Transfer rumours, targets & new signings

[LancyTony]

Just a thought - I wonder whether Remie Streete is available? Seems he was last with any club in 2019, but had got over the injury problems that plagued him? Apparently, although he came back to train with us in 2019 Aspo didn't sign him because he didn't need defenders? Like I say - just a thought?

[Danish Valiant]

On 08/12/2021 at 10:32, ValeForever. said:

I liked Lloyd. Think he got some undeserved stick at times. I think he will turn out to be a good player in a few years time.

He had a good first touch & awareness & his biggest asset was his work rate, he hunted balls down which is what this team is all about. He also notched a few goals for us despite limited game time.

Good luck to him in his recovery & wish him all the best.

I agree with his assets, but I still never understood the signing of him.

I understand we can never get 5 even strikers in the building, but when we have Bailey, I don't understand we sign a loan player, almost the same age, with basically the same assets. 

For me, Lloyd, Matrix or no Matrix, was a very very very strange signing, and almost seemed a signing, for the sake of a signing, DC having painted himself into a corner, by promising a striker.

I understand all the reasons DC gave for signing him. That he had all the things we were missing in the other strikers. And that all sounded very good and promising. But in real life, you could see it in glimpses, but he very much looked like a youth player, playing the real game for the first time, learning how to use his assets in the "real" game. And why waste that space on another clubs youngster, instead of ie. Bailey?

[Joe B]

58 minutes ago, Danish Valiant said:

I agree with his assets, but I still never understood the signing of him.

I understand we can never get 5 even strikers in the building, but when we have Bailey, I don't understand we sign a loan player, almost the same age, with basically the same assets. 

For me, Lloyd, Matrix or no Matrix, was a very very very strange signing, and almost seemed a signing, for the sake of a signing, DC having painted himself into a corner, by promising a striker.

I understand all the reasons DC gave for signing him. That he had all the things we were missing in the other strikers. And that all sounded very good and promising. But in real life, you could see it in glimpses, but he very much looked like a youth player, playing the real game for the first time, learning how to use his assets in the "real" game. And why waste that space on another clubs youngster, instead of ie. Bailey?

Lloyd started 18 games for the League 2 Champions last season, making 32 appearances. They seemed to think he was good enough.

Bailey is absolutely nowhere near ready. To pretend that Lloyd, who played a fair bit in the best team in the league, and Bailey, who has never made a league appearance before this season and was part of a very poor youth team, are somehow equivalent is wrong.

The signing made sense; we needed a 4th choice striker who was happy to not start every week but had experience of a successful League 2 side. Ideally he'd have some pace as Wilson and Proctor aren't quick. He hasn't played much because Proctor and Wilson have both had good runs of form, and then he got injured himself.

The line about 'signing a striker because he promised a striker' is complete conjecture mate. It really wasn't a difficult signing to understand at all.

[Danish Valiant]

Just now, Joe B said:

Lloyd started 18 games for the League 2 Champions last season, making 32 appearances.

Bailey is absolutely nowhere near ready. To pretend that Lloyd, who played a fair bit in the best team in the league, and Bailey, who has never made a league appearance before this season, are somehow equivalent is wrong.

The signing made sense; we needed a 4th choice striker who was happy to not start every week but had experience of a successful League 2 side. He hasn't played much because Proctor and Wilson have both had good runs of form, and then he got injured himself.

The line about 'signing a striker because he promised a striker' is complete conjecture mate. It really wasn't a difficult signing to understand at all.

So you think he was an excellent signing? My opinion is I don't think it made sense, and I stand by that! 

And you say it yourself, that he was basically there to make up the numbers. You just put it in more diplomatic terms.

[Joe B]

4 minutes ago, Danish Valiant said:

So you think he was an excellent signing? My opinion is I don't think it made sense, and I stand by that! 

And you say it yourself, that he was basically there to make up the numbers. You just put it in more diplomatic terms.

No. I clearly don't say that.

I said the signing made sense. Didn't say, in hindsight, it's worked, because he's played 200 minutes in the league; he rarely played because two strikers were in good form in front of him, then he got an unfortunate injury at the worst time. 

The signing made sense as he started 18 games for the League 2 Champions last season and we needed a 4th choice striker with pace and had experience at our level. We couldn't rely on Bailey for that role. We could sign another starter due to the budget/Wilson + Proctor expecting to start. 

As I say - the signing isn't a difficult one at all to understand. The question of it going well is a different matter, but the lad has barely played so I'm not keen to judge.

[Danish Valiant]

Just now, Joe B said:

No. I clearly don't say that.

I said the signing made sense. Didn't say, in hindsight, it's worked; he rarely played because two strikers were in good form in front of him, then he got an unfortunate injury at the worst time. 

The signing made sense as he started 18 games for the League 2 Champions last season and we needed a 4th choice striker with pace and had experience at our level. We couldn't rely on Bailey for that role. We could sign another starter due to the budget/Wilson + Proctor expecting to start. 

As I say - the signing isn't a difficult one at all to understand. 

Based on pure stats, I can agree. 

But that he has started 18 games, doesn't really put him that much ahead of Bailey in my opinion. And with the amount of games Lloyd got, and the level he showed in those games, I would perhaps rather have given that valuable experience to Eden. 

[cactuselves]

16 minutes ago, Danish Valiant said:

Based on pure stats, I can agree. 

But that he has started 18 games, doesn't really put him that much ahead of Bailey in my opinion. And with the amount of games Lloyd got, and the level he showed in those games, I would perhaps rather have given that valuable experience to Eden. 

Its all about opinions and I'm with Joe on this one. He played up front 32 times for a team that won the league. He was signed as support for Rodders / Wilson / Proctor. His workrate is great and he has proven that he can do a job in a promotion season. It was a signing that made sense all ends up.

It wasn't 'wasting the space' on another clubs assets rather than Bailey. Bailey has always been at Vale and its up to him to prove that he is good enough to get in to the first team whether Lloyd is here or not. 

It didn't work out for LLoyd, but he did make a small impact in winning a couple of key free kicks that ended up in goals. 

It will be interesting to see what type of striker we go for in Jan though... do we push out for a player who will be 'first choice' and possibly keep Wilson / Proctor out when they are back or do we go for a stop gap. Budget and other transfer targets will dictate....

Lets get through the next few games with as many points as possible an hope we are still there or therabouts!!

[Fosse69]

DC principle: loan players should be with an option to sign if worth proven, Lloyd has experience and fits the Matrix, time will tell.

[mbycars]

On 07/12/2021 at 19:39, Danish Valiant said:

Never understood the signing of Lloyd. Matrix or no matrix. DC talked him up, as he's supposed to, but the amount of game time showed a different story. A bit weird, to loan a young player, who is so much like someone we already have in the building, in Eden Bailey. They are so much alike, and Eden is already ours, and younger than Lloyd, so why not give him the sparse game time Lloyd got, and develop our own player, instead of Cheltenhams? 

Oh well, you can't get every signing right...

Eden Bailey is no where near 1st team standard yet. He is at least 2 years behind Lloyd in his development. 

[Danish Valiant]

42 minutes ago, mbycars said:

Eden Bailey is no where near 1st team standard yet. He is at least 2 years behind Lloyd in his development. 

Exactly what I think Lloyd looked like, in the few games he played. No where near first team standards yet

[Guitar Ray]

My view on the Lloyd debate would be that he was never signed to be a first choice, just an option off the bench and as a backup.  Looking at his stats he’s clearly another of those young players “with potential”, so a bit of a chancer, which was fine under the circumstances.  If we were lucky he could’ve been a diamond fit us but it’s not played out that way.

We’re going to need a bit of luck with any signing we make in this next window.  We need a striker, or strikers, to come in and hit the ground running, which is a big ask.  I also worry that we’re not in a strong bargaining position because other clubs, agents and players will all know the predicament we’re in.

[darren1810]

Seeing as he made valuable contributions at Swindon, Mansfield and Crawley I think Lloyd was more than adequate as back up.  Joe is spot on with his assessment.  

Although not directly mentioned by anybody I feel he's remembered for his Bradford miss rather than his positive contributions. 

Bailey is taking baby steps he's nowhere near the level of Lloyd. 

He's a nuisance and harries defenders and offered something different in the brief minutes he had. 

[valiant_593]

12 hours ago, LancyTony said:

Just a thought - I wonder whether Remie Streete is available? Seems he was last with any club in 2019, but had got over the injury problems that plagued him? Apparently, although he came back to train with us in 2019 Aspo didn't sign him because he didn't need defenders? Like I say - just a thought?

Odd suggestion that. Not played football in years and we don’t need defenders. 

[Burslem Academicals]

14 minutes ago, Danish Valiant said:

Exactly what I think Lloyd lookes like, in the few games he played. No where near first team standards yet

As pointed out Lloyd played 32 games for last seasons Champions and having won promotion is a league 1 player on loan to league 2.....Lloyd is 21 with 89 competitive games under the belt and one Championship on the CV while Bailey is 17 and has never started a game.....Lloyd was our fourth striker while Bailey is a youth team kid.....expect Lloyd has now gone back to free up a squad place for a striker in january.

[Rampant Zebra]

I am more concerned how many of our players will want to leave, I suspect Taylor would like a move away, or at least Sproson wants him to move.