Daniel Munoz

[TheBigToePunt]

The financial argument for selling Munoz is clear, but even if one sticks to only thinking in those terms, the value of staying up is far greater.

As inevitable and understandable as our biggest sales have been, and as impossible as it is to replace some of those players with one remotely as good, we have nevertheless replaced outgoing players with downgrades at every turn. Mateta for Larsen (ultimately). Eze for Pino. Olise for even the excellent Sarr. Guehi for Canvot. Lacroix for whichever one you want. None of the players we could pick instead of Munoz are evidently as good as him.

That will catch us up in the end. There is a value to keeping established performers even if their transfer price reduces.

 

[ambrose7]

Love the guy but the last 6 months of last season he didn't look quite the same. I think we've seen his peak.

2 years left on his current deal and 30 so depreciating value from now. Brought in two younger options for the same price we are being offered plus Cardines out getting a season of experience... As soon as we signed Khalaili we looked over-resourced which suggested the club had made its decision.

Forest will offer him the stupidly high last big contract he wants. It makes a fair bit of sense for us.

 

[Mr Palaceman]

If we now have to cover for him and the club see a sale as a good option, fine... But not to forest. He would undoubtedly strengthen their team and that does not sit well with me at all.

For me Forest are the new weed..

 

[pssguy]

Isn't it more fun to string them along and then pull the deal minutes before the transfer deadline?

Not if Munoz wants to leave. Cutting of your nose etc.

 

[pssguy]

The surprising thing to me is that there does not appear to be more interest in him from top clubs.

For me he's one of the best attacking RWBs in world football.
Not his delivery perhaps, but in the runs he makes, the positions he takes up and the drive he provides down the right.
At even around 30 he's as fit as a fiddle with energy and enthusiasm that puts younger players to shame.
But it's not just that, his numbers are very good in terms of goals and assists.

Clearly I'm missing something, and yes, I know he carried an injury last season

Agreed. It's a weak position for United, City and Liverpool: chump change for them. Or a top Spanish team

 

[PalazioVecchio]

Love the guy but the last 6 months of last season he didn't look quite the same. I think we've seen his peak.

his World Cup run was not too bad ?

 

[Dogburger]

Get rid . Munoz has been wanting out and if Forest are stupid enough to pay £20m+ for a player on the wane lets do it , he cant defend for toffee anyway which is probably why Moyes had second thoughts

Quite looking forward to see what the new boys can do now , COYP!

 

[Sardinero]

Think he at one time was our best player, but after his injury he lost pace which was a shame. I agree we need to sell him now and wish him luck

 

[Eagleboy61]

That Wolfie on Forest Fan TV is a prick,said palace have been good chained again after they knicked Glasner off us! the guy is a complete knob and a special needs case

 

[martinelliff]

Along with Mateta we should probably sell Munoz (and if a huge offer +70m comes in for Sarr if he wants away) and start afresh. Palace have done this several times since being in the EPL (e.g. after the Zaha era) so perhaps best to get all the rotten wood out at once and go forward without any malcontents in the team who are near the end of their careers anyway and at peak value. Steady the ship and move forward.

 

[silvertop]

There is a point about any court case, however. That should be dropped if they want to do business with us.

He should drop the claim coz it is crap.

The transfer stuff is just business.

I agree £25m seems about right.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

Along with Mateta we should probably sell Munoz (and if a huge offer +70m comes in for Sarr if he wants away) and start afresh. Palace have done this several times since being in the EPL (e.g. after the Zaha era) so perhaps best to get all the rotten wood out at once and go forward without any malcontents in the team who are near the end of their careers anyway and at peak value. Steady the ship and move forward.

i agree with getting rid of anybody who is mentally or physically not an Eagle. However, our new-player-recruitment department has been a shambles since Dougie Freedman left us.

 

[doombear]

The financial argument for selling Munoz is clear, but even if one sticks to only thinking in those terms, the value of staying up is far greater.

As inevitable and understandable as our biggest sales have been, and as impossible as it is to replace some of those players with one remotely as good, we have nevertheless replaced outgoing players with downgrades at every turn. Mateta for Larsen (ultimately). Eze for Pino. Olise for even the excellent Sarr. Guehi for Canvot. Lacroix for whichever one you want. None of the players we could pick instead of Munoz are evidently as good as him.

That will catch us up in the end. There is a value to keeping established performers even if their transfer price reduces.

Eze took longer to settle than Pino has played so far

.Larsen like all strikers needs a good run of starts with the right kind of supply. He didn't get that last season. He usually played with Hughes and Lerma in midfield whilst Mateta had the benefit of Wharton and Kamada.

Sarr's goal and assist stats for us are the same as Olise's were.

As for Munoz, if his performance against Everton is a piinter to the future, I'm confident that both Mungueza and Khalaili wil prove to be the better options going forward. Yes Munoz has been excellent for us but will he continue to be if he were to stay? I have my doubts. I thunk we've had the best of him and enjoyed it.

Guehi was a one off who settled quickly.

Let's give our new players a bit of time.

 

[doombear]

i agree with getting rid of anybody who is mentally or physically not an Eagle. However, our new-player-recruitment department has been a shambles since Dougie Freedman left us.

Let's see how our current incomings work out before calling our business since Dougie went a shambles.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

Eze took longer to settle than Pino has played so far

.Larsen like all strikers needs a good run of starts with the right kind of supply. He didn't get that last season. He usually played with Hughes and Lerma in midfield whilst Mateta had the benefit of Wharton and Kamada.

Sarr's goal and assist stats for us are the same as Olise's were.

As for Munoz, if his performance against Everton is a piinter to the future, I'm confident that both Mungueza and Khalaili wil prove to be the better options going forward. Yes Munoz has been excellent for us but will he continue to be if he were to stay? I have my doubts. I thunk we've had the best of him and enjoyed it.

Guehi was a one off who settled quickly.

Let's give our new players a bit of time.

I'm not sure I can muster quite your level of positivity about one of two of those names, but even if I could my concern is not just about whether the newer players will ever match up to the players they have replaced. I mean, perhaps in some cases they might. Even if they don't, they may still be effective (Sarr is a very good example of that).

No, my concern is that at the point of change, when one good player is sold and a replacement brought in, we are seeing so big a downgrade case-by-case that we might not survive it if it happens too soon and too often. Whereas Eze, Olise, Guehi etc all had lots of learning and growing to do when they joined us, they were nevertheless already as good as the players they replaced, pretty much. The quality of the team didn't dip too badly, if at all, during that period of change. We could afford, therefore, to be patient with those players.

In more recent times the quality of the team dips notably with every sale and replacement, or with most of them, anyway. Even if we hope some of the newer players will improve over time, we will only have that time if we can stay up whilst we wait.

That's my concern about selling the likes of Munoz. OK, the deal makes sense in isolation, but in reality ours is increasingly becoming a team made up of players who we hope will improve markedly over time (fair enough) but who are also (crucially) not obviously good enough for the here and now.

I think we need to keep a few more established players to see us through this period when the lesser performing (including younger) players develop into ones who are good enough. And that's taking your positive lead, and being hopeful that they ever will be.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

Along with Mateta we should probably sell Munoz (and if a huge offer +70m comes in for Sarr if he wants away) and start afresh. Palace have done this several times since being in the EPL (e.g. after the Zaha era) so perhaps best to get all the rotten wood out at once and go forward without any malcontents in the team who are near the end of their careers anyway and at peak value. Steady the ship and move forward.

That's all fine if we are left with players who are good enough. Otherwise it's just cutting off our nose to spite our face, surely?

 

[ASCPFC]

Be interesting to see Khalaili today.

 

[JHB]

I'm not sure I can muster quite your level of positivity about one of two of those names, but even if I could my concern is not just about whether the newer players will ever match up to the players they have replaced. I mean, perhaps in some cases they might. Even if they don't, they may still be effective (Sarr is a very good example of that).

No, my concern is that at the point of change, when one good player is sold and a replacement brought in, we are seeing so big a downgrade case-by-case that we might not survive it if it happens too soon and too often. Whereas Eze, Olise, Guehi etc all had lots of learning and growing to do when they joined us, they were nevertheless already as good as the players they replaced, pretty much. The quality of the team didn't dip too badly, if at all, during that period of change. We could afford, therefore, to be patient with those players.

In more recent times the quality of the team dips notably with every sale and replacement, or with most of them, anyway. Even if we hope some of the newer players will improve over time, we will only have that time if we can stay up whilst we wait.

That's my concern about selling the likes of Munoz. OK, the deal makes sense in isolation, but in reality ours is increasingly becoming a team made up of players who we hope will improve markedly over time (fair enough) but who are also (crucially) not obviously good enough for the here and now.

I think we need to keep a few more established players to see us through this period when the lesser performing (including younger) players develop into ones who are good enough. And that's taking your positive lead, and being hopeful that they ever will be.

In fairness we were never going to be able to replace Guehi, Olise or Eze without there being a drop in quality. Guehi is one of the best centre halves in world football, Olise might be the best player in football full stop, Eze is a £65m attacking player.

For me the challenge is that firstly we haven’t properly addressed some key gaps (central midfield) and secondly that some of the players have not just been not as good but not good enough full stop (Johnson).

 

[RubinsCube]

In fairness we were never going to be able to replace Guehi, Olise or Eze without there being a drop in quality. Guehi is one of the best centre halves in world football, Olise might be the best player in football full stop, Eze is a £65m attacking player.

For me the challenge is that firstly we haven’t properly addressed some key gaps (central midfield) and secondly that some of the players have not just been not as good but not good enough full stop (Johnson).

Agreed and I have heard several managers and former players say over the years that when top players in a team move on it is pointless trying to replace them: you need to find new top players and then build new teams around those new top players.

If the team is a top half team then this becomes a lull rather than something existential. For a middle of the table or lower half team it can very easily lead to relegation (Leicester, West Ham, Wolves and many others).

The higher the churn the more frequent these overhauls become. The less successful the recruitment the less successful the overhauls are.

My concern with Palace is that the churn is becoming more frequent and it seems on recent evidence that the hires are less successful. It seems we are increasingly being viewed by prospective signings as a short term stepping stone. Maybe that's the way it has to be in the current regulatory climate, and maybe these are the reasons these players choose us rather than another club, but it does feel very underwhelming as a fan.

At some stage the wheels will come off because real life recruitment - unlike Championship Manager - is not an exact science.

 

[CT Charlie]

When healthy and playing in a Glasner-style scheme, Muñoz is our most irreplaceable player. Other teams would understandably pay more for Mateta, Sarr, Wharton, maybe Henderson, but in terms of our success, I rate Muñoz as #1 because of his relentless energy and considerable skill.

In five World Cup matches this summer, he scored 2 goals and played 90 minutes, 90 minutes, 4 minutes, 90 minutes and 120 minutes.