*** Hearts Summer Transfer Window 2022 - Snodgrass signs ***

[Batistuta87]

54 minutes ago, TypoonJambo said:

If Everton give him the choice surely a good second year and maybe some goals in Europe would seriously widen his options for his next move. Definitely better than a half decent year in the lower half of the championship 

Yeah you'd think so. 🤞🏻

[FarmerTweedy]

1 hour ago, Rick Sanchez said:

 

I had a good chuckle further up at someone saying Shankland would cost us near 10k a week.

Who said that?

[Rick Sanchez]

2 minutes ago, FarmerTweedy said:

Who said that?

 

Turns out it was yourself

[JimmyCant]

29 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

What about Dembele? He hasn't quite made the breakthrough everyone expected and maybe needs a new home. Out of contract and could be worth a punt

He’s a good shout. He’s been playing for the B’s since coming back from injury and he is out of contract in the summer. He’s be a great signing but he’s only 19 and I think Celtic will give him another deal, if he wants one that is. development fee about £160,000. We could maybe do a Hickey type deal for him

Edited May 8, 2022 by JimmyCant

[FarmerTweedy]

11 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

One confirmed to be off in the summer, Jamie Walker has signed a 2 year deal with Bradford

 

 

Fantastic news, should put an end to crazy folk talking about keeping him for next season! Hope it continues to go well for him down there and he keeps injury free (or as much so as is possible for him these days!) and he plays regularly and enjoys himself over the next couple of years! 

[FarmerTweedy]

7 minutes ago, Rick Sanchez said:

 

Turns out it was yourself

Nope, it definitely wasn't! You obviously didn't read my post properly! 

[Clerry Jambo]

All the best Jamie, good deal and hopefully get playing on a regular basis

[Rick Sanchez]

4 hours ago, FarmerTweedy said:

My only concern with Shankland would be the cost. If we've got to pay £500k as a transfer fee and also got to pay him something like £10k per week, or even just whatever our current highest wage is, to get him, I'm very doubtful that that would represent good value for money, and I'd feel we could probably have got better for that money. If the transfer fee is a bit lower, and if his wage demands are reasonable for someone I'd describe as somewhat unproven at our level, I'd be happy with us signing him, particularly given Robbie has worked with him before. 

 

1 hour ago, Rick Sanchez said:

 

I had a good chuckle further up at someone saying Shankland would cost us near 10k a week.

 

[Herbert.]

21 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

I hadn't even thought of that. What would make it a massive fee? I don't think he has played many 1st team games. I'm not sure what the fee is based on

 

I think over 100k would be a massive fee for someone who's done nothing bar a handful of sub appearances. He's not going to be ready to be a regular first team starter and guaranteed after 15-20 games and he's only made a handful of starts people will moan he's a waste of money.

[gregzy2k7]

A little disappointed that we chose to let walker leave instead of gms or ginelly, would have kept him as a squad player before the other two, oh well, best of luck to him at Bradford.

[RS86]

5 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

Loads of folk with Utd mates. 

 

I've met 2 in 30 odd  years. 

I live in Perth, work with a good few folk from Dundee and surrounding area and used to live in Dundee. I know loads of them

 

On that subject one thing I was told about Shankland is that his workrate was good and he was starting to offer more than just goals to their side. Would tie in with Beerschot using him out wide.

[milky_26]

27 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

I hadn't even thought of that. What would make it a massive fee? I don't think he has played many 1st team games. I'm not sure what the fee is based on

apart from the 39 games in EPL and 39 in championship, also i think he joined bournemouth when he was 19/20 so probably no development fee

[Clerry Jambo]

11 minutes ago, gregzy2k7 said:

A little disappointed that we chose to let walker leave instead of gms or ginelly, would have kept him as a squad player before the other two, oh well, best of luck to him at Bradford.

100%

[Dick Dastardly]

8 minutes ago, milky_26 said:

apart from the 39 games in EPL and 39 in championship, also i think he joined bournemouth when he was 19/20 so probably no development fee

The development fee was in regards to Dembele at celtic, not Brookes. 

[Dick Dastardly]

14 minutes ago, Herbert. said:

 

I think over 100k would be a massive fee for someone who's done nothing bar a handful of sub appearances. He's not going to be ready to be a regular first team starter and guaranteed after 15-20 games and he's only made a handful of starts people will moan he's a waste of money.

It is a lot of money to gamble but I'm not sure i agree he definitely wouldn't be ready to start. Cochrane had only played a handful of games before he came, same a Beni. It might take a few games to get up to speed but they are going to be coming thick and fast. Could be up to speed in no time

[Dick Dastardly]

32 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

He’s a good shout. He’s been playing for the B’s since coming back from injury and he is out of contract in the summer. He’s be a great signing but he’s only 19 and I think Celtic will give him another deal, if he wants one that is. development fee about £160,000. We could maybe do a Hickey type deal for him

I haven't seen much of him and only going by the noise when he first broke through as a 2yr old playing for the under 21s or whatever it was. £160,000 is a gamble though 

[JimmyCant]

3 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

I haven't seen much of him and only going by the noise when he first broke through as a 2yr old playing for the under 21s or whatever it was. £160,000 is a gamble though 

We’re in the happy position where we can afford to take a gamble. The laddie looked decent enough playing for Celtic. Whatever you think about Celtic, playing and learning there is a great start for a young player, Aaron Hickey certainly benefited from it. Came back to us a very confident young player.

[Dick Dastardly]

4 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

We’re in the happy position where we can afford to take a gamble. The laddie looked decent enough playing for Celtic. Whatever you think about Celtic, playing and learning there is a great start for a young player, Aaron Hickey certainly benefited from it. Came back to us a very confident young player.

There would be a winning mentality drilled into him at least. I would hate to have a percentage going to them from future fees though. Horrible shower of c@#ts

[Hansel]

Everton winning today lifts them out of the relegation zone so hopefully they stay up and they allow Simm to stay next season 

[PaddysBar]

32 minutes ago, gregzy2k7 said:

A little disappointed that we chose to let walker leave instead of gms or ginelly, would have kept him as a squad player before the other two, oh well, best of luck to him at Bradford.

Definitely agree with this. If we were keeping any of the three, it would be Walker for me, but really only because GMS and ginelly are pish. 
 

id rather they all left though. 

[JimmyCant]

2 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

There would be a winning mentality drilled into him at least. I would hate to have a percentage going to them from future fees though. Horrible shower of c@#ts

They waived the development fee for Hickey. It wouldn’t have been much anyway but we agreed a sell on instead. It’s a strange one because Ange speaks highly of him yet they haven’t renewed him yet. 

[Dick Dastardly]

7 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

They waived the development fee for Hickey. It wouldn’t have been much anyway but we agreed a sell on instead. It’s a strange one because Ange speaks highly of him yet they haven’t renewed him yet. 

Maybe he is wanting 1st team football and wont sign for them. 

[RobNox]

23 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

We’re in the happy position where we can afford to take a gamble. The laddie looked decent enough playing for Celtic. Whatever you think about Celtic, playing and learning there is a great start for a young player, Aaron Hickey certainly benefited from it. Came back to us a very confident young player.

A lot of people seem to be overlooking that fact.  We stand to gain at least £4m from Europe next year, and potentially a lot more.  While I don't want to see us spunk that in one mad transfer window (which Robbie has already said we don't intend to do), it does allow us to consider players who would command a transfer fee that otherwise would put them out of our reach.

 

I trust our recruitment process and also trust us to set financial limits on what we are prepared to offer a player in terms of wages and what we are prepared to offer in transfer fees.

 

At the FOH open night, Joe Savage talked about the recruitment process, said if we were interested in a player but his agent is looking for unrealistic terms, we tell them to jog on and turn our attention to the next candidate.  "Jog on" were Joe's actual words, the more I hear him speak, the more I like the guy, he doesn't mince his words.

 

 

[pointon]

3 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

You do know that for that to happen Everton and Simms need to agree to it. 

 

We also want to keep him.

 

We can't do much more than offer him or Everton terms. 

If they don't agree, **** all we can do about it. 

 

"transfer will define us" 

****ing hell. 😂😂😂

 

I let’s stick with Boyce and pay a fee for Shanckland or Jamie Walkers doing a job for for Bradford as is Henderson for Alloa 😂😂 time to show some ambition 

[jamboinglasgow]

10 hours ago, Jamboj1 said:

We want shankland and he seems to want us. Anything between 200/300k and he will be here, we won’t be paying the 500 they’re asking. Woodburn is keen to stay and we are keen to keep him, apparently really impressed in training this season and we believe once he finds form there is money to be made👍🏻

 

I not as enthused as others with Shankland but if its only 200k/300k we are paying and he is not on too high wages I would be happy with that. Woodburn is one who I have felt has dissapointed, though there have been flashes of skill. But after all the recruitment and coaching side have done this season I will trust their judgement.

[jamboinglasgow]

22 minutes ago, RobNox said:

A lot of people seem to be overlooking that fact.  We stand to gain at least £4m from Europe next year, and potentially a lot more.  While I don't want to see us spunk that in one mad transfer window (which Robbie has already said we don't intend to do), it does allow us to consider players who would command a transfer fee that otherwise would put them out of our reach.

 

I trust our recruitment process and also trust us to set financial limits on what we are prepared to offer a player in terms of wages and what we are prepared to offer in transfer fees.

 

At the FOH open night, Joe Savage talked about the recruitment process, said if we were interested in a player but his agent is looking for unrealistic terms, we tell them to jog on and turn our attention to the next candidate.  "Jog on" were Joe's actual words, the more I hear him speak, the more I like the guy, he doesn't mince his words.

 

 

 

I am glad we wont be taken for a ride by an agent. It may mean we dont get all our targets but getting players in the right budget sets the right tone. It also means we are effectively using all the money we have which is important for the squad. I remember someone saying on here a rumour that we were trying to sign a player from South America in January, but during the negotiations it became a mess (cant remember if the agent put the wage demand suddenly up or there were too many agents demanding cuts) and we just walked away. Clubs who are desperate for signings can make expensive decisions that haunt them for seasons.

[GinRummy]

2 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

I not as enthused as others with Shankland but if its only 200k/300k we are paying and he is not on too high wages I would be happy with that. Woodburn is one who I have felt has dissapointed, though there have been flashes of skill. But after all the recruitment and coaching side have done this season I will trust their judgement.

 

2 minutes ago, pointon said:

I let’s stick with Boyce and pay a fee for Shanckland or Jamie Walkers doing a job for for Bradford as is Henderson for Alloa 😂😂 time to show some ambition 

Shankland doesn’t do much except score goals. We need someone like that imo. Might not start every week but there’s a lot of games next season and I can see the value in someone like him. If he was the only forward we were going to sign then I’d think differently but i doubt he will be. 

[Batistuta87]

1 hour ago, Dick Dastardly said:

Yeah you're probably right. It was more a hopeful name than a serious one

All good, that's what this thread is all about. I've probably posted 20 or so hopeful names 😂

 

Brooks is (was?) a very good young player. Would absolutely jump at the chance to have him at Hearts. 

 

[Batistuta87]

4 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

 

Shankland doesn’t do much except score goals. We need someone like that imo. Might not start every week but there’s a lot of games next season and I can see the value in someone like him. If he was the only forward we were going to sign then I’d think differently but i doubt he will be. 

Shite when players do that eh 

 

[GinRummy]

3 minutes ago, Batistuta87 said:

Shite when players do that eh 

 

😂 exactly my point. Boyce does lots of work for the team but his finishing not the best. Simms is showing his quality but been a while since we’ve had a penalty box striker. 

Edited May 8, 2022 by GinRummy

[jr ewing]

15 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

I not as enthused as others with Shankland but if its only 200k/300k we are paying and he is not on too high wages I would be happy with that. Woodburn is one who I have felt has dissapointed, though there have been flashes of skill. But after all the recruitment and coaching side have done this season I will trust their judgement.

Pay nothing. 

[BackOfTheNet]

18 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

 

Shankland doesn’t do much except score goals. We need someone like that imo. Might not start every week but there’s a lot of games next season and I can see the value in someone like him. If he was the only forward we were going to sign then I’d think differently but i doubt he will be. 

Having players that just hang around the box and score goals is all fine and well in the Championship (or fives), hell, it’s all well and good if he came to Hearts and did that for all I care. Issue is, he doesn’t do that to a significant degree at our current level. Nor has he ever done it so far in his career. That’s where the scepticism from some comes. £200-£300k, if true, would not be too bad for the punt mind you, depending on the wage demands. I really hope that if he signs he bangs them in. But the same way people talk about Shankland being a 20+ goals a season striker in this Hearts team is reminiscent of how people talked about how GMS would walk the Championship and be an amazing player in the Premiership. What players have done in the past may not always convert to being true if they move to Hearts. At least GMS had proven himself at our level previously though.

Edited May 8, 2022 by BackOfTheNet

[GinRummy]

6 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

Having players that just hang around the box and score goals is all fine and well in the Championship (or fives), hell, it’s all well and good if he came to Hearts and did that for all I care. Issue is, he doesn’t do that to a significant degree at our current level. Nor has he ever done it so far in his career. That’s where the scepticism from some comes. £200-£300k, if true, would not be too bad for the punt mind you, depending on the wage demands. I really hope that if he signs he bangs them in. But the same way people talk about Shankland being a 20+ goals a season striker in this Hearts team is reminiscent of how people talked about how GMS would walk the Championship and be an amazing player in the Premiership. What players have done in the past may not always convert to being true if they move to Hearts. At least GMS had proven himself at our level previously though.

We’re not going to sign a proven goal scorer at our level. He could be a flop but equally he could be a great addition to the squad as he offers something different. I’m not jumping hoops about him signing but, like you said, could be worth a punt. There’s a lot of chances been created and wasted this season, could be argued those chances wouldn’t have come about if we had a poacher in the side but we aren’t scoring the number of goals our play deserves imo. 

Edited May 8, 2022 by GinRummy

[BackOfTheNet]

5 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

We’re not going to sign a proven goal scorer at our level. He could be a flop but equally he could be a great addition to the squad as he offers something different. I’m not jumping hoops about him signing but, like you said, could be worth a punt. There’s a lot of chances been created and wasted this season, could be argued those chances wouldn’t have come about if we had a poacher in the side but we aren’t scoring the number of goals our play deserves imo. 

Get where you’re coming from. And that’s just it, we can easily say Shankland could have finished many of the chances Boyce wasted. But then again, if Shankland is in the squad do we make those chances in the first place? Do we have the opposition moving the same way or are they more static as he’s somewhat predictable in his movement? I dunno, as Boyce is predictable too to be honest. A lots of ifs, buts and maybes. I don’t think anyone can be sure of success or failure on this one, so seeing people making fun/being made of fun for not subscribing to one extreme opinion either way is a little irksome. (Not saying you’re doing this, but there’s many dealing only in absolutes on this thread)

Edited May 8, 2022 by BackOfTheNet

[Bazzas right boot]

35 minutes ago, pointon said:

I let’s stick with Boyce and pay a fee for Shanckland or Jamie Walkers doing a job for for Bradford as is Henderson for Alloa 😂😂 time to show some ambition 

 

Nah, I'd go for Simms.

Don't think it would defines us tho- eithere way.

 

[Batistuta87]

21 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

😂 exactly my point. Boyce does lots of work for the team but his finishing not the best. Simms is showing his quality but been a while since we’ve had a penalty box striker. 

100% 

Boyce has done well and I love him as a Hearts player but to go to that next level and really score goals, we need a Simms (big physical guy to hold up the ball but who can also run onto it) and a Shankland (a good finisher who is positionally aware, composed and clinical). Whether that's exactly those two I don't know, but that's certainly two players whom I think would work well together.

 

[GinRummy]

2 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

Get where you’re coming from. And that’s just it, we can easily say Shankland could have finished many of the chances Boyce wasted. But then again, if Shankland is in the squad do we make those chances in the first place? Do we have the opposition moving the same way or are they more static as he’s somewhat predictable in his movement? I dunno, as Boyce is predictable too to be honest. A lots of ifs, buts and maybes. I don’t think anyone can be sure of success or failure on this one, so seeing people making fun/being made of fun for not subscribing to one extreme opinion either way is a little irksome. (Not saying you’re doing this, but there’s many dealing only in absolutes on this thread)

Just the way of things on here. People with the strongest opinions always come to the fore. I’d definitely take him but as you suggested, i don’t thing anyone could say they’re 100 percent confident he’d be a success. 

[milky_26]

2 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

The development fee was in regards to Dembele at celtic, not Brookes. 

sorry missed that the thread had went to dembele

[JimmyCant]

We have rarely made a signing that had a 100% chance of success. Robbo and Gordon spring to mind but even with those there was a chance they wouldn’t be what they were. Both were better as it turned out.

 

Even spending £1 million or more wouldn’t guarantee success. The amount you spend or pay in wages isn’t necessarily directly related to performance.

12 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Just the way of things on here. People with the strongest opinions always come to the fore. I’d definitely take him but as you suggested, i don’t thing anyone could say they’re 100 percent confident he’d be a success. 

 

[Dick Dastardly]

40 minutes ago, Batistuta87 said:

All good, that's what this thread is all about. I've probably posted 20 or so hopeful names 😂

 

Brooks is (was?) a very good young player. Would absolutely jump at the chance to have him at Hearts. 

 

You never know. After everything he's been through he might have different priorities. Becoming a hero at the biggest fan owned club and a wee shot in Europe could be tempting. 

[Dick Dastardly]

1 minute ago, milky_26 said:

sorry missed that the thread had went to dembele

I'm all over the shop pal! 😂😂

[Portable Badger]

4 hours ago, jr ewing said:

Matt Stevens. Forest Green Rovers anyone?

Only if he eats meat !!!

[Bazzas right boot]

2 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

One confirmed to be off in the summer, Jamie Walker has signed a 2 year deal with Bradford

 

 

 

 

Good luck lad. 

 

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

8 hours ago, jamdunc said:

All they said was he felt he had make a mistake and was trying to get out of it. We will see in time

I don’t think you have to try that hard to get out of a pre-contract to be honest so we’ll see.

 

Re Shankland - it would be a nice change (even if it was true) to sign a striker that didn’t do much other than score goals as we seem to specialise in strikers that do everything apart from score goals….

[jr ewing]

17 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

I don’t think you have to try that hard to get out of a pre-contract to be honest so we’ll see.

 

Re Shankland - it would be a nice change (even if it was true) to sign a striker that didn’t do much other than score goals as we seem to specialise in strikers that do everything apart from score goals….

It's coached out of them.

[john thomas]

18 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

I don’t think you have to try that hard to get out of a pre-contract to be honest so we’ll see.

 

Re Shankland - it would be a nice change (even if it was true) to sign a striker that didn’t do much other than score goals as we seem to specialise in strikers that do everything apart from score goals….

Shankland is a good footballer .

Wrong to say he just scores goals , though nothing wrong with scoring .

Think he would , undoubtedly , improve the squad

[jr ewing]

43 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

We have rarely made a signing that had a 100% chance of success. Robbo and Gordon spring to mind but even with those there was a chance they wouldn’t be what they were. Both were better as it turned out.

 

Even spending £1 million or more wouldn’t guarantee success. The amount you spend or pay in wages isn’t necessarily directly related to performance.

 

No, but it helps. 

[Bazzas right boot]

8 minutes ago, jr ewing said:

It's coached out of them.

 

 

For 20 years? 

[stevie1874]

4 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

If seeing a player - play and train with you for a entire season isn't a good  basis to offer a contract ( or not) then I really don't know what is. 

 

It's probably the best situation in which you can evaluate a player before signing him permanently. 

 

Your statement was bizzare and made no sense. 

 

 

Bizzare? I pointed out that in my opinion giving someone (what will be a decent wage in our structure) a contract based on a couple of decent games, numerous anonymous performances but shows up well in training is taking a big risk. I did say I thought a 1 year contract would do. Try reading posts before you start on one. 👍 
Bizzare would be a supposed Hearts supporter wanting Hibs to win a cup 🤷‍♂️

[stevie1874]

4 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

If seeing a player - play and train with you for a entire season isn't a good  basis to offer a contract ( or not) then I really don't know what is. 

 

It's probably the best situation in which you can evaluate a player before signing him permanently. 

 

Your statement was bizzare and made no sense. 

 

 

Bizzare? I pointed out that in my opinion giving someone (what will be a decent wage in our structure) a contract based on a couple of decent games, numerous anonymous performances but shows up well in training is taking a big risk. I did say I thought a 1 year contract would do. Try reading posts before you start on one. 👍 
Bizzare would be a supposed Hearts supporter wanting Hibs to win a cup 🤷‍♂️