[Albion] Napoli interested in Billy Gilmour **Sold 30/08/24**

[Mr deez]

Same here. £12M seems incredibly low - to me that's a 'binning him off' price. Wonder how much of that £12M Chelsea would get?

Even if there was a clause, very little as that's barely making a profit.

 

[Justice]

£8m bid according to TS

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

And my point is that missing one of the most successful progressive passers in the league was almost certainly a factor why we spent seven games circulating the ball without finding passes in between the lines.

But it doesn’t translate to the other games when he played, so no, not for me.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Same here. £12M seems incredibly low - to me that's a 'binning him off' price. Wonder how much of that £12M Chelsea would get?

Whilst I think he is surplus to requirements, I was hoping for another £20m!

That’s an astonishingly low bid and subsequent bizarre guess at our valuation.

What is so concerning is the source. He seems to be at the front of the queue in terms of being giving snippets of info from the club:

 

[Gilmour Fan]

Just a few of his impressive stats

 

[brighton_tom]

Not doubting Napoli's interest, or that a bid has been rejected, but i would think us letting him go for £12m is absolute bullshit. Unless we are suddenly about to bring in 2 more starting centre mid options then BG is still very much a first team player. Of course its possible we could let him go if the right bid came in, but £12m is not it..

 

[Han Solo]

But it doesn’t translate to the other games when he played

It does. If Brighton would have scored one goal (+2 own goals) every 7th game we would be having very different conversations now.

I'm not saying scoring or not scoring is entirely dependent on Billy, but people are massively underrating his role in making the team somewhat functional over the season. Statistically he is not only one of the best passers in the top 5 leagues but also one who carries and passes the ball FORWARD whenever possible.

Here's a "all actions in a game" type of video that show a little of what Billy is actually doing on the pitch:

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

Starting 23 year old playmakers playing in the premier league with two years on their contracts don’t go for £12m even if they were considered surplus on a new playing style.

Gilmour is a lot more important to us than he’s clearly given credit for. Would be a mistake to let him leave for this.

Alex Crook has a direct line to PB so normally quite accurate with all things Albion, the “£12m maybe enough”! Sadly hasn’t come from nowhere

 

[Hugo Rune]

And my point is that missing one of the most successful progressive passers in the league was almost certainly a factor why we spent seven games circulating the ball without finding passes in between the lines.

There has now been an upgrade.

Mats Wieffer:

“His profile makes him a worthy addition to the Brighton squad as Wieffer excels in several key areas. His passing statistics are noteworthy, with 6.81 passes played into the final third per 90 minutes (92nd percentile in Europe’s top five leagues) and 8.03 progressive passes per 90 (94th percentile).” New York Times


Wee Billy Gilmour:

 

[Han Solo]

There has now been an upgrade.

Mats Wieffer:

“His profile makes him a worthy addition to the Brighton squad as Wieffer excels in several key areas. His passing statistics are noteworthy, with 6.81 passes played into the final third per 90 minutes (92nd percentile in Europe’s top five leagues) and 8.03 progressive passes per 90 (94th percentile).” New York Times


Wee Billy Gilmour:




View attachment 185885

Progressive passing in the Eredivisie where you have twice the time and twice the space to do something with the ball is in a different league to doing it in the Premier League.

 

[GT49er]

Mats Wieffer and maybe Diego Gomez (after the Olympics) will do that for us. Both big old units who can fall back into Hürzeler’s back 5 when we set-up the low block. Also players who can shoot and assist.

Let's hope so! Mind you, Dahoud was a good replacement last year - until the season started!

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

It does. If Brighton would have scored one goal (+2 own goals) every 7th game we would be having very different conversations now.

I'm not saying scoring or not scoring is entirely dependent on Billy, but people are massively underrating his role in making the team somewhat functional over the season. Statistically he is not only one of the best passers in the top 5 leagues but also one who carries and passes the ball FORWARD whenever possible.

Here's a "all actions in a game" type of video that show a little of what Billy is actually doing on the pitch:

The video was very early on with a full strength team that had continued from the previous season. Everyone was an 8 or 9.
(Stupidly at that moment I thought we’d have a great season, then the injuries started and RdZ stubbornness).

As per my post, for me, BG absence was not a significant factor in our loss of form.

He’s a steady PL player nothing more IMO, I’ll be sorry if he leaves, but would agree with @Farehamseagull estimate of £25m+ being good business.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

12m seems incredibly low.

That's a bit less than we let Burn go to Newcastle for isn't it? And he had less time on his contract and asked to leave because it was a now or never opportunity to play for his boyhood club.

Now I'm sure Billy would jump at the chance to play for Napoli but why would we let him go for so little? We got 20m+ for Trossard with 18months left, 25m+ for Bissouma with one year left, we got 25m for Sanchez, a gk who refused to play for us. And only one of those buying teams was Chelsea, so...

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

I’d offer them Dahoud on a free just to free up the reported £3.5m a year we are paying him.

 

[jackanada]

No. It is an estimation of WB's contribution to the team by the speculator. It is not a statement from Fab about what he thinks.

Thank you for using WB.
WBG is also acceptable but if everyone could stop using BG that would be great because it always takes me a moment to realise Ben's Grandad (RIP) hasn't been derailing the conversation.

 

[Han Solo]

I’d offer them Dahoud on a free just to free up the reported £3.5m a year we are paying him.

I don't think our high demands are preventing Dahoud from leaving...

Imho the only way we could have gotten a fee for Dahoud this summer is if we'd hired Potter. Harry, that is.

 

[Hugo Rune]

12m seems incredibly low.

That's a bit less than we let Burn go to Newcastle for isn't it? And he had less time on his contract and asked to leave because it was a now or never opportunity to play for his boyhood club.

Now I'm sure Billy would jump at the chance to play for Napoli but why would we let him go for so little? We got 20m+ for Trossard with 18months left, 25m+ for Bissouma with one year left, we got 25m for Sanchez, a gk who refused to play for us. And only one of those buying teams was Chelsea, so...

I don’t believe the £12m valuation. If anything else, that would cause a huge congestion problem on the A27 with both Premier League and Championship recruitment teams queuing up in order to buy the wee laddie.

However, I’m coming round to the idea that the club could compromise on the fee if the following criteria were true:

1. The player is an incredibly nice guy. One that the club would like to see prosper from a human perspective.

2. The buying team is not based in England. We don’t want Billy coming back to haunt us next season!

3. We already have at least two options for their position.

4. We agree a 50%+ sell-on fee.

5. The player/agent has approached the club and indicated the Conte/Napoli destination is wanted.

6. Hürzeler has told the Tony et al that WBG is surplus to requirements and will struggle for squad time, let alone game time.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Same here. £12M seems incredibly low - to me that's a 'binning him off' price. Wonder how much of that £12M Chelsea would get?

Transfermarkt believe that we paid about £7m for him. Say Chelsea have a 30% sell-on, that is normally on the profit. So about £1.5m to Chelsea from the £5m profit.

But what if we, in order for Napoli to get him so cheap, had a 50% sell-on clause with this deal?

So hypothetically, if Napoli sold him to Milan for £40m in 2027, we could get another £14m from the profits and limit the amount Chelsea get from the sale this summer. Total profit on WBG would be £17.5m which would be pretty good for a player rejected by our new manager.

It’s a gamble for sure, you’d just need a Chairman who is good at that sort of thing to pull it off.

Effectively, we’d be getting rid of Chelsea’s opportunity to make money on is sale and replacing with ours in the future. Bad news for Chelsea.

 

[Midget]

I like WBG a lot. As well as seeming like a good guy, he's one of the few who tried to keep quick, accurate passing going when we were looking a bit ponderous and shite last season. I'd be a bit sad if he goes so soon and a bit pissed off if he goes cheaply.

I think it's too early for us to assume he doesn't fit our plans just based on how St Pauli played under Hürzeler in a completely different league (and tier). We haven't seen how we play under FH yet. Yes we're bringing new people in, but I'd hope he has more ideas than just trying to make us "FCSP if they could spend a bit more cash".

It all depends on how WBG feels he fits into the plans of course. But I'd like to see how he looks in Japan in a Hürzeler Brighton team before I start shitting the bed.


(*I am unlikely to shit the bed either way.)

 

[Whitechapel]

Transfermarkt believe that we paid about £7m for him. Say Chelsea have a 30% sell-on, that is normally on the profit. So about £1.5m to Chelsea from the £5m profit.

But what if we, in order for Napoli to get him so cheap, had a 50% sell-on clause with this deal?

So hypothetically, if Napoli sold him to Milan for £40m in 2027, we could get another £14m from the profits and limit the amount Chelsea get from the sale this summer. Total profit on WBG would be £17.5m which would be pretty good for a player rejected by our new manager.

It’s a gamble for sure, you’d just need a Chairman who is good at that sort of thing to pull it off.

Effectively, we’d be getting rid of Chelsea’s opportunity to make money on is sale and replacing with ours in the future. Bad news for Chelsea.

Chelsea would also get a cut of the sell-on clause though, unfortunately