Harry Maguire

[eversince 76]

Again, what has price got to do with his abilities?

Agree. Loads expect a player to live up to his price tag instead of his talents. Clubs need to pay crazy money. It’s about making sure you get the player you really want.
And yes, we have been part of turning the market as it is. So I have no calms paying over the odd. What is paying over the odds anyway? You can only judge such when a player stops playing for your club.

 

[mosssideblue]

Agree. Loads expect a player to live up to his price tag instead of his talents. Clubs need to pay crazy money. It’s about making sure you get the player you really want.
And yes, we have been part of turning the market as it is. So I have no calms paying over the odd. What is paying over the odds anyway? You can only judge such when a player stops playing for your club.

I just dont see any argument when a poster says we should touch him for x but if we can get him for y, that would be ok. I can only think that they are worried what their mates might say - crazy logic imo

 

[Dax777]

I just dont see any argument when a poster says we should touch him for x but if we can get him for y, that would be ok. I can only think that they are worried what their mates might say - crazy logic imo

No... It simply means for price Y, we might be able to get a better player.

Why not offer 250 million for Salah? Coz you can offer that for Mpabbe instead. That's the reasoning. And it's a legitimate one.

 

[badaz52]

I assume he is suggesting that £80M to £90M would be too high a price for Harry Maguire. I agree with him, but would go further and say £60M would be too much as well, but he isn’t crap

This is exactly what I was saying. IMO VVD is a better player and cost less than what is being quoted for Maguire. Maguire is a good player don't get me wrong but he is 26 and he isn't worth more than VVD which is why I said £60m is fair. If we are going to pay £80m+ get De Ligt as he is better value due to his age.

 

[mosssideblue]

No... It simply means for price Y, we might be able to get a better player.

Why not offer 250 million for Salah? Coz you can offer that for Mpabbe instead. That's the reasoning. And it's a legitimate one.

I think you totally misunderstood.

Some are saying they would be happy with Maguire for £x but not happy with him for £y. Whether he cost £x or £y, you are still getting the same player i.e. his contribution is no better or worse because of what he cost

 

[waspish]

This is exactly what I was saying. IMO VVD is a better player and cost less than what is being quoted for Maguire. Maguire is a good player don't get me wrong but he is 26 and he isn't worth more than VVD which is why I said £60m is fair. If we are going to pay £80m+ get De Ligt as he is better value due to his age.

No one new how really good vvd would be and why we balked at the 75m fee

 

[badaz52]

Again, what has price got to do with his abilities?

It's not about ability it's more a case of value. He is 26 and yes he is an England International but so is Stones. Are we saying Stones is worth more than the £50m we paid for him? hardly. I'm just saying that he should not cost more than VVD as VVD is a better player and De Ligt would be better value for anything like £80m+ because he is younger.

We know City won't go above their own valuation of a player which is why I said the Maguire deal is dead, Maguire could force the issue himself if he really wants to come to us but that doesn't mean Leicester will budge on the valuation.

 

[mosssideblue]

It's not about ability it's more a case of value. He is 26 and yes he is an England International but so is Stones. Are we saying Stones is worth more than the £50m we paid for him? hardly. I'm just saying that he should not cost more than VVD as VVD is a better player and De Ligt would be better value for anything like £80m+ because he is younger.

We know City won't go above their own valuation of a player which is why I said the Maguire deal is dead, Maguire could force the issue himself if he really wants to come to us but that doesn't mean Leicester will budge on the valuation.

Of course it has to be about ability. Whether we got him for £10m or £100m, he is still the same player.

Its very speculative saying x is better than y when they play for different teams imo. VVD might be shite playing for us for example, as might DeLigt

Personally, I dont think we will see Maguire playing for us

 

[Dax777]

I think you totally misunderstood.

Some are saying they would be happy with Maguire for £x but not happy with him for £y. Whether he cost £x or £y, you are still getting the same player i.e. his contribution is no better or worse because of what he cost

I get that. I'm saying the reason why people say that is because they are considering the opportunity cost and not just the player in a vacuum.

Yes, you get the same player at either price, but at price X there probably wasn't any better player you could have gotten instead, at price Y there is.

Thus, it makes sense to like Maguire at 45 million ( as all the other players you could have gotten at that price were no more likely to be successful), however at 90 million perhaps you could lure a De Ligt or a Koulibally.

It's the opportunity cost that makes him unlikeable at price Y vs price X

 

[80s Shorts]

Might not look so bad with the hood up !

Would it fit over his head though ?