Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
happy85

David Brooks

By happy85, in Transfer Talk

Recommended Posts

Foxes96

Foxes96

Posted
Posted

On the flip side it’s not just what Bournemouth ask for but what teams are willing to pay for him. Personally don’t think any teams would be willing to go above £30 mil for Brooks, and I imagine he would want a move back to the Prem so can see him going for around the £25mil mark, which imo would be good business for us.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
urban.spaceman

urban.spaceman

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, peach0000 said:

100k a week is a great deal with no transfer fee involved. Over the last couple of seasons his attacking output has been right up there with the very best. Would definitely have to put clauses in his contract punishing him if he refuses to play though.

Without a transfer fee it's not too bad, but that would still put him as one of the club's highest earners - Maddison's about to sign a £110k a week deal and he's been here for 2 years. The club would still want value for money for those wages which is a big gamble IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
peach0000

peach0000

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, urban.spaceman said:

Without a transfer fee it's not too bad, but that would still put him as one of the club's highest earners - Maddison's about to sign a £110k a week deal and he's been here for 2 years. The club would still want value for money for those wages which is a big gamble IMO.

If he was to sign a 4 year contract on that kind of money it would only be 20 million over the course of his contract. It's less than I would expect bournemouth would have asked in transfer fees if he was still under contract. I don't think having him as a top earner would be a problem, it's commonly known that players out of contract get more money than those signed for a fee (Aaron Ramsey is on 400k at Juve for example). I think Fraser on 100k a week would be exceptional value for money personally. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dan Gliballs

Dan Gliballs

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Without a transfer fee it's not too bad, but that would still put him as one of the club's highest earners - Maddison's about to sign a £110k a week deal and he's been here for 2 years. The club would still want value for money for those wages which is a big gamble IMO.

Not to mention the other players on that kind of money have arguably earned it performing at the club.

To come in and instantly pocket wages inline with the club's biggest earners, without having ever kicked a ball doesn't seem to be the club's way, which is great.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
honeybradger

honeybradger

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, matty98 said:

I rate him, just not for 25 million, he's just had a year out injured. Who knows what that'll do to him.

 

I know we can't go out and buy a ready made player that will deliver those numbers but I don't see Brooks as being capable of reaching that level.

I think he's the best winger we've been linked with. Sarr might have a higher potential but he's still raw, i think brooks is a much better rounded player right now which is what we need.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hackneyfox

hackneyfox

Posted
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I've heard this said of him a lot, how many injuries has he had? 

Just the one which needed two operations.

This site seems full of people who see a player has had one unfortunate injury and then believe he's injury prone.

 

In a pre-season friendly game against Brentford, Brooks suffered an ankle injury which was reportedly set to leave him sidelined until mid-October.[22] In December 2019, following a prolonged period on the sidelines and having yet to make an appearance for the Cherries in the season so far, Brooks underwent a second ankle operation, with the view of being sidelined until mid-March.[23] Commenting on the injury, Brooks said in February that "As soon as I sustained the injury, I knew straightaway it wasn't going to be a couple of weeks but didn't know it was going to be six months and I don't think the physios would have thought that either". He went on to add that the injury was "Just a bit of bad luck and I don't think anybody could have predicted it. I have just had to get on with it and try to get back to fitness".[24]

On the 11th March, Brooks returned to full training with the rest of the Bournemouth squad, after nearly 8 months out through injury.[25] Having now returned from injury, Brooks scored his first goal of the season in a 2-1 loss to Man City on the 15th July. [26]

Edited by hackneyfox
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
moore_94

moore_94

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I've heard this said of him a lot, how many injuries has he had? 

He had the big injury this season where he missed every game pre-break and an injury last season where he missed 5 games, that is his entire injury history since he joined Bournemouth in 2018

 

At Sheff Utd he missed 3 months and was out Dec 2017 to Feb 2018 with glandular fever

 

That is his entire injury history, and he seems to be well over his ankle injury from this season as he has played every game after the break, so I am not really sure where injury prone comes from

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
urban.spaceman

urban.spaceman

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, peach0000 said:

If he was to sign a 4 year contract on that kind of money it would only be 20 million over the course of his contract. It's less than I would expect bournemouth would have asked in transfer fees if he was still under contract. I don't think having him as a top earner would be a problem, it's commonly known that players out of contract get more money than those signed for a fee (Aaron Ramsey is on 400k at Juve for example). I think Fraser on 100k a week would be exceptional value for money personally. 

 

5 minutes ago, Dan Gliballs said:

Not to mention the other players on that kind of money have arguably earned it performing at the club.

To come in and instantly pocket wages inline with the club's biggest earners, without having ever kicked a ball doesn't seem to be the club's way, which is great.

I'm somewhat in the middle on this. If you look at our higher earners (which is updated for Maddison's expected new salary) you could make the case for the highest having earned their upgraded pay packets:

 

40608126_Screenshot2020-07-30at12_41_08.thumb.png.35664243019498f8272179931aaacd43.png

 

https://www.spotrac.com/epl/leicester-city/payroll/

 

With the exception of Slimani and Silva, who have both been abject failures, and Evans and Ricardo, who like the previous two came here with experience, output, reputation and expectation but unlike the other two have been a huge success, you've got Vardy, Kasper, Madders, Wilf and Chilwell who have worked their way up through the club structure from pretty meagre wages to previously unfathomable heights. 

 

Does Fraser have good enough experience? 5 years in a PL mid table side would suggest so.

 

Can we expect a good output from him? Looking at his history he had a great season in 18/19 with 7 goals and 14 assists; otherwise his output is not as good as Perez IMO.

 

Does he have a good reputation? Well, he's asking for £100k a week based on the above for starters, make of that what you will. He also refused to sign a month's extension at Bournemouth to play beyond June 30th, and they got relegated. 

 

Would we really get value for money at £100k a week? Without a transfer fee maybe, I take that point. But looking at the above wage list I don't think the club will see it that way personally. Players earning less than that would have their agents knocking on Rudkin's door demanding equality, and they'd have an argument for it.

 

Personally I think Brooks fits our philosophy better - younger, cheaper wage wise, hungrier, and with a hell of a lot of potential.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolhandfox

coolhandfox

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

Is he better than Gray?

39 APPS for Bournemouth, 8 goals, 5 assists  

 

Gray 132 APPS, 10 goals 9 assists 

 

So it would appear so statistical however Gray has a lot of apps which are 20 mins here and there 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
honeybradger

honeybradger

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

39 APPS for Bournemouth, 8 goals, 5 assists  

 

Gray 132 APPS, 10 goals 9 assists 

 

So it would appear so statistical however Gray has a lot of apps which are 20 mins here and there 

76 sub appearances i remember the commentator saying the other day, the highest in the league.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
moore_94

moore_94

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

76 sub appearances i remember the commentator saying the other day, the highest in the league.

Gray - 10 goals and 9 assists in 5,501 minutes (61.1 games) - goal contribution every 290 minutes

 

Brooks - 8 goals 5 assists in 2,790 minutes (31 games) - goal contribution every 214 minutes

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...