Punts - what Evans and Leonard sales show us

[Ricky]

I think you need to make your mind up. You start out saying that the sale of Leonard is daft - but then you conclude that it's part of an excellent strategy?

I just do not understand any fan who is lamenting the loss of Leonard. Let's be very, very clear about this...he did NOTHING. I've seen every game he played, from the first one, which was away at Norwich. On that day him and Lee Evans made their debuts. I was excited to see 2 new players making their debut. My conclusion on that day was that Evans looked a very neat and tidy player - but the other bloke, Leonard, was hardly in the game. He got subbed off if I recall correctly.

Since then he's rarely threatened to get into our first team, and that's despite us being without key midfield players like Coutts and Duffy on occasions. When he's come on he's looked very ordinary - and I mean, VERY ordinary. The best I've ever seen from him in all the time he was here, was the last home match v Norwich, when he replaced the startled rabbit in the headlights that is Ben Woodburn, and made an improvement to the stability of the midfield. Largely because Woodburn was panicking every time he got the ball and kept kicking it anywhere and giving it away.

If I can find something positive to say about Leonard in all the time he's been here it's that he can be a calming influence, with his fondness for a 5 yard sideways pass, to a jittery midfield. Big deal!

Of course, now he's been traded we have all the "he'll come good" brigade out in force. Well, he didn't and he's gone. So stop trying to tell us something good about a bloke that we all saw had nothing to contribute to this team. He wasn't good enough - full stop.

I don't think we bought him with a view to cultivating him like a greenhouse plant and then selling him on for a profit. I think we bought him because we believed he was going to make a major contribution to the team. The fact he didn't, and the fact we still made a profit on him, is a feather in the cap of Mr Wilder. And folks who are criticising the sale of Leonard are criticising the credentials of Wilder to make the right decisions for this club.

Apart from that - I totally agree with you!

That I feel the sale of Leonard is daft only adds to my point - I think he would have proved to be a good signing and will in no time prove to be worth more than the £1.5m we're said to have got for him. As it stands though, he goes down as an unsuccessful one and we've made a profit on him.

You can have your opinions about Leonard as a player but it's irrelevant to my post.

And we didn't "all see" he had nothing to contribute. Plenty thought he did. Including Wilder, based on various interviews. We've sold him because he wanted to go and because we could double our money, not because he had nothing to offer.

Barely anybody saw anything in Calvert-Lewin.... look how that worked out.

 

[Chali 2na]

In a nutshell yes. Buying players from L1 has proved through the events of the last JTW that this strategy is ineffective in the advancement of the team, I think most of us would agree this - we’ve had to repeat the whole exercise again.

Buying better quality reduces the risk, agree that it won’t eliminate it entirely - Norwood being a case in point.

In terms of the budget - fair point, my answer would be one that less is sometimes more, I.e. buy 2 players of quality rather than 4 players of L1 quality.

Ok, so assuming the total outlay for those 4 players was approximately £1.5-£2m, which 2 (or even 1) higher quality players would you have preferred us to spend our money on?

The point I'm trying to make is that our budget forces us to take gambles: we can't afford the finished product.
Our signings in January were all gambles, unfortunately they didn't come.

 

[Superbladesman7]

I know this will sound farfetched, but I genuinely know Leonard’s girlfriends brother.

Housemate at sheff uni is from essex and one of his good pals.

Anyway my point being they apparently never settled properly in Sheffield. Bought a house in Mosborough, got burgled quite early on. But ultimately never felt at home here.

I think that as much as anything will have pushed this transfer rather than CW being more than happy to sell.

Seemed like a good lad though and a shame he didn’t get more opportunities, but when all fit he was 5th choice at best in our ridiculously strong midfield now.

UTB

 

[Cerberus Blade]

That I feel the sale of Leonard is daft only adds to my point - I think he would have proved to be a good signing and will in no time prove to be worth more than the £1.5m we're said to have got for him. As it stands though, he goes down as an unsuccessful one and we've made a profit on him.

You can have your opinions about Leonard as a player but it's irrelevant to my post.

And we didn't "all see" he had nothing to contribute. Plenty thought he did. Including Wilder, based on various interviews. We've sold him because he wanted to go and because we could double our money, not because he had nothing to offer.

Barely anybody saw anything in Calvert-Lewin.... look how that worked out.

Please tell us what you saw in him that has made you so convinced that he would have "proved to be a good signing"? (I'd love to have that insight!)

Your argument is that his sale was daft because if we had held onto him , even though he wasn't likely to get much first team football with us, his value would have magically increased and that would have led to us getting more money for him.

No, that's daft mate. I mean...that's really daft.

His value would have only increased if he'd played regular football in the first team and done well for us. As things stood, he was heading further away from the first team, not getting nearer to it, especially when you consider the signings of Norwood, the return to fitness of Coutts, and now the signing of Johnson as well.

I also think you're genuinely confused about his reasons for leaving. He's left because he's surplus to requirements mate - Wilder doesn't fancy him - he hasn't done it for us - understand? That's why he's left. I'm sure he wants to go in that situation - but don't get that confused with us really wanting him to stay - we didn't. He's been a huge flop.

I think it's better to come to terms with that and resist the urge to put a little stake in the ground to say, "I told you he'd come good", just in case he does come good one day?

You've made some good points about picking up players and moving them on for a profit - which I agree with. But then you shoot yourself in the foot by criticising the release of Leonard as "daft".

 

[Deaneandagana]

Ok, so assuming the total outlay for those 4 players was approximately £1.5-£2m, which 2 (or even 1) higher quality players would you have preferred us to spend our money on?

The point I'm trying to make is that our budget forces us to take gambles: we can't afford the finished product.
Our signings in January were all gambles, unfortunately they didn't come.

Your points are valid, Norwood is the obvious answer, however not sure he was available.

My contention is that in order to improve you have to improve the players which ultimately means increased budget, financial outlay, it becomes a balancing act.

I think Wilder has accepted the point that buying L1 players doesn’t work, we saw during the close season that he became agitated over the need to raise the stakes.

I once saw an interview with Brian Clough, Forest had just one their first European cup and Clough was asked how does he ensure Forest repeat this and their First Divn form - his reply was simply “keep buying better quality players”

 

[Ricky]

Please tell us what you saw in him that has made you so convinced that he would have "proved to be a good signing"? (I'd love to have that insight!)

Your argument is that his sale was daft because if we had held onto him , even though he wasn't likely to get much first team football with us, his value would have magically increased and that would have led to us getting more money for him.

No, that's daft mate. I mean...that's really daft.

His value would have only increased if he'd played regular football in the first team and done well for us. As things stood, he was heading further away from the first team, not getting nearer to it, especially when you consider the signings of Norwood, the return to fitness of Coutts, and now the signing of Johnson as well.

I also think you're genuinely confused about his reasons for leaving. He's left because he's surplus to requirements mate - Wilder doesn't fancy him - he hasn't done it for us - understand? That's why he's left. I'm sure he wants to go in that situation - but don't get that confused with us really wanting him to stay - we didn't. He's been a huge flop.

I think it's better to come to terms with that and resist the urge to put a little stake in the ground to say, "I told you he'd come good", just in case he does come good one day?

You've made some good points about picking up players and moving them on for a profit - which I agree with. But then you shoot yourself in the foot by criticising the release of Leonard as "daft".

I've been through all this on the Leonard to Millwall thread.

I'm saying he'll increase in value now he's going to be playing regularly.

That is why I didn't want us to agree to permanent deal at this stage, and one reason I think it's daft. If it was just a loan, that would've made far more sense. Then Millwall can decide what they're willing to pay in January.

That he'd IMO prove to be a good player for us is separate to the point about his value now increasing. In any case, he had 3 years left with us to increase in value - or to go out on loan to do so.

He wasn't surplus. He was in the squad every game and we'll be signing someone to replace him (Cranie). And again I'll refer to various comments Wilder's made about him. "Doesn't fancy him" would be a wrong way to put it.

What did I see in him? Athleticism, versatility, drive and (at last) some ability on the ball in the Norwich game. Someone who'd always at least be a very useful substitute and only improve over the duration of his contract.

 

[Chali 2na]

Your points are valid, Norwood is the obvious answer, however not sure he was available.

Norwood was playing games, on loan for Fulham, so he wouldn't have been available. If he was, I'm sure we would have been interested.

My contention is that in order to improve you have to improve the players which ultimately means increased budget, financial outlay, it becomes a balancing act.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is any possibility of increasing the budget in the foreseeable future.

I think Wilder has accepted the point that buying L1 players doesn’t work, we saw during the close season that he became agitated over the need to raise the stakes.

I once saw an interview with Brian Clough, Forest had just one their first European cup and Clough was asked how does he ensure Forest repeat this and their First Divn form - his reply was simply “keep buying better quality players”

I do understand what you're saying, and Wilder may have learnt something from the January window - I hope he doesn't change his policy completely though, as there's plenty good with it, and he's doing a great job compared to previous managers.

I also think that saying "buying L1 players doesn’t work" is a little simplistic too. I imagine we won't rule out L1 players, as plenty of great players come from league 1. Players like James Madison, Harry Maguire and Callum Wilson were bought from L1 clubs in recent years and now they're in the PL.

 

[super_pig]

Agree with your comments, it’s the signings made in the the last JTW that haven’t worked

it was a punt that didn’t work out. we couldn’t replace Coutts as much for the time of the season than the financial outlay
so we had a punt on a few decent lower league players as a stop gap
it didn’t work out only in the sense that we didn’t get top 6.. we could have gone into total freefall

 

[GrayBlade]

I think agreeing to sell Leonard at this stage is daft. But we've sold him, we're said to have doubled our money and now all the January signings have departed never to be seen again.

We also made a profit on Lee Evans, selling for over £1m.

Neither of these can be considered bad signings for me, but neither were really a success. Yet we've made a profit on both. Turning a combined £1.5m into at least £2.5m.

Both were effectively L1 players when they signed. Both were a good age - 23 and 25. Both had good fitness records. Both were performing consistently well. Both, certainly Leonard, seemed like the right types of characters.

I said at the time that signing both of them was a great combined punt, with one being insurance against the other.

8 months down the line, even though it's not worked out as well as hoped, we've got our money back and then some and have only benefited from taking this punt.

It shows that we should be confident to take this calculated, speculative approach to recruitment and play something of a numbers game.

It's about taking well researched gambles on players within a certain age and cost bracket. Some will work, some won't. Financially, the successful ones should more than pay for the unsuccessful ones. Certainly if 1 in 2 are successful - and I'd back us to have at least a 50% hit rate.

Players within a certain age and fee bracket can increase considerably in value in a very short space of time. Especially with the level of inflation at Championship level and above.

Moore, O'Connell, Baldock, Carruthers and Lundstram are others who could be put in the same category as Evans and Leonard. Look what we paid for them, and look what they're worth now. It backs up this point. You're looking at around £2.2m becoming something like £15m.

I think it's an excellent strategy. It's just important not to try and force it too much.

Absolutely spot on there mate.