i dont suppose.

I've seen players completely change over a summer, if he wants to, he has all the tools.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom