Mamadou Sakho (CB) Crystal Palace

Discussion in 'Rumour Mill - Transfer Talk' started by kipland007, Aug 24, 2016.

  1. Kopstar

    Kopstar ★★★★★ Valued Member

    Messages:
    7,532
    Likes Received:
    14,113
    Let's say the tier A guys (not tier 1 btw? These tiers are very confusing) all move to clubs other than Liverpool...Sakho re-think or is he gone regardless do you think?
     
    redfanman likes this.
  2. Limiescouse

    Limiescouse Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,078
    Likes Received:
    8,899
    It's an interest thing to query, but I think he is gone regardless. I think at this point, even if who we can land is only comparable in ability, it is in our interests, just in terms of Klopp retaining authority over the group. Had he gone on loan in August, or not been such a silly billy in between August and January then maybe it would different.
     
    redfanman likes this.
  3. Kopstar

    Kopstar ★★★★★ Valued Member

    Messages:
    7,532
    Likes Received:
    14,113
    Potential for a repeat of a Carroll-Dempsey scenario then? Sakho going and not being replaced (at least with someone as good)? That would be interesting.
     
  4. Limiescouse

    Limiescouse Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,078
    Likes Received:
    8,899
    Interesting? Are you Steve Davis?

    Last second reprieve for Lucas. Could you imagine the meltdown?
     
    redfanman likes this.
  5. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    We've sold Lovren and Klavan?
     
    redfanman likes this.
  6. Limiescouse

    Limiescouse Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,078
    Likes Received:
    8,899
    No. No we haven't.
     
    redfanman likes this.
  7. legalalien

    legalalien The Tweetherder

    Messages:
    6,924
    Likes Received:
    4,820
  8. Wyld@Heart

    Wyld@Heart Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,305
    Likes Received:
    2,691
    I suppose that depends on our valuation of Sakho. I've seen 30 mil bandied about which is not entirely implausible but Southampton are probably looking to see what cash amount they'd be getting as opposed to the value of the makeweight in a possible deal. I highly doubt they'd accept 30 mil and Sakho but 40-45 mil plus Sakho... That means however that we're devaluing our own player and possibly losing out on getting a decent whack on him from another club.

    It depends on what interest, if any, has been shown in Sakho by other clubs. If its feasible to get 25-30 mil for him from another club then we might be better off not complicating our dealing with Southampton and just pay the 55-60 mil for VVD as we'd probably get closer to the '30 mil plus Sakho' valuation in that way.
     
  9. RedSeven

    RedSeven On the one road Valued Member

    Messages:
    4,593
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    We'll probably pay 55-60mp for Van Dijk and then sell them Sakho for 20-25mp,no need to complicate things.
     
    LaurazRed, lfc.eddie and Wyld@Heart like this.
  10. Kopstar

    Kopstar ★★★★★ Valued Member

    Messages:
    7,532
    Likes Received:
    14,113
    The further complicating factor in trying to do a player part-exchange is the inevitable argument from Celtic that Sakho was undervalued as part of that process and they're due a higher fee from their sell-on clause. Far better to keep them as standalone deals as RedSeven says.

    Southampton won't want another Lallana/Lambert shenanigan when it was mooted they could be lumped together with only a nominal fee attributed to Ricky to minimise the amount due to Bournemouth (?)...
     
    redfanman and Wyld@Heart like this.
  11. RedSeven

    RedSeven On the one road Valued Member

    Messages:
    4,593
    Likes Received:
    1,418
    I think at a push we could get 30 from someone,his time with Palace will have done his valuation a world of good,but is he the type of player that Southampton would pay 30mp for,i'd be surprised(hopefully).He's a backs to the wall type of defender(imo),perfect for Palace not for Southampton but i think they could be tempted to pay 20mp for him,maybe 25mp,and see it as a good deal as if it doesn't work out there would be interest at that same price from elsewhere so they could move him on easily enough.
     
  12. redfanman

    redfanman TIA Regular Valued Member

    Messages:
    9,220
    Likes Received:
    6,562
    My suggestion would be to give wisdom to Celtic as their %?
     
  13. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    I don't think what he did in Palace matters much when it comes to his price right now, more about affordability and priority of other clubs this summer. There are only a handful of clubs, less than a handful that would pay anywhere near £20-30m for a centre half. and I don't see any of them would be attracted to signing Sakho. They are all Premier League clubs, from Arsenal with Mustafi, to United's Baily, Chelsea's Luiz signing and Man City's capture of Stones, there is no other club I can remember that would pay £20-30m for a centre half. Spurs got Alderweireld for £11.5m. If we are not willing to sell Sakho on par value as we bought him, or on a discount, we might not be able to move him out. If we force Southampton's hand for part exchange, then we might have to pay £80m for Van Dijk if we are adamant over our £30m valuation for Sakho.
     
    redfanman likes this.
  14. RedSeven

    RedSeven On the one road Valued Member

    Messages:
    4,593
    Likes Received:
    1,418

    I'm trying to be optimistic here eddie but chances are we'll get the 20mp for him.Market is inflated,prices are going through the roof,tv money through the roof, Palace and Southampton are both going to be looking for CBs and other teams will be looking to shore up those leaky defenses.Happens every year,someone spends silly money on a player who's not worth it (west ham i'm looking at youlol).
     
  15. Kopstar

    Kopstar ★★★★★ Valued Member

    Messages:
    7,532
    Likes Received:
    14,113
    I think the difference in value between Sakho and VVD is about half if those transfers were independent of each other. If VVD is worth £60m then Sakho ought to be worth £30m. Similarly, if we pay £50m for VVD then Sakho is probably worth about £25m.

    I expect us to ultimately pay around £53m for VVD so would expect to sell Sakho for around £26.5m in those circumstances. Celtic would be due around £5.3m which I think is at least twice what Wisdom might be worth and I expect they'd just prefer the cash!
     
  16. costared

    costared TIA Reserve Team

    Messages:
    2,967
    Likes Received:
    979
    I think Sakho is worth 30 mill at todays rates irrespective of what we pay for VVD.
    City paid 50 mill for Stones last year and frankly I would rather have Sackho in my defence than Stones.
     
  17. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    There is a difference between Stones move and Sakho's. Everton didn't really need or want to sell Stones, the players wanted to leave and the buying club wants him. Sakho is a player deemed surplus and we don't want him around, and we are short on cash for other targets and needing to sell this fella, we won't get high price for him. It depends on who wants the deal more. Like Sterling, we didn't want to sell him but he wants to leave, the buying club wants him. So we get the price we asked for. If Sterling was a surplus, made known to the world, we won't get £44m plus £5m add-ons.
     
    redfanman likes this.
  18. Anfield rd Dreamer

    Anfield rd Dreamer Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,729
    Likes Received:
    3,914
    To an extant, but as one of the best CBs available on the market there will still be a high interest and desire for him. The number of clubs he would improve is very high, many of them have plenty of money (Prem TV deal means Ibe is 15 million, Bolasie 30 million etc). I expect we will still make a profit on what we paid and he'll be the player bought to replace one of these mega expensive CBs the likes of us, City and Chelsea are pursuing.
     
  19. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    It is only relevant when someone is willing to put the cash up for him for being one of the best centre half. If nobody is willing to put the amount we are asking for, then it serves no purpose to promote him as one of the best centre half. One might even argue if he was that good, why don't you save your money on Van Dijk, or better yet, why not keep him? Your post about the other players bought under the new deal was due to the fact that the buying clubs want them, and the selling club do not really have to sell them or having the ultimate desire to let him go. Ibe was playing for us quite regularly the season before he was sold, Klopp didn't made it known to public that he can get the fuck out on loan. Same can be said about Bolaise where he was an integral part of Pardew's attacking side. Sakho is not, he is a surplus and as a surplus you don't get premium value out of selling your surplus player, no matter how rich the buyer is.
     
  20. Anfield rd Dreamer

    Anfield rd Dreamer Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,729
    Likes Received:
    3,914
    As I said though, there aren't many better CBs around. There'll be interested parties you wait and see. As long as there are multiple parties wanting him then the price goes up whether we want to sell him or not. It becomes meaningless what our position on the player was. It's now about who wants him more and who is willing to pay the most. Think when Spurs paid more for Sissoko than Everton had already had agreed. At that stage it didn't matter on whether Newcastle were willingly selling or that the buying club were clawing the player away from them. The player was leaving and the club that offered the most got him.
     
  21. lfc.eddie

    lfc.eddie "¿Plata... O Plomo?" Valued Member

    Messages:
    41,009
    Likes Received:
    21,806
    Again, it doesn't matter how you or our club rate him if we have the intention to sell him all along like a thorn sticking our butt.... Spurs paid more to Sissoko because Newcastle didn't have to sell. Judging by the trend of how many centre halves had moved around, only the top 6, minus Spurs had put out £30m or more for them. If he is that good and seen by all clubs as a steal, there would have been shit loads of offer on the table since the going rate for such highly rated players of his position is going for £50m and above.

    My take, he will go on loan in France come the start of the season, if we are not able to use him as a part exchange with Soton.
     
  22. The Elusive 19th

    The Elusive 19th TIA Youth Team

    Messages:
    3,359
    Likes Received:
    1,730
    :shocked::shocked::shocked::shocked::shocked::shocked::shocked::shocked::shocked:
     
  23. Elessar

    Elessar Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Likes Received:
    708
    Sakho is being seen as a problem player. A player that create problems. Not many clubs want that type of players.
     
  24. Elessar

    Elessar Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,538
    Likes Received:
    708
    If he had been excellent at Palace and not created any problems then Palace would IMO already signed him. They paid more than £30m for Benteke so the price clearly isn't the problem.
     
  25. Limiescouse

    Limiescouse Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    8,078
    Likes Received:
    8,899
    That's like saying Roma should hold for 50 million for Salah because that's what we're seemingly willing to pay for VVD.
     
  26. redfanman

    redfanman TIA Regular Valued Member

    Messages:
    9,220
    Likes Received:
    6,562
    Nope. They don't want to pay 30m and don't think anyone else will either. Nothing to do with behaviour at the I club, otherwise they wouldn't be trying to sign him.
     
  27. ubermick

    ubermick Willing to drive Nikola to the airport. Admin

    Messages:
    9,450
    Likes Received:
    17,389
    If the bridges are truly burnt (and I still think it's foolish if that's the case) then the smart move would be to try and include him in the VVD deal. Southampton get a quality defender straight back, and decreasing the financial outlay helps them, because they have less money to pay on to Celtic (reportedly 20% sell on clause now, I'm reading). It's a win-win all around.
     
  28. NYRhockey

    NYRhockey Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    875
    Likes Received:
    1,089
    Except for the board, lol. Imagine the uproar if we have a game where we give up 2-3 goals and Southampton is coming off a clean sheet? :shocked:
     
    Livvy and norwegian wood like this.
  29. Arminius

    Arminius FSG PR plant Moderator

    Messages:
    15,680
    Likes Received:
    13,129
    30M for a striker is run of the mill. 30M for a defender gets you into top 5 ever paid.
     
  30. Arminius

    Arminius FSG PR plant Moderator

    Messages:
    15,680
    Likes Received:
    13,129
    They will still have to pay out 20% of the transaction value, as I understand it, so the valuation of Sakho then becomes potentially subject to litigation.
     
    Anfield rd Dreamer and Kopstar like this.