Slightly worse players.

[TheBigToePunt]

As we replace our better players (appreciate that Olise, Eze , Guehi, were a bit of a golden generation) with slightly worse. I think that’s what eventually gets teams relegated.
We replaced Olise a 9/10 with Sarr a 7/10.
Eze was an 8 replaced by Pino a 6.
Guehi a 10 replaced by ? Don’t know, but no better than a 6.

One of the few recent replacements that haven’t weakened the team is Anderson/Lacroix + profit , max being a superior defender but nowhere near as good on the ball.

The same will be the case with Munoz , unless we are really lucky.
Also Henderson, if he was to go the chances are that Benitez, who might be alright, will be a bit weaker.

We seem to have replaced a few 8/9/10s with a load of 6/7s most of whom will have to sit on the bench, due to numbers.

Ready made top players won’t come to us, so we need to look at potential, but i think the only way for a team like us to get the numbers up is to look at the weaker players that start/come on regularly (I like him but the Hughes etc of the team), players that ‘do a job’, if we can improve these weaker players then we’d have a higher level team and if you have a better average player, rather than a couple of superstars, they won’t get bought from us.

Brentford have continually sold their goal scorers and have bought in unknown quality replacements, but in the end they will come up with a bad replacement and get relegated.

This is what has happened at West Ham/Wolves in the last few years.

All spot on. Even if recruitment remains largely successful we can never replace top players like-for-like. Even if Palace were happy to spend the whole £65m we got for Eze on one top class replacement, an 8/10 or 9/10 player just isn't going to come to Palace. Each big sale must weaken the team, therefore, whatever we do.

We were at a stage (during a lot of Roy's time) where we had almost no transfer budget. From what I can see, that's because we weren't making much money from selling players (we don't make much of an operating profit after wages). I can understand why the current business model is seen as better but as you say, lots of teams have found that when it comes to signing replacements for outgoing top talent, you can only go back to the well so many times before it runs dry.

To use your method if, for example, we replace Olise (9/10) with Sarr (7/10) we lose two 'points'. Sarr is a pretty reliable '7' but will probably never be a '9'.

If, however, we replace Olise with what we hope is a 'Next Big Thing' 19 year old, then we may be replacing a 9/10 player with a 5/10 or 6/10 player in the short term, but he may grow to be another 8/10 or 9/10. Its a gamble, but if we don't take that risk and develop talent to sell for big money, sooner or later the budget will suffer hugely. We end up back where we were under Roy, locked in a cycle of only being able to sign the Ayews, Hughes' and Koyates of this world, playing football that suits them, but having a very settled ship.

Replace an outgoing star with a journeyman too often and the team will be appreciable weaker, but perhaps be stable at the required level. Replace him with potential and we might end up with another cracking set of players to enjoy, but only once they have grown, and only if we can survive whilst they do so. The first method involves taking one step backwards and staying there, the second method at least two steps backwards in hope its only two steps and that you will take three steps forward afterwards.

 

[Casual]

Good post. That’s why , if possible , need to be selling Guehi for 60-80m and buying a youngster (canvot) for a bit down the line and he can be put in the team ‘as and when’ and also a player like Ake, even on a season loan, for an instant impact.

Still hoping Esse could come good. If it does then replacing Olise with Sarr and Esse, for similar money, would work out great. One for an instant impact, one for the future.

Should be buying the championships best players regularly to make this work.

All spot on. Even if recruitment remains largely successful we can never replace top players like-for-like. Even if Palace were happy to spend the whole £65m we got for Eze on one top class replacement, an 8/10 or 9/10 player just isn't going to come to Palace. Each big sale must weaken the team, therefore, whatever we do.

We were at a stage (during a lot of Roy's time) where we had almost no transfer budget. From what I can see, that's because we weren't making much money from selling players (we don't make much of an operating profit after wages). I can understand why the current business model is seen as better but as you say, lots of teams have found that when it comes to signing replacements for outgoing top talent, you can only go back to the well so many times before it runs dry.

To use your method if, for example, we replace Olise (9/10) with Sarr (7/10) we lose two 'points'. Sarr is a pretty reliable '7' but will probably never be a '9'.

If, however, we replace Olise with what we hope is a 'Next Big Thing' 19 year old, then we may be replacing a 9/10 player with a 5/10 or 6/10 player in the short term, but he may grow to be another 8/10 or 9/10. Its a gamble, but if we don't take that risk and develop talent to sell for big money, sooner or later the budget will suffer hugely. We end up back where we were under Roy, locked in a cycle of only being able to sign the Ayews, Hughes' and Koyates of this world, playing football that suits them, but having a very settled ship.

Replace an outgoing star with a journeyman too often and the team will be appreciable weaker, but perhaps be stable at the required level. Replace him with potential and we might end up with another cracking set of players to enjoy, but only once they have grown, and only if we can survive whilst they do so. The first method involves taking one step backwards and staying there, the second method at least two steps backwards in hope its only two steps and that you will take three steps forward afterwards.

 

[Willo]

Good post. That’s why , if possible , need to be selling Guehi for 60-80m and buying a youngster (canvot) for a bit down the line and he can be put in the team ‘as and when’ and also a player like Ake, even on a season loan, for an instant impact.

Still hoping Esse could come good.
Should be buying the championships best players regularly to make this work.

Hayden Hackney, Tyreece Campbell, Femi Azeez, Leo Scienza, Jovon Makama, Ephron Mason-Clark are amongst the players from the Championship who have impressed me this season.

 

[MrRobbo]

I've been saying it for a while now, but our new model of buying young, maturing and then selling for profit, it still in its infancy.

Ideally when we sell a (using an early analogy) we sell a 8/10. We use the money to buy a 7/10 immediate replacement, and a kid with the potential to be a 9/10.

We for the first time ever (?) have 4 players on loan in the championship. Another good example of the strides we are making as a club.

I think the thing that a people get frustrated with is the lack of clear linear progress. But the nature of the beast is that its always going to be a step backwards to take 2 steps forwards.

 

[Lanzo-Ad]

On the pointometer, are there any 3s or 4s?

 

[StandbyPalace]

the expectations are higher than before cup win , we was slow and steady which was the name of the game for us , whether you buy young unknown or more experience players , there is always a trap down all clubs whether your man city or wolves , you hope the player you buy fits into the club , not the club fits in with the player , as I have said on alot of things its all guess work

The problem is the market prices keep going up. There are a lack of decent strikers. Even tho Mateta has not scored for a long time and missed good chances along the way, he is still one of the top scorers in the PL this season with 8 goals.

 

[StandbyPalace]

The OP is right in that we cant hardly say weve replaced our recent sales with as good a players but you can also well done to the club for recruiting developing players such as Eve Olise Anmderson in the first place. The club will also make good money when/if Wharton and Munoz leave. They will also be very difficult to replace. Wouldnt it be great if in the case of Wharton, Doucore is the natural replacement and delivers the kind of form that before his injury Liverpool were taken note of.

And let us be grateful and appreciate the work of Palace legend Dougie Freedman who one way or another was responsible for bringing most if not all of these players to SP with the financial backing from Steve P and the investors.

 

[TheBigToePunt]

I think what this discussion once again shows is how hard it is to 'kick on' from what seems a position of strength. Its much more a matter of each squad having a life cycle, which then ends and we start again.

One thing you could say about the signings of Larsen, Johnson, Nketiah etc is that they are not just young, unproven potential from outside the top flight. Perhaps the club are deliberately trying not to keep going back and signing the best young championship hopefuls, precisely because they don't want to become a nursery, like Southampton or Leicester.

By the time those clubs went down they were hollow shells with no heart or bollocks at all, even though they still had good talent on paper. Once you start selling and rebuilding with unproven youth, the senior players at the club have to build all over again from the starting line. That has to affect your mindset, and then the atmosphere around the place. Bad times are then only around the corner.

Even if they do well, Larsen, Johnson, and Nketiah will probably not be players we could sell at much of a profit. What they do offer, however, is that the club can say to Henderson, La Croix, Munoz, Sarr etc 'Yes, we have to sell our best players when the big boys come knocking, but only because the player will not sign a new deal and stay once that has happened. Its not because we need the money. We don't. Look at how we spend it all once we get it. Your job here remains to win for Palace and to compete. You don't have to babysit some generation of potentially valuable assets while they learn to walk. We are buying you ready-made teammates. This remains a serious place.'

 

[LeftWing11]

I've been saying it for a while now, but our new model of buying young, maturing and then selling for profit, it still in its infancy.

Ideally when we sell a (using an early analogy) we sell a 8/10. We use the money to buy a 7/10 immediate replacement, and a kid with the potential to be a 9/10.

We for the first time ever (?) have 4 players on loan in the championship. Another good example of the strides we are making as a club.

I think the thing that a people get frustrated with is the lack of clear linear progress. But the nature of the beast is that its always going to be a step backwards to take 2 steps forwards.

I think this is the part we get wrong and need to improve on. We should have replacement/s in the door, getting game time, before we sell. We all know Whalton is the next to go. He most certainly won't be here by summer 2027. His replacement should be here getting minutes so the transition is seamless. Then you can sell at the optimum time for the maximum fee. The same with Munoz.

The club must see that the squad have been thoroughly rinsed this year and close to breaking point. I am hoping that this window is to make sure we get to the end of the season in this division and then return to our usual transfer policy. And, I wonder if Freedman didn’t get on with Glasner over transfers and would return once Glasner leaves…..here’s hoping….

 

[park the bus]

I think what this discussion once again shows is how hard it is to 'kick on' from what seems a position of strength. Its much more a matter of each squad having a life cycle, which then ends and we start again.

One thing you could say about the signings of Larsen, Johnson, Nketiah etc is that they are not just young, unproven potential from outside the top flight. Perhaps the club are deliberately trying not to keep going back and signing the best young championship hopefuls, precisely because they don't want to become a nursery, like Southampton or Leicester.

By the time those clubs went down they were hollow shells with no heart or bollocks at all, even though they still had good talent on paper. Once you start selling and rebuilding with unproven youth, the senior players at the club have to build all over again from the starting line. That has to affect your mindset, and then the atmosphere around the place. Bad times are then only around the corner.

Even if they do well, Larsen, Johnson, and Nketiah will probably not be players we could sell at much of a profit. What they do offer, however, is that the club can say to Henderson, La Croix, Munoz, Sarr etc 'Yes, we have to sell our best players when the big boys come knocking, but only because the player will not sign a new deal and stay once that has happened. Its not because we need the money. We don't. Look at how we spend it all once we get it. Your job here remains to win for Palace and to compete. You don't have to babysit some generation of potentially valuable assets while they learn to walk. We are buying you ready-made teammates. This remains a serious place.'

Ideally it would be a mix of experience and youngsters pushing for a place - in other words competition for places.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Ideally it would be a mix of experience and youngsters pushing for a place - in other words competition for places.

And the more young signings insist on release clauses the more we're at risk of losing half the team in one hit.

 

[est1905]

We are copying the Southampton model of a few years ago. However as I have pointed many times the problem with that model (buy low sell high, rinse and repeat) is that finding rough diamonds is not easy.

I can accept that when we sell Olise or Guehi we are not going to replace with a player juts as good. However what concerns me is that we are paying top dollar for not quite as good.

We're not copying the Southampton model we (like Brighton, Brentford and to a lesser degree Fulham) have to try and compete as well as survive. If you cant do both there's not much point in being in the division.
The only way a club of our resources can do that is to look for young talent, give it a stage to showcase its skills while coaching and improving them and then sell when the time is right and we get a good offer.
Anyone would think we had a choice. If we didn't make it clear to players that we'll sell when a big offer comes in IF you want to leave they would never have signed for us in the first place. This is how we have to do it. But it doesn't always end in a sale. Zaha was kept because no one matched the club's valuation of him and despite a little bit of bitching he didn't agitate for a move and knuckled back down. Marc is another player the club very much wanted to keep for longer. Has he accepted any of the contract renewal offers Palace had made him he too would still be a Palace player. Similarly Olise would probably have stayed another year had his release clause not been met. My point is we are not exactly shoving them out the door but for the sake of their career we cannot and quite rightly will not stand in their way if a big career opportunity comes around.
The club have actually (maybe for the first time) spent a lot more than we have recouped this time around. I doubt that will become the norm for us but it is encouraging to see the owners recognise when the squad needs investment. I'm hoping that what the club sees in Jorgen Strand-Larson turns into an astute buy when everyone is currently saying he is too expensive. Time will tell.
Every transfer is a gamble. No one knew Olise, Eze, Guehi, Wharton, Munoz, etc would have turned out to be such successful players for us. Equally, no one knows that Johnson, Guessand and JSL wont be. Who knows? In a few months we might be all saying this team is as good as the one that won the FA cup.

 

[MrRobbo]

I think this is the part we get wrong and need to improve on. We should have replacement/s in the door, getting game time, before we sell. We all know Whalton is the next to go. He most certainly won't be here by summer 2027. His replacement should be here getting minutes so the transition is seamless. Then you can sell at the optimum time for the maximum fee. The same with Munoz.

The club must see that the squad have been thoroughly rinsed this year and close to breaking point. I am hoping that this window is to make sure we get to the end of the season in this division and then return to our usual transfer policy. And, I wonder if Freedman didn’t get on with Glasner over transfers and would return once Glasner leaves…..here’s hoping….

100% agree. But its tricky.

We're got to identify a player who could be a first team replacement in a year and have a proper plan for them. Brighton were very good with Mitoma and McAlister in particular. Almost having a 2 year plan plotted out.

I still hold hope out for Ozoh and Esse.

Ozoh in particular looks to be doing well, getting games under his belt (granted with 2 injury hit loans). Come the summer we'll need to decide if another loan is best or being in and around the squad. That may depend on Lerma renewing. Lots of moving parts.

 

[Mystic Smeg]

As we replace our better players (appreciate that Olise, Eze , Guehi, were a bit of a golden generation) with slightly worse. I think that’s what eventually gets teams relegated.
We replaced Olise a 9/10 with Sarr a 7/10.
Eze was an 8 replaced by Pino a 6.
Guehi a 10 replaced by ? Don’t know, but no better than a 6.

One of the few recent replacements that haven’t weakened the team is Anderson/Lacroix + profit , max being a superior defender but nowhere near as good on the ball.

The same will be the case with Munoz , unless we are really lucky.
Also Henderson, if he was to go the chances are that Benitez, who might be alright, will be a bit weaker.

We seem to have replaced a few 8/9/10s with a load of 6/7s most of whom will have to sit on the bench, due to numbers.

Ready made top players won’t come to us, so we need to look at potential, but i think the only way for a team like us to get the numbers up is to look at the weaker players that start/come on regularly (I like him but the Hughes etc of the team), players that ‘do a job’, if we can improve these weaker players then we’d have a higher level team and if you have a better average player, rather than a couple of superstars, they won’t get bought from us.

Brentford have continually sold their goal scorers and have bought in unknown quality replacements, but in the end they will come up with a bad replacement and get relegated.

This is what has happened at West Ham/Wolves in the last few years.

I would say with Sarr we got a 10 out of 10!
Pino will never be an Ebs but improving all the time
In Chadi, if he stays injury free, we have a good replacement for MG and Canvot is a future diamond. I do think JSL, Guessand will both do well and Johnson will start to shine after a few more games. We just have to support them not knock them.

 

[Living In Hope]

I would say with Sarr we got a 10 out of 10!
Pino will never be an Ebs but improving all the time
In Chadi, if he stays injury free, we have a good replacement for MG and Canvot is a future diamond. I do think JSL, Guessand will both do well and Johnson will start to shine after a few more games. We just have to support them not knock them.

I'll have what you're having !

 

[Palacesince64]

If it’s true Matt Hoobs contract as Sporting Director is only til the summer. I’m not convinced it will be extended. His signings have been costly, the omissions are significant, and in the process he’s p*ssed Glasner off over the Guehi transfer and failed with the McNeil one.
Our last successful signing was Sarr whom Dougie had been after for years. Since then it’s been a bit underwhelming. I’m hoping Dougie has had enough sun and wants to come back to South London but fear that’s a very long shot!

 

[Norbury Old Git]

If it’s true Matt Hoobs contract as Sporting Director is only til the summer. I’m not convinced it will be extended. His signings have been costly, the omissions are significant, and in the process he’s p*ssed Glasner off over the Guehi transfer and failed with the McNeil one.
Our last successful signing was Sarr whom Dougie had been after for years. Since then it’s been a bit underwhelming. I’m hoping Dougie has had enough sun and wants to come back to South London but fear that’s a very long shot!

Being a canny Scot Dougie will want to serve his two years so he doesn’t get hit with a big tax bill. We will have to wait another year before fighting it out with all the big boys for his services.

 

[EagleEddie]

If you’ve got an £80 million budget, do you spend it on two £40 million players, or try to stretch it across four or five signings? There’s also the dilemma that as soon as we enter the market, prices tend to rise. Each year we’ll have a set budget, we’ll know where the gaps are and have a good idea of likely departures. The theory being, I would think, we’ve been tracking a few suitable replacements. Regardless, the spending limit stays the same and tough decisions have to be made, it just comes down to whether the gamble pays off. We may buy a few donkeys but just occasionally we hit the jackpot with a thoroughbred.