Mykhailo Mudryk [Chelsea Bound]

[Rasmi]

We spent 115£ million on 5 players last summer , bringing this guy in for near that amount is idiotic.
Liverpool bought Darwin for 64 £ from a Portuguese league that is light years ahead of Ukrainian football.
The guy is 21 and would feel the pressure living up to that price from day one.
The media and fans would be all over him.
We shouldn't pay more than 30 - 40£ million - and even that would be a bit pricy considered what this guy has achieved so far.

Give Shaktar 35 million £, mixed up with presentation add ons - something like if he plays xx games in Champions League than they get additional 20 £ million.

64 million straight payment and rest of 21 million in instalments. Nunez cost 85 million pound

 

[drippin]

We spent 115£ million on 5 players last summer , bringing this guy in for near that amount is idiotic.
Liverpool bought Darwin for 64 £ from a Portuguese league that is light years ahead of Ukrainian football.
The guy is 21 and would feel the pressure living up to that price from day one.
The media and fans would be all over him.
We shouldn't pay more than 30 - 40£ million - and even that would be a bit pricy considered what this guy has achieved so far.

Give Shaktar 35 million £, mixed up with presentation add ons - something like if he plays xx games in Champions League than they get additional 20 £ million.

Found this, we actually have a recent example of what I earlier, and you here suggest. Sensible add-ons to lessen the risk of buying such a player with little experience.

"The Reds will pay the Primeira Liga side a guaranteed £64.3m sum, but with a number of add-ons that can be triggered throughout the life of the six-year contract, a large number of them very achievable and related to individual and team successes, there is the expectation that the eventual fee paid won't be too far away from the top figure."

---

"Based on an exchange rate of 1.15 for the Euro against Sterling, the figures laid out by Swiss Ramble show a £65m guaranteed sum before add-ons, and an estimated 20 percent agent cut that would equate to £13m, giving a potential outlay of £78m before any additional triggers are met. Should those be met. then the actual value of the deal, including agent payments, could rise to as high as £100m, it is suggested."

Darwin Nunez could eventually cost Liverpool £144m and FSG already know why

Liverpool have made a big financial commitment in bringing Darwin Nunez to Anfield

www.liverpoolecho.co.uk

 

[HollandGooner]

Yep hence I laughed at the people who think Mudryk is huge gamble and Leao is safe bet. Both have long way to go. The PL is different animal. But no doubt Mudryk would lit up seria a

Leao is the real deal

 

[Rasmi]

Leao is the real deal

Could be. He is very talented. But he is a player on the up rather than one that’s there right now. He didn’t have a sniff in the two games vs Chelsea. Reece had him in his pocket so much that he said after Reece is the toughest defender he played against ever

 

[ArsenalInMyHeart]

Personally i love Leao but if Mudryk is wanted by Arteta, i will support him.

 

[KrissKringle]

Bare in mind Mudryk is 2 years younger and has already performed to a higher level in the CL than Leao has to date.

 

[daron christie]

How much did we pay for a unproven non CL playing Saliba …?

 

[Halend]

How much did we pay for a unproven non CL playing Saliba …?

£30m

 

[drippin]

How much did we pay for a unproven non CL playing Saliba …?

27 million pounds. Was it like 6 installments.

Arsenal sign William Saliba from Saint-Etienne on long-term deal

Eighteen-year-old will spend 2019/20 season back on loan at the Ligue 1 side

www.skysports.com

 

[daron christie]

£30m

Yes imagine if he had already made an impression in the CL how much we would of had to pay for him

 

[GDeep™]

I think it should be at least 150 million, because if he doesn't succeed at football for some weird reason, he can surely do it in show business.

RIP Aaron Carter.

 

[Trilly]

Haven’t seen anything from Mudryk or Leao that has overly impressed me. Leao looks a messy player, with low technique, in a poor league.

Leao has looked pretty meh the few times I’ve seen him, really fast though.

People on here rate him highly though so I’ll just go with that until I’ve seen enough of him.

 

[6666Louis]

Mudryk looks like a rare chance of becoming the worlds best player

He has some Mbappesque fast feet, power and technique

No one knows how he deals with the struggles of a new league, more pressure and less freedom

 

[db10_therza]

Mudryk looks like a rare chance of becoming the worlds best player

He has some Mbappesque fast feet, power and technique

No one knows how he deals with the struggles of a new league, more pressure and less freedom

AM wouldn’t take Mbappe here though. Pace merchant and that…

Jokes aside I think you’re spot on. His ceiling is ridiculous, a proper high stakes, moonshot gamble.

 

[Trilly]

AM wouldn’t take Mbappe here though. Pace merchant and that…

Jokes aside I think you’re spot on. His ceiling is ridiculous, a proper high stakes, moonshot gamble.

It’s that lightning pace.

When you add top class ability to that you always get a terrifying player. Feels like something like 9/10 of elite forwards have pace. Not just regular pace either but really really fast.

 

[Trilly]

27 million pounds. Was it like 6 installments.

Arsenal sign William Saliba from Saint-Etienne on long-term deal

Eighteen-year-old will spend 2019/20 season back on loan at the Ligue 1 side

www.skysports.com

I genuinely think Saliba is worth the next five failed attempts at going for the next big thing.

It’s very risky shopping in the ‘premium but unproven young talent’ category but the upside for me is worth it.

If Mudryk was 20 instead of 22 I’d say that 50M for him is similar to the 30M we paid for an unproven (but highly rated) Saliba.

 

[drippin]

I genuinely think Saliba is worth the next five failed attempts at going for the next big thing.

It’s very risky shopping in the ‘premium but unproven young talent’ category but the upside for me is worth it.

If Mudryk was 20 instead of 22 I’d say that 50M for him is similar to the 30M we paid for an unproven (but highly rated) Saliba.

Saliba was great business, because it was so many installments. Didn't affect our other business very much, and now we got a top CB out of the blue for this season without new investment. Only mistake they made was only 5 year contract, but I assume Saliba didn't agree for more.

For unproven talents, yeah, they're fine if they are paid in many installments or have much of the fee in add-ons.

If you fail at Mudryk kind of transfers for 50 million (if they sell for that "little") for 5 times, it's 250 million. Is that better than buying two 125 million top players who have proven themselves already?

 

[db10_therza]

If you fail at Mudryk kind of transfers for 50 million (if they sell for that "little") for 5 times, it's 250 million. Is that better than buying two 125 million top players who have proven themselves already?

This kinda assumes that your failed mudryk type buy has no resale value if they flop. Which admittedly given our recent sales isn’t a bad shout 😭

Even with that assumption though, you’re basically saying to “break even” with the buy proven model you need a hit rate of 2 in 5 gambles to pay off. Given our recent efforts in buys I think that’s quite achievable.

It also ignores of course the very real risk that your “proven” buy doesn’t work out (could be injury, not adjusting to style of play, pressure of the price tag etc).

Over sustained periods the gamble strategy has been shown to be effective. Looking at this Jan in isolation though, you’d have a very strong argument to say but proven just because of where we’re at.

 

[drippin]

This kinda assumes that your failed mudryk type buy has no resale value if they flop. Which admittedly given our recent sales isn’t a bad shout 😭

Even with that assumption though, you’re basically saying to “break even” with the buy proven model you need a hit rate of 2 in 5 gambles to pay off. Given our recent efforts in buys I think that’s quite achievable.

It also ignores of course the very real risk that your “proven” buy doesn’t work out (could be injury, not adjusting to style of play, pressure of the price tag etc).

Over sustained periods the gamble strategy has been shown to be effective. Looking at this Jan in isolation though, you’d have a very strong argument to say but proven just because of where we’re at.

It was only a question with no assumptions.

And yes, where we are at with basically needing only a top DMF/CMF and a top winger, we should aim for starting quality players rather than gambles. But those are not as easy to get as one would think, because they have to be ready to compete/rotate with our current starters.

 

[db10_therza]

It was only a question with no assumptions.

And yes, where we are at with basically needing only a top DMF/CMF and a top winger, we should aim for starting quality players rather than gambles. But those are not as easy to get as one would think, because they have to be ready to compete/rotate with our current starters.

Yeah I can see where you’re coming from. I should probably state my position before I get accused of sitting on the fence.

I’m generally pro-gamble anti-proven. The thing with proven buys is they tend to either have a big ego, or they have the pressure of the price tag hanging around them. I’m not a fan of either of those things. Some people around here point to our position as some kind of Goldilocks lucked out moment but for me it’s not an accident. A lot of wrongs were righted and a lot of good decisions got us to where we are. The hunger and desire of “gambles” to prove themselves whether from the academy or from elsewhere has been a huge part of that. They got non negotiables coming out their backside.

I would normally always prefer to buy 5x gambles over 2x experienced. This Jan, I will “allow it” but my preference is to carry on with the same methods that got us to where we are now.