Jordan Rhodes - gone to Blackpool

[Wolfie20]

18 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

I'd argue he does given the sizeable portion of the responses here expressing their disappointment if this materialises. The weight of that expectation was formed largely off the back off his comments about the age profile of players we are targeting. When most of our signings (so far) go actively against that profile, then I think it's worth clarifying the initial comments and if anything has changed. 

The negative posts on a possible Rhodes signing represent a tiny proportion of Rams fans - no way does Warne have to make any comment to defend his signings.

[duncanjwitham]

Just now, Kokosnuss said:

Perhaps my mental image of Washington doesn't reflect reality, but I thought he was all about 'busywork', and I was picturing this creating space for others to play in and freeing up Rhodes &/or Collins from the attention of defenders - the ball then goes either to a no. 10 or one of the wingbacks who plays the ball into a loosely marked poacher, ready to pounce.

That's probably about the best combo you can put together from the 3 of them, and it's not exactly a massively exciting one.  Everyone runs around a lot and hope they forget to mark one of our strikers... 🤷‍♂️

There's still no real physical presence to play off, no cleverness to open up teams, no pace to stretch teams, no anything at all really.

[SFox1993]

25 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

I'd argue he does given the sizeable portion of the responses here expressing their disappointment if this materialises. The weight of that expectation was formed largely off the back off his comments about the age profile of players we are targeting. When most of our signings (so far) go actively against that profile, then I think it's worth clarifying the initial comments and if anything has changed. 

Well good luck with that 👍🏻 I thought he said we wanted the majority of players signing between 22 and 27 most have granted the last 3 have been over that but there is more players to come in and what we have brought in so far is players who know how to get promoted ... did you not want sonny Bradley then ?

[Sparkle]

1 hour ago, McMuffin said:

What looked like a great window is about to become another disappointing one. 
No enthusiasm for the season now. Another year in league one.
Bird, Cashin will be off next year to play for someone more ambitious like Millwall or Plymouth or maybe there’ll be off in January when they  realise we’re not going to make the playoffs again.

What have we done to make you think that it looked like a great window? - I am not saying we won’t win the league ( due to the standard of the other clubs) we have sold knight who always did so much, we have sold Belick and yes he wasn’t ever going to play but still a very good player and lost a inspirational captain in Davies and our top scorer and playmaker in McGoldrick, whilst Dobbin was our real pace down one side last season however inconsistent.

we have replaced them with a few journeymen - again I expect to win the league because it’s the third division. We are working with a defined budget and that’s the way it is and players who are decent generally don’t want to play in the third division. I do fully expect either Bird or Cashin to be sold by the end of the transfer window especially as the club haven’t announced any contract extensions apart from young Rooney.

[Caerphilly Ram]

26 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

I'd argue he does given the sizeable portion of the responses here expressing their disappointment if this materialises. The weight of that expectation was formed largely off the back off his comments about the age profile of players we are targeting. When most of our signings (so far) go actively against that profile, then I think it's worth clarifying the initial comments and if anything has changed. 

He’s already commented on how difficult the market for strikers is proving to be and that he may have to go outside of the ideal age bracket. He’s proactively addressed it in advance of these signings, people either haven’t heard that interview or are wilfully ignoring his more recent comments in favour of the older ones. 

[MACKWORTHRAM]

2 hours ago, Nuwtfly said:

If it's a short deal, with no fee, I'm not wholly against this.

Yes I would have preferred a younger striker; someone for the future; a long term project for the club to invest in and maybe see a profit on, but I am starting to see a pattern in the players Warne is signing this summer: promotion.

He's signing proven quality at this level because we're absolutely going it for year and the only aim is to just get out of this league. 

Building for the future can start when we're in the Championship and in a better financial position with more pulling power (this is my guess as to what they're thinking behind the scenes).

 

What's to say we won't sign a younger striker as well?

Still about 6 weeks left of the window.

[DazzaRam]

Rhodes on a 1 year loan/deal i can stomach. Adding Rhodes to Collins and Washington points to playing 2 up top. Where does that leave Mendez-Laing/Barkhuizen if we are playing wing backs? Im not a fan of Rhodes but Kazim didnt sign with much excitement and he became a bit of a hero. 

[duncanjwitham]

8 minutes ago, MACKWORTHRAM said:

What's to say we won't sign a younger striker as well?

Still about 6 weeks left of the window.

The thing is, if we're playing some kind of front 3 (whether that's a 3412, 3421, 343 or whatever), we've already got Collins, Washington, Rhodes (presumably), Barkhuizen, Sibley and NML for those positions.  Plus Ward can play as a winger in a 3, plus the youngsters who've played in preseason.  That's a lot of bodies for 3 positions already.  I don't see why we'd go and get Rhodes if we're going to get another out-and-out striker next week.

[YorkshireRam]

10 minutes ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

He’s already commented on how difficult the market for strikers is proving to be and that he may have to go outside of the ideal age bracket. He’s proactively addressed it in advance of these signings, people either haven’t heard that interview or are wilfully ignoring his more recent comments in favour of the older ones. 

Then surely it's acceptable to say he was slightly naïve to come out with the original age bracket comment if we couldn't back it up when it comes to signings?

This isn't even a comment on Rhodes' ability, he could be a shrewd signing. But it all seems very short-sighted. If we get promoted this year there's zero continuity when it comes to strikers as neither of the 3 will be Championship-standard in a year's time, and a big factor in that is age. 

The main external criticism of Warne I saw is that he yo-yos; yes he has 3 promotions from League 1 under his belt, but he also has 3 relegations from the Championship- this type of transfer business goes directly in-line with the fears of not building for the future; getting promoted pragmatically but then not having any foundations to built on because you just bought what it took to get you over the line. 

This is the first window in 3 years we can spend fees. Given all the talk of a main striker being a priority, I expected us to spend on someone with potential to grow further, who subsequently has resale value. Instead, so far it's been cheap deals for aging strikers not seen as necessary by their Championship clubs... I just expected more from a business perspective, not even playing ability.

[Ambitious]

Another thing worth bearing in mind with Rhodes, focusing purely on the past 5 years on all players that played more than 800 minutes. 

22/23 - Best goal rate of Huddersfield's side in the Championship - 290 minutes per goal
21/22 - Best goal rate of Huddersfield's side in the Championship - 241 minutes per goal
20/21 - Best goal rate of Sheff Wed's side in the Championship - 212 minutes per goal
19/20 - Third best goal rate of Sheff Wed's side in the Championship - 228 minutes per goal
18/19 - Third best goal rate of Norwich's side in the Championship  - 168 minutes per goal

So he's had the best minutes per goal ratio for his side in the last three seasons. When you compare to the top League One goalscorers and how they did in the Championship: 

McGoldrick - scored a goal every 485 minutes in the Championship in 21/22. A goal every 126 minutes for us in League One. 
Clarke-Harris - scored a goal every 250 minutes in the Championship in 21/22. A goal every 154 minutes in League One last season. 
Chaplin - scored a goal every 534 minutes in the Championship in 20/21. A goal every 129 minutes in League One last season. 
Michael Smith - scored a goal every 314 minutes in the Championship in 20/21. A goal every 182 minutes in League One last season. 
Bishop - never played higher than League One - career average is a goal every 259 minutes. 

So I would argue that his ability to put the ball in the goal has been restricted by A) situation - he's still been more prolific than any other player in his sides in the last three years and B) minutes on the pitch. He's largely been injury free the last three seasons which is a big plus. 

He's a player that needs to supported, but I'm fairly positive he scores a good amount of goals at this level in this Derby team. If he gets the opportunity to get a run of games on the pitch then all the better. He started 15 games for Huddersfield last season, 10 of his 34 appearances were less than 15 minutes long. 

The drop in quality from Championship to League One is significant - I would back Rhodes (given the opportunities and games) to easily break the 20 goal mark next season based on his track record, not just over his career but also over the past five years. 

[Sparkle]

4 minutes ago, Ambitious said:

Another thing worth bearing in mind with Rhodes, focusing purely on the past 5 years on all players that played more than 800 minutes. 

22/23 - Best goal rate of Huddersfield's side in the Championship - 290 minutes per goal
21/22 - Best goal rate of Huddersfield's side in the Championship - 241 minutes per goal
20/21 - Best goal rate of Sheff Wed's side in the Championship - 212 minutes per goal
19/20 - Third best goal rate of Sheff Wed's side in the Championship - 228 minutes per goal
18/19 - Third best goal rate of Norwich's side in the Championship  - 168 minutes per goal

So he's had the best minutes per goal ratio for his side in the last three seasons. When you compare to the top League One goalscorers and how they did in the Championship: 

McGoldrick - scored a goal every 485 minutes in the Championship in 21/22. A goal every 126 minutes for us in League One. 
Clarke-Harris - scored a goal every 250 minutes in the Championship in 21/22. A goal every 154 minutes in League One last season. 
Chaplin - scored a goal every 534 minutes in the Championship in 20/21. A goal every 129 minutes in League One last season. 
Michael Smith - scored a goal every 314 minutes in the Championship in 20/21. A goal every 182 minutes in League One last season. 
Bishop - never played higher than League One - career average is a goal every 259 minutes. 

So I would argue that his ability to put the ball in the goal has been restricted by A) situation - he's still been more prolific than any other player in his sides in the last three years and B) minutes on the pitch. He's largely been injury free the last three seasons which is a big plus. 

He's a player that needs to supported, but I'm fairly positive he scores a good amount of goals at this level in this Derby team. If he gets the opportunity to get a run of games on the pitch then all the better. He started 15 games for Huddersfield last season, 10 of his 34 appearances were less than 15 minutes long. 

The drop in quality from Championship to League One is significant - I would back Rhodes (given the opportunities and games) to easily break the 20 goal mark next season based on his track record, not just over his career but also over the past five years. 

All good points - mostly camouflaged by him being a substitute mostly arriving with 15 minutes to go - I don’t mind this signing at all but he needs help next to him 

[RamsFan10]

As has been said a few times now… if he’s just popped up on our radar on the cheap and we’ve gone for it - and we still fully intend on bringing another striker in - then I’m all for Rhodes.
 

If however our three strikers for this season are Collins, Washington and Rhodes (given Warne’s three strikers comments) I would be concerned to say the least. 

[Day]

15 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

Then surely it's acceptable to say he was slightly naïve to come out with the original age bracket comment if we couldn't back it up when it comes to signings?

This isn't even a comment on Rhodes' ability, he could be a shrewd signing. But it all seems very short-sighted. If we get promoted this year there's zero continuity when it comes to strikers as neither of the 3 will be Championship-standard in a year's time, and a big factor in that is age. 

The main external criticism of Warne I saw is that he yo-yos; yes he has 3 promotions from League 1 under his belt, but he also has 3 relegations from the Championship- this type of transfer business goes directly in-line with the fears of not building for the future; getting promoted pragmatically but then not having any foundations to built on because you just bought what it took to get you over the line. 

This is the first window in 3 years we can spend fees. Given all the talk of a main striker being a priority, I expected us to spend on someone with potential to grow further, who subsequently has resale value. Instead, so far it's been cheap deals for aging strikers not seen as necessary by their Championship clubs... I just expected more from a business perspective, not even playing ability.

Get what you're saying, as a business perspective though, a young striker in that age bracket which would be an investment might not have been available, stuck in a chain where another club wants to bring in before they sell, Warne doesn't want to wait any longer or went elsewhere when he thought he had one in the bag.

Anything can happen in the window, for what it's worth I think he will speak of his frustrations once the window has closed, doesn't seem the type to pretend everything went great.

Right now he can't really say all that as the focus needs to be on recruiting.

Maybe he was a little naive to come out and talk about the ages he wants to sign, being at a bigger club probably isn't prepared for this level of scrutiny over every single word.

Although as someone else pointed out, this forum is a tiny fraction of the fan base, will be many that don't follow what's said online and will go into the season with an open mind.

 

[therealhantsram]

My PoV: When backs are against the wall and the club has no money, necessity leads to trying out some young players from with in the ranks.  Kevin Wilson, Phil Gee and Dean Sturridge all broke through when we had no cash and were in need of goals.  All three delivered promotion seasons for us.

For that reason I am not worried.  Someone - don't know who - will get an opportunity this season and grasp it with both hands.

[May Contain Nuts]

23 minutes ago, Ambitious said:

The drop in quality from Championship to League One is significant - I would back Rhodes (given the opportunities and games) to easily break the 20 goal mark next season based on his track record, not just over his career but also over the past five years. 

....but again, that would involve placing all of our eggs in the basket marked Rhodes and the team balance would likely go out the window.

You've said it yourself, he needs to be supported. He won't create his own goalscoring situations and if everyone else is busy doing all they can to present him with the sort of opportunities he needs to score goals, who's providing them with their own chances?

Getting 20 goals out of Rhodes isn't the answer to getting promotion. We couldn't manage it last season with McGoldrick getting 22 and we didn't have to make the same allowances for his presence.

We don't seem to have any method in mind (beyond Washington running around a lot) for getting our attacking midfielders on the ball, centrally,  20-30 yards from goal and in a bit of space, so how are they going to add to the goal tally themselves?

I've seen people suggesting we could get 15 goals each out of Rhodes, Collins & Washington but it seems rather fanciful, there are only so many chances to go around.

Edited July 18, 2023 by Kokosnuss

[Caerphilly Ram]

29 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

Then surely it's acceptable to say he was slightly naïve to come out with the original age bracket comment if we couldn't back it up when it comes to signings?

This isn't even a comment on Rhodes' ability, he could be a shrewd signing. But it all seems very short-sighted. If we get promoted this year there's zero continuity when it comes to strikers as neither of the 3 will be Championship-standard in a year's time, and a big factor in that is age. 

The main external criticism of Warne I saw is that he yo-yos; yes he has 3 promotions from League 1 under his belt, but he also has 3 relegations from the Championship- this type of transfer business goes directly in-line with the fears of not building for the future; getting promoted pragmatically but then not having any foundations to built on because you just bought what it took to get you over the line. 

This is the first window in 3 years we can spend fees. Given all the talk of a main striker being a priority, I expected us to spend on someone with potential to grow further, who subsequently has resale value. Instead, so far it's been cheap deals for aging strikers not seen as necessary by their Championship clubs... I just expected more from a business perspective, not even playing ability.

Your original point that I replied to was Warne needs to clarify it, he has done. Now you’re moving the goalposts and saying he was naive to make the comments in the first place, so what? He shouldn’t have said anything? 

And he has backed up his age bracket comment, we have signed players within and closer to the peak age bracket he mentioned. He’s then explained that he may have to look outside of that as well. We haven’t only signed old players, yet people keep suggesting we have. Elder, Ward, Wilson, Vickers and Nelson (just about) fall into that peak bracket. Bradley and Washington are just outside it, Bradley as a cb arguably is still in his peak bracket given he doesn’t need to be as fit and mobile as say Ward or Elder.
 

I partly agree with your comments about the short termism, that is a concern.
However, Wilson, Ward, Elder, Bradley, Nelson, Vickers are all capable of giving the club a good couple of years service, perhaps laying the foundations now for defence and midfield, short term in attack so when we go up there’s a chance to sign younger/better quality players with a stronger hand available to the club. We are still in league one, there is still a business plan of sorts we have to keep too. AND there’s still time to add more players.
Just feels like the relative lack of activity for a week, coupled with the potential addition of a striker some deem below their expectations, is starting to embolden an anti-Warne sentiment again. I’ve seen comments along the lines of “Warne needs to explain this. Warne needs to justify the finances. Where is the money? Where is the ambition?” The season hasn’t started yet, we’re still building a squad, there’s every chance we succeed and there’s every chance we fail, no need to get too dramatic about one signing when a week or two back plenty of people were happy with Kane Wilson and Sonny Bradley and the like. 

[duncanjwitham]

2 minutes ago, Kokosnuss said:

We don't seem to have any method in mind (beyond Washington running around a lot) 

You can't say stuff like that round here mate.  Warne is an absolute tactical genius, with the best tactics. And also, we don't need tactics, having tactics makes you predictable or something so we definitely won't have tactics.  Yeah, both of those. At the same time.  In Warne we believe.

[Ambitious]

1 minute ago, Kokosnuss said:

....but again, that would involve placing all of our eggs in the basket marked Rhodes and the team balance would likely go out the window.

You've said it yourself, he needs to be supported. He won't create his own goalscoring situations and if everyone else is busy doing all they can to present him with the sort of opportunities he needs to score goals, who's providing them with their own chances?

Getting 20 goals out of Rhodes isn't the answer to getting promotion. We couldn't manage it last season with McGoldrick getting 22 and we didn't have to make the same allowances for his presence.

We don't seem to have any method in mind (beyond Washington running around a lot) for getting our attacking midfielders on the ball 20-30 yards from goal and in a bit of space, so how are they going to add to the goal tally themselves?

I've seen people suggesting we could get 15 goals each out of Rhodes, Collins & Washington but it seems rather fanciful, there are only so many chances to go around.

My personal opinion is that it's disrespectful to Rhodes to put Washington and Collins in the same bracket as him. Rhodes is a markedly more accomplished footballer than both of them and (for my money) will score a lot of goals at this level. 

In terms of supporting our striker, that should be a priority regardless. Rhodes is going to play off the shoulder, although a few Huddersfield fans have praised his hold-up play too, so the two players behind him (assuming a 3-4-2-1) will need to run the channels and come deep for the ball. If you want Rhodes to run the channels, come deep for the ball, etc, it's not his game.  

[MackworthRamIsGod]

1 hour ago, Donnyram said:

Warne said a couple of weeks ago in an interview that he will likely have to go over the 32 year bracket to find a goal scorer

So my point stands, he bleeted on about age being an issue and not having enough players in the right age band. We don't currently seem to be making great strides to rectify that.

[MackworthRamIsGod]

1 hour ago, Wolfie20 said:

The negative posts on a possible Rhodes signing represent a tiny proportion of Rams fans - no way does Warne have to make any comment to defend his signings.

I wouldn't say tiny. There seems to an equal number for and against the signing.