Jhon Duran…

ayushreddevil9 said:
Well 3 years gap is too much. Not comparable at all
Click to expand...

Yes but if Spurs get 2-3 seasons out of him and then sell he'll be 30 then that's the point as they'll still be expecting decent bids for someone who'll probably establish himself in the England squad.

They'll always be a promoted or bottom half team who's perhaps just had a takeover (Everton/Palace) who'll have 30/40m to perhaps spend.

West Ham just signed Fullkrug for nearly 30m who's 31 so they'd certainly be bidding 50m or so for Ollie Watkins in the unlikely event he wanted to join them.
 
We have been victims of the "Giffen good" effect for a decade, which counterintuitively dictates that as the price of something rises, demand increases.

For example, John Duran, Gabriel Martinelli and Moises Caicedo...we were clearly interested in all three....but they were all "too cheap".

Compare with Donny van der Beek, Hannibal Mejbri, Anthony Martial etc...all reassuringly expensive. "They must be good, look how expensive they are!".

It's a similar effect to the one you see in gambling. If I say there are two horses running this afternoon at Newmarket and one is priced at 2/1 and one is 10/1, which has the better chance of winning? The answer is, you can't possibly know without further info., but intuitively you think the horse at 2/1 has more chance. It's why punters will stick £100 on an evens shot they don't really fancy and then have a fiver on a horse they really like and have followed for months at 16/1.
 
Proppa striker. One of my favourite players to right now
 
Lentwood said:
We have been victims of the "Giffen good" effect for a decade, which counterintuitively dictates that as the price of something rises, demand increases.

For example, John Duran, Gabriel Martinelli and Moises Caicedo...we were clearly interested in all three....but they were all "too cheap".

Compare with Donny van der Beek, Hannibal Mejbri, Anthony Martial etc...all reassuringly expensive. "They must be good, look how expensive they are!".

It's a similar effect to the one you see in gambling. If I say there are two horses running this afternoon at Newmarket and one is priced at 2/1 and one is 10/1, which has the better chance of winning? The answer is, you can't possibly know without further info., but intuitively you think the horse at 2/1 has more chance. It's why punters will stick £100 on an evens shot they don't really fancy and then have a fiver on a horse they really like and have followed for months at 16/1.
Click to expand...
How many different hobbies do you fecking have :lol: :lol: Weren't there references about Poker and NFL lately? Are you Charlie Harper?
 
Bluelion7 said:
What I find entertaining is the continuing idea that Chelsea’s scouting and recruitment is a haphazard mess. When we were in for Olise even after buying Palmer: “they have zero idea what they’re doing. An injury riddled RW when you e already bought people there”

When we were offering 55m to Everton for Anthony Gordon before it fell through: “Have Chelsea lost their minds? Seriously, not a bad little player, but this is getting absurd.”

Chelsea working out a deal for Jhon Duran: “Chelsea need a starter. They already have a prospect in Jackson, they don’t need to buy someone else who may or may not produce”

Honestly we should listen to other people less.

Those three deals fell through for very different reasons, but validation is always nice. Duran is a really good striker.
Click to expand...

You could add Adam Wharton to that too this past January.
 
Lentwood said:
It's a similar effect to the one you see in gambling. If I say there are two horses running this afternoon at Newmarket and one is priced at 2/1 and one is 10/1, which has the better chance of winning? The answer is, you can't possibly know without further info., but intuitively you think the horse at 2/1 has more chance. It's why punters will stick £100 on an evens shot they don't really fancy and then have a fiver on a horse they really like and have followed for months at 16/1.
Click to expand...
This makes absolutely no sense, odds are literally a number built from this so-called 'further info' :lol:
 
Bluelion7 said:
What I find entertaining is the continuing idea that Chelsea’s scouting and recruitment is a haphazard mess. When we were in for Olise even after buying Palmer: “they have zero idea what they’re doing. An injury riddled RW when you e already bought people there”

When we were offering 55m to Everton for Anthony Gordon before it fell through: “Have Chelsea lost their minds? Seriously, not a bad little player, but this is getting absurd.”

Chelsea working out a deal for Jhon Duran: “Chelsea need a starter. They already have a prospect in Jackson, they don’t need to buy someone else who may or may not produce”

Honestly we should listen to other people less.

Those three deals fell through for very different reasons, but validation is always nice. Duran is a really good striker.
Click to expand...
If you’re gonna bid for 3582577 players at the age of 23 or younger it’s obvious that quite a few of them will improve and become excellent players. That doesn’t make the scouting exceptional. Every top club will have had guys like Palmer, Olise and Gordon on their lists. But it’s only Chelsea who basically bid for 99% of them. What matters is the quota of how many you get right compared to how many you get wrong. Although in Chelsea’s case you don’t even care for that, as you just buy 100 talented players and then choose the 23 to use in your squad long term while freezing out the rest.
 
Bluelion7 said:
What I find entertaining is the continuing idea that Chelsea’s scouting and recruitment is a haphazard mess. When we were in for Olise even after buying Palmer: “they have zero idea what they’re doing. An injury riddled RW when you e already bought people there”

When we were offering 55m to Everton for Anthony Gordon before it fell through: “Have Chelsea lost their minds? Seriously, not a bad little player, but this is getting absurd.”

Chelsea working out a deal for Jhon Duran: “Chelsea need a starter. They already have a prospect in Jackson, they don’t need to buy someone else who may or may not produce”

Honestly we should listen to other people less.

Those three deals fell through for very different reasons, but validation is always nice. Duran is a really good striker.
Click to expand...
That might be because you've bought players for 1.330 million EUR the last 5 windows (sold for 540 million). It seems more than a little happy go lucky and very unsustainable.

Attacking midfielders coming into Chelsea the last two years (including loan):
- Chukwuemeka
- Madueke
- Sterling
- Mudryk
- Felix (loan and transfer)
- Gallagher (from U21)
- Casadei
- Palmer
- Nkunku
- Angelo
- Hutchinson
- Neto
- Dewsbury-Hall
- Sancho (loan)

Attacking midfielders leaving you in the same period:
- Sterling (loan)
- Mount
- Havertz
- Werner
- Ziyech
- Hutchinson
- Moreira
- Angelo
- Gallagher
- CHO
- RLC
- Batshuayi
- Pulisic

That's in two years....

Right now you have 13 players fighting for 3-4 places in your team (AM, LW, RW and CF)
You just want everything, don't you?
How many of the above mentioned players not from the academy do you think you made money on?

Funfact:
Chelsea had 23 managers (including interims) between it was founded in 1905 to year 2000.
Since then they have had 23 managers (including interims)

On topic:
Jhon Duran looks like an interesting young striker and that left foot is a weapon.
I'll be very surprised if he keeps up that goalratio with more gametime though.
 
He's going to be class. Thoroughly enjoyed the game last night and landed for Villa fans. But I fecking despise Gabby Agbonhlahor.
 
Lentwood said:
We have been victims of the "Giffen good" effect for a decade, which counterintuitively dictates that as the price of something rises, demand increases.

For example, John Duran, Gabriel Martinelli and Moises Caicedo...we were clearly interested in all three....but they were all "too cheap".

Compare with Donny van der Beek, Hannibal Mejbri, Anthony Martial etc...all reassuringly expensive. "They must be good, look how expensive they are!".

It's a similar effect to the one you see in gambling. If I say there are two horses running this afternoon at Newmarket and one is priced at 2/1 and one is 10/1, which has the better chance of winning? The answer is, you can't possibly know without further info., but intuitively you think the horse at 2/1 has more chance. It's why punters will stick £100 on an evens shot they don't really fancy and then have a fiver on a horse they really like and have followed for months at 16/1.
Click to expand...

You're describing a Veblen good. I.e. like the old Stella ads, "Reassuringly Expensive".

A Giffen good also has increased demand when the price rises but for very different reasons. Giffen goods are cheap basic essentials where a price rise crowds out expenditure on more expensive alternatives in a way that frees up funds to buy more of the Giffen good. (Giffen goods might well not actually exist in the real world).
 
teague said:
You're describing a Veblen good. I.e. like the old Stel :lol: la ads, "Reassuringly Expensive".

A Giffen good also has increased demand when the price rises but for very different reasons. Giffen goods are cheap basic essentials where a price rise crowds out expenditure on more expensive alternatives in a way that frees up funds to buy more of the Giffen good. (Giffen goods might well not actually exist in the real world).
Click to expand...
Well there we go, people are getting a crash course in Economics as they browse :lol:

Been a while since I was at Uni, need to brush-up obviously
 
At 20 he could develop in all sorts of directions.

What’s clear is that he’s big, fairly quick and can strike the feck out of the ball with his left foot.

Honestly not sure about the rest of his game, which seems pretty raw. But at 20 that could improve a lot over time. Or not.

At this point, I’d definitely rather have Sesko. But that could change over the next couple years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.