Patrick Dorgu | United in talks

£30 million is madness for an unproven player . Move on.
Tell this to City who just signed two lesser known centerbacks for similar money. 30m is the normal price for those kind of players, but the question is whether they bring the right profile and Dorgu seems to be okay.
 
Tell this to City who just signed two lesser known centerbacks for similar money. 30m is the normal price for those kind of players, but the question is whether they bring the right profile and Dorgu seems to be okay.
Exactly. £30 million is like £10-15 million from 10-20 years ago.

It’s considered a punt.
 
Put it this way: what are the chances of him turning out to be good enough for us? Let's assume odds of 30%.

If you pay £30m, then you're effectively paying around £90m to fill the position, taking into account the chance of success.

You have to take a probabilistic approach to transfer dealings.
 
Put it this way: what are the chances of him turning out to be good enough for us? Let's assume odds of 30%.

If you pay £30m, then you're effectively paying around £90m to fill the position, taking into account the chance of success.
Where have you plucked that arbitrary figure from? :lol:
 
Put it this way: what are the chances of him turning out to be good enough for us? Let's assume odds of 30%.

If you pay £30m, then you're effectively paying around £90m to fill the position, taking into account the chance of success.

You have to take a probabilistic approach to transfer dealings.
this is interesting maths to say to the least
 
No. We sold Elanga for £15m and this deal should be in the same ballpark.

How are these the same?

United actively wanted to sell a fringe squad player who played enough to demonstrate he wasn't good enough to play for them.

Dorgu potentially might be good enough, is a key player for Lecce and they won't want to sell.
 
I'd probably start by basing it on the success rate of the current regime, which is tricky as there is not much data available to make an accurate assessment.
Even with the best scouting and transfer team in the world, I doubt you ever get much better odds than 50% when buying young unproven talents.
 
Put it this way: what are the chances of him turning out to be good enough for us? Let's assume odds of 30%.

If you pay £30m, then you're effectively paying around £90m to fill the position, taking into account the chance of success.

You have to take a probabilistic approach to transfer dealings.

 
How are these the same?

Man Utd actively wanted to sell a fringe squad player who played enough to demonstrate he wasn't good enough to play for them.

Lecce won't want to sell a key player who potentially may be good enough for United.
Lecce definitely want to sell at some point. They've never sold a player for more than €20m (£17m).

Is he twice as good as any other player to ever play for the club?
 
Even with the best scouting and transfer team in the world, I doubt you ever get much better odds than 50% when buying young unproven talents.
All we have to go on for now is:

Zirkzee - Questionalble
De Ligt - Good transfer
Yoro - Too young to tell
Mazraoui - Good transfer
Ugarte - Good transfer

I know it's not that simplistic but it's the starting point I would work from when attempting to put a number on it. 3/5 signings being good is fairly decent.
 
That’s the market since a while now I’m afraid
Is it, though? Granted, lots of club are willing to make disproportionate offers due to desperation, developing tunnel-vision or lack of feasible alternatives in the mercato, which inflates transfer business (Manchester United itself is a major culprit in this inflation, which has unfortunately caught up with us even though the club is a proverbial money-minting machine).

But three of the very best 3—4—2—1 teams in club football have managed to acquire starting quality wingbacks in recent years for eminently reasonable sums of money. Which does give us a half-decent frame of reference, in a roundabout way (in terms of the possibilities in the mercato, if we're astute enough and cast a wide enough net).
  • Free transfer: Alejandro Grimaldo to Bayer Leverkusen.
  • €20 million: Raoul Bellanova to Atalanta.
  • €11 million: Jeremie Frimpong to Bayer Leverkusen.
  • €7 million: cost of Federico Dimarco's return to Internazionale.
Others who cost half as much as what Lecce are demanding, over the last half-decade or so (transfer fees haven't risen exponentially in this time-frame): Théo Hernandez to Milan, Alphonso Davies to Bayern Munich, Rayan Aït-Nouri to Wolverhampton, Destiny Udogie to Tottenham, Milos Kerkez to Bournemouth, and so on and so forth.

Asking for a bit of financial prudence and restraint from Manchester United, when the player in question is by no means a standout talent (to merit such a significant outlay) and we have limited spending capabilities, isn't exactly out of order.
 
Is it, though? Granted, lots of club are willing to make disproportionate offers due to desperation, developing tunnel-vision or lack of feasible alternatives in the mercato, which inflates transfer business (Manchester United itself is a major culprit in this inflation, which has unfortunately caught up with us even though the club is a proverbial money-minting machine).

But three of the very best 3—4—2—1 teams in club football have managed to acquire starting quality wingbacks in recent years for eminently reasonable sums of money. Which does give us a half-decent frame of reference, in a roundabout way (in terms of the possibilities in the mercato, if we're astute enough and cast a wide enough net).
  • Free transfer: Alejandro Grimaldo to Bayer Leverkusen.
  • €20 million: Raoul Bellanova to Atalanta.
  • €11 million: Jeremie Frimpong to Bayer Leverkusen.
  • €7 million: cost of Federico Dimarco's return to Internazionale.
Others who cost half as much as what Lecce are demanding, over the last half-decade or so (transfer fees haven't risen exponentially in this time-frame): Théo Hernandez to Milan, Alphonso Davies to Bayern Munich, Rayan Aït-Nouri to Wolverhampton, Destiny Udogie to Tottenham, Milos Kerkez to Bournemouth, and so on and so forth.

Asking for a bit of financial prudence and restraint from Manchester United, when the player in question is by no means a standout talent (to merit such a significant outlay) and we have limited spending capabilities, isn't exactly out of order.
Spot on. Why do so many people on here want us to spaff our (very limited) transfer funds up the wall yet AGAIN?
 
Lecce definitely want to sell at some point. They've never sold a player for more than €20m (£17m).

Is he twice as good as any other player to ever play for the club?

And if they do it will be for a lot of money because he's a key part of their team and a player with high potential.

The second point is absolute nonsense logic, what are you even on about? Newcastle's record sale was Elliott Anderson to Forest this summer - does that mean Isak can't possibly be worth £87.5m because he's not literally 2.5x better than Anderson? A club's player sale history has absolutely no barely on a current player's value.
 
For £30 million or more lets say 6 or 7 goal involvements in his 12 matches in attacking positions. So a couple more.

£30 million shouldnt be spent unless its a standout player. If he's coming in for £18 million its another story.

Dwight McNeil has 6 in 13 for Everton who have scored 18 and are 16th placed. I dont really want us to sign him either but thats an example of player at a club in a similar position also being picked on the wing and having more than 4 goal involvements in 12 or 1 in 3.

Can you see why signing a player who mostly plays as a winger this season and doesnt have a lot of goals and assists might be a concern when weve only scored 27 goals ourselves this season? We've also wasted a huge amount of money. Is there something wrong with wanting that cycle to stop?

Firstly, the idea that 4GA makes him a write off, but 6GA would be ok, is kind of ridiculous. One more goal and one more assist over 20 games is a marginal difference. Those numbers are very clearly in the same bracket of performance.

Secondly, the notion that £30M is the preserve of stand out players is from a different era. Given its January and we would be taking away one of the better players from a team fighting relegation, that figure is about right for a player that the club think can both contribute short term but also has a higher ceiling than their current performance level.

If there's another left wing back on the market with an order of magnitude better GA and/or a fraction of the price, I'd very clearly prefer them. But given the options on the market right now I don't have any issue with this transfer.
 
And if they do it will be for a lot of money because he's a key part of their team and a player with high potential.

The second point is absolute nonsense logic, what are you even on about? Newcastle's record sale was Elliott Anderson to Forest this summer - does that mean Isak can't possibly be worth £87.5m because he's not literally 2.5x better than Anderson? A club's player sale history has absolutely no barely on a current player's value.
I'd rather Isak than 2.5 Elliot Andersons.
 
Why don't we just send them Amass on loan for a reduction in fee. We wanna loan Amass out. They'll be getting a promising player for the position they're also losing a promising player. Seems too obvious
 
No. We sold Elanga for £15m and this deal should be in the same ballpark.
In an ideal world, maybe. But us selling someone and a team like Lecce selling someone are 2 different things, people are never going to pay through the nose for cast offs from big clubs, we're the only mugs that do it. That's before you even take into account things like wages.
 
They paid somewhere in the region of 300k for him, £30m would be a ridiculous fee for someone who's not really proven anything in the position we're supposedly signing him for. If he moves in the summer within Italy, he won't go to close to that, so we're being taken advantage of. Italian clubs know this.
 
Is it, though? Granted, lots of club are willing to make disproportionate offers due to desperation, developing tunnel-vision or lack of feasible alternatives in the mercato, which inflates transfer business (Manchester United itself is a major culprit in this inflation, which has unfortunately caught up with us even though the club is a proverbial money-minting machine).

But three of the very best 3—4—2—1 teams in club football have managed to acquire starting quality wingbacks in recent years for eminently reasonable sums of money. Which does give us a half-decent frame of reference, in a roundabout way (in terms of the possibilities in the mercato, if we're astute enough and cast a wide enough net).
  • Free transfer: Alejandro Grimaldo to Bayer Leverkusen.
  • €20 million: Raoul Bellanova to Atalanta.
  • €11 million: Jeremie Frimpong to Bayer Leverkusen.
  • €7 million: cost of Federico Dimarco's return to Internazionale.
Others who cost half as much as what Lecce are demanding, over the last half-decade or so (transfer fees haven't risen exponentially in this time-frame): Théo Hernandez to Milan, Alphonso Davies to Bayern Munich, Rayan Aït-Nouri to Wolverhampton, Destiny Udogie to Tottenham, Milos Kerkez to Bournemouth, and so on and so forth.

Asking for a bit of financial prudence and restraint from Manchester United, when the player in question is by no means a standout talent (to merit such a significant outlay) and we have limited spending capabilities, isn't exactly out of order.

Spot on.

Somewhat understandably, a lot of fans have lost sight of what a good value transfer looks like.

I've seen on Twitter that Liverpool want Kerkez as a long term replacement for Robertson and have offered £30 million. For a player like Dorgu we should be looking at a total package of around £15m at the very maximum.