Jump to content

2016/17 Ins & Outs


David
 Share

Recommended Posts

It's good planning to have trialist in and recruitment ongoing.

 

End of next week two could be out on loan and then suddenly we have budget to sign a player...voila.

That assumes that Lucas isn't already part of the budget.

 

To recap, when Pearson left McGhee was quoted (June 28th) saying we were light in midfield and that an attacking midfielder was a priority. Since then we've signed McHugh and Lucas has come in on trial (July 5th). After that the public position changed to McGhee saying he'll work with what he has.

 

The assumption people seem to have been making is that he's been referring to the players who have had their wee press conferences and have "officially" signer rather than just the broader group of players he's been working with day to day. Lucas has been a part of that day to day squad for almost a month (albeit unregistered until the other day).

 

Looking at Lucas' background; Swansea academy graduate, Wales u21 captain etc it's plausible that the trial is less focused on his ability and more about proving his fitness given he missed a year with a fractured back and the best part of 2 years with a ruptured anterior knee ligament.

 

Would it be that surprising if we had actually agreed provisional terms with him subject to him proving his fitness? It'd go some way to explaining how we now seem to have "spent our budget". You'd think the player would be more amenable to committing to what has turned into a fairly extended trial if he knew what the deal on the table was.

 

Edit: same goes for Faddy. There was a deal offered to him back in May that as far as I'm aware has neither been accepted nor rejected. If it's still on the table you'd think (hope) that deal would already be built into the budget.

 

There was an indication that he's doing pre-season with us and rehabbing following his injury so with Moore away on loan there's vacant squad position for a 4th choice striker whose main job description is to give us 15 mins off the bench and provide cover, a role that would have done Moore's career no favours IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That assumes that Lucas isn't already part of the budget.

 

To recap, when Pearson left McGhee was quoted (June 28th) saying we were light in midfield and that an attacking midfielder was a priority. Since then we've signed McHugh and Lucas has come in on trial (July 5th). After that the public position changed to McGhee saying he'll work with what he has.

 

The assumption people seem to have been making is that he's been referring to the players who have had thei wee press conferences and not just the broader group of players he's been working with day to day. Lucas has been a part of that day to day squad for almost a month (albeit unregistered until the other day).

 

Looking at Lucas' background; Swansea academy graduate, Wales u21 captain etc it's plausible that the trial is less focused on his ability and more about proving his fitness given he missed a year with a fractured back and the best part of 2 years with a ruptured anterior knee ligament.

 

Would it be that surprising if we had actually agreed provisional terms with him subject to him proving his fitness? It'd go some way to explaining how we now seem to have "spent our budget". You'd think the player would be more amenable to committing to what has turned into a fairly extended trial if he knew what the deal on the table was.

 

Edit: same goes for Faddy. There was a deal offered to him back in May that as far as I'm aware has neither been accepted nor rejected. If it's still on the table you'd think (hope) that deal would already be built into the budget.

 

There was an indication that he's doing pre-season with us and rehabbing following his injury so with Moore away on loan there's vacant squad position for a 4th choice striker whose main job description is to give us 15 mins off the bench and provide cover, a role that would have done Moore's career no favours IMO.

Yeah you could be right. Either way hopefully we do what is required to fill the midfield spot.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lucas seems to have had 4 first team starts since 2010, maybe a pay per play deal ?

He appears to make Arsenals Jack Wheelchair look pretty robust

No harm to the lad, but fragility is not an ideal trait in a small squad

I think that's fair tbh. It's the first thing that stands out though having said that you can put it down to 2 (separate) serious injuries rather than recurring niggling injuries.

 

Weirdly his international record show he was playing regular 90 mins. http://www.transfermarkt.com/lee-lucas/nationalmannschaft/spieler/143851#ath

 

He'd be a risk with those two injuries behind him, no doubt, which is why I think it's sensible for the club to be taking a good look over a decent length of time however there's an argument to be made that in order for us to bring in a "quality" player on the budget we're running there would need to be a trade off somewhere. Giving a player at a low ebb coming back from injury a platform to prove himself and get back in the game may be just that.

 

I mean I'm saying all this, I've not even seen him play other than Motherwell's YouTube highlights and a cracking free kick for Swansea's u21s.

 

Edit: if you're spectacularly bored there's a 43min package of him playing for Swansea's u21s over the course of last season uploaded https://youtu.be/D-rxOgoOWI4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He'd be a risk with those two injuries behind him, no doubt, which is why I think it's sensible for the club to be taking a good look over a decent length of time however there's an argument to be made that in order for us to bring in a "quality" player on the budget we're running there would need to be a trade off somewhere. Giving a player at a low ebb coming back from injury a platform to prove himself and get back in the game may be just that.

 

 

The club is adopting the right approach by giving him a trial presumably to find out how robust he is. Management and the medical staff will know far more about him than we do but at the moment to an untrained eye he does appear to be risky/fragile. IF he signs he might be a real find but on the other hand he might be a financial liability, depending on the deal. My concern is that if he becomes the only attacking central midfielder at the club we're taking a huge risk for a critical position. Is it too important a position to take such a risk with?

 

I can't comment on the lad's unfortunately short performance yesterday but certainly at Central Park he didn't do an awful lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The club is adopting the right approach by giving him a trial presumably to find out how robust he is. Management and the medical staff will know far more about him than we do but at the moment to an untrained eye he does appear to be risky/fragile. IF he signs he might be a real find but on the other hand he might be a financial liability, depending on the deal. My concern is that if he becomes the only attacking central midfielder at the club we're taking a huge risk for a critical position. Is it too important a position to take such a risk with?

 

I can't comment on the lad's unfortunately short performance yesterday but certainly at Central Park he didn't do an awful lot.

From the bits and pieces I've seen on YouTube (yes, I am bored) Lucas looks like your fairly typical "Swansea" central midfielder, receives & recycles the ball.

 

Curiously the highlights package I linked to of Tait's pal from Grimsby who's been training at the club looked a lot more like a player in the Pearson-style box-to-box mould.

 

Again I'm only going on clips that are thrown up on YouTube I've seen neither in the flesh. So you take all of that with a pinch of salt, highlights reels are by definition skewed in terms of bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The club is adopting the right approach by giving him a trial presumably to find out how robust he is. Management and the medical staff will know far more about him than we do but at the moment to an untrained eye he does appear to be risky/fragile. IF he signs he might be a real find but on the other hand he might be a financial liability, depending on the deal. My concern is that if he becomes the only attacking central midfielder at the club we're taking a huge risk for a critical position. Is it too important a position to take such a risk with?

 

I can't comment on the lad's unfortunately short performance yesterday but certainly at Central Park he didn't do an awful lot.

Having just watched that really long YouTube video posted by Swansea's academy, and assuming the clips lifted from the games last season are representative of his game then I wouldn't describe Lucas as an attacking midfielder. If I was chucking labels about I'd probably say he looks more like a deep lying playmaker.

 

He seems very tidy, always willing to receive the ball in the centre of the park and picks the ball up off centre halves, takes a touch moves it on, can pick a forward pass and seems to have a decent range of passing at his disposal. Caveat being they're u21 games but he rarely takes more than a couple of touches, first touch gets the ball under control, 2nd moves it on. However there's nothing there that suggests he's your man for lung bursting box to box runs or driving from the centre of the park. As a player to pick the ball up, retain possession, and keep it moving through midfield to wingers and strikers, yeah I could see that.

 

Assuming you know what he looks like and roughly where he plays (in the same area as Lasley) you should be able to pick him out easily enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the snippets I've seen online and watching his brief outing yesterday, he reminds me a little of Paul Lawson. Sadly Lucas has had even worse luck with injuries. If we are interested I'd expect any contract offer to be very low risk.

 

I had hoped we would have pursued a more obvious replacement for Pearson but at the moment, McGhee has 2 hands behind his back with the budget constraints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Attacking midfielders are second only to strikers in terms of pricing and availability.

 

Interestingly, I wonder how Vigurs would have done in a midfield three with Lasley, McHugh or Campbell holding?

 

Perhaps we had the right player at the wrong time?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Attacking midfielders are second only to strikers in terms of pricing and availability.

 

Interestingly, I wonder how Vigurs would have done in a midfield three with Lasley, McHugh or Campbell holding?

 

Perhaps we had the right player at the wrong time?

Often thought that myself, would have liked to have seen him play under mcghee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought I'd get slaughtered for mentioning Vigurs... 'lazy bastards, passenger, remarks... still time though!

 

Always felt Vigurs was a player.

 

As it turned out he has an almost identical record to Stephen Pearson last season in terms of goals and appearances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Lucas would be worth a try. He was highly-rated at Swansea before his injuries. Some players never fully recover from such a serious injury but if he does it could prove very worthwhile for us.

 

I view Faddy in a similar light although he won't become a sellable player.

 

The Grimbsy guy I haven't seen play at all so he is harder to judge.

 

If McGhee can sort one or two of these options and then bring Pearo back in January I think we will be ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vigurs was a lazy shitebag, who hid when we needed players to step up. He hit a nice pass every three games and somehow that excused him from doing anything for hours at a time.

 

Just before someone thinks we're all misty eyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given FIFA rules about player registration and the number of clubs a player can play for in a season then I'm quite surprised that players and their agents would be OK with such short term deals if they are genuinely being viewed as "trialists" and there's no offer of a deal on the table for them.

 

Fair play to the club for doing what they can to get a look at the players though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...