Dont get how izzy brown can be classed as an okay signing.

The club knew he was injured when he signed and that resulted in him being nowhere near a good signing.

Edmondson couldnt get anywhere near to the first team despite us having only one striker and has been shipped off to a pub league while we desperately search for a new striker - he has zero future at this club... but is somehow good?

Also did I miss something about Halme, in what way was hw okay?

Baker was recalled cause he couldnt get game time but somehow is also an ok signing? I do t get that at all

comment by Mattyp (U8926)
posted 1 minute ago
Dont get how izzy brown can be classed as an okay signing.

The club knew he was injured when he signed and that resulted in him being nowhere near a good signing.

Edmondson couldnt get anywhere near to the first team despite us having only one striker and has been shipped off to a pub league while we desperately search for a new striker - he has zero future at this club... but is somehow good?

Also did I miss something about Halme, in what way was hw okay?

Baker was recalled cause he couldnt get game time but somehow is also an ok signing? I do t get that at all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For me Brown was always a high risk high reward acquisition. He didn't work out, but not because of Orta. We just couldn't get him fit enough.

Edmondson was brought in to contribute to the U23s, which he has done well, being key to the success they enjoyed under Corberan. He's got a good loan now, and, by the sound of it, will be signing a new contract in the coming weeks.

Halme did alright, and we got a profit on his signing.

Baker is a player who people slag off as a terrible signing. Actually thought he did alright whenever I watched him play. Pretty mediocre player, but not a terrible one, in my eyes at least.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Cal Neva (U11544)
posted 1 minute ago
Orta

by me

Bielsa.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, obviously Bielsa is another big factor in this, but I thought that was a given.

5 stars from me for the effort.

I pretty much agree with your break down.

As for Orta, might we assume that the reason
he was dodgy year one, was partly down to Radz?
As in, we now know out the gate, Radz was
concentrating efforts/money off the pitch getting
the club sorted. And he has, obviously done that.

Maybe Victor was operating with restrictions?
Monetary and asked to be more speculative?
No defending him for that period. Just wondering
if "he was sh 1 t then" is a bit of an unfair
statement to throw at him, not knowing
the whole circumstances during that time.
Not sure? But some howler signings.

He has got better. Bielsa hiring was insanely
good business. And his signings did get better.
Still some misses even recently as you point
out though. Overall, better now.

And I totally agree on your Mateusz Klich
assessment. One of my favourites from day
one. Hung out to dry by the manager back
then. Brought back. Excelled under MB.

And your Bamford assessment.

the 1 single thing orta has done is to get bielsa, nothing else matters

So many issues with this article, it appears to be far from impartial, Hugo Diaz ok (really?), Ekuban played 20 times scoring once is OK, Lasogga plays 31 times scores 10 and is poor.
I think in hindsight Saiz was a poor signing because of his attitude, self before side.
I think Sacko predated Orta.
No mention of Bogusz who I think has shown a lot of promise even though he is yet to break through nor Stevens for that matter.
Also having set out your scoring criteria you then pay no attention to it. Good is better than superb. Bad and shocker score the same.
I make your final score 21 not one but if it is one does that mean you score Orta as a good acquisition.

comment by imnotaherojustmyjob (U21862)
posted 9 minutes ago

the 1 single thing orta has done is to get bielsa, nothing else matters
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Spot on.

It's all about individual views based on what they see.

Not a bad assessment though, but is flawed as you've focussed exclusively on players. He was the architect of Bielsa coming to Leeds - so that's +100 right there. He's the Director of Football at the club, not Director of Players. I also don't get why a player goes down a category based on there fee & earnings? He's either performed or he hasn't. Remove the comment and leave him in the ok bracket and i'd not really argue. As my old school teachers used to say, "could have done better". …

As I just posted on the Watkins chat, Orta brought us Bielsa. The turnover of players was poor first season or so but they then changed and focused on quality over quantity.

In amongst his flops, you have the core of the promotion side in Costa, Meslier, White, Alioski, Douglas, Klich, Bamford, Harrison, Roberts

You also have to pay credit to Monk for Pablo and Ayling

There is a challenge on Ortas record but ultimately he is the one DOF who helped take us back up where many other management teams failed.

In addition, he is absolutely off his rocker and also seems popular in the group. He’s a good fit for Leeds and has enough about him as a DOF to give Bielsa the freedom he wants and needs. He understands the manager and doesn’t interfere. The Radz - Orta - Bielsa axis works so wel

totally with VOF on this.

two excellently balanced views on Orta, not the rubbish we used to get on here that was so one sided it was infuriating to be honest.


great work Lubs, and Kebab for original too

comment by Elsbels - OnOnOn (U21658)
posted 34 minutes ago
So many issues with this article, it appears to be far from impartial, Hugo Diaz ok (really?), Ekuban played 20 times scoring once is OK, Lasogga plays 31 times scores 10 and is poor.
I think in hindsight Saiz was a poor signing because of his attitude, self before side.
I think Sacko predated Orta.
No mention of Bogusz who I think has shown a lot of promise even though he is yet to break through nor Stevens for that matter.
Also having set out your scoring criteria you then pay no attention to it. Good is better than superb. Bad and shocker score the same.
I make your final score 21 not one but if it is one does that mean you score Orta as a good acquisition.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not really sure why Hugo Diaz is being included in the comparison, but okay. With Ekuban we signed him, sold him for a profit, on a fairly minimum wage in the process, whilst Lasogga was on a large wage packet and didn't produce enough, in my view, at least.
You have essentially said about Saiz what I said in the article, so...
Sacko was on loan at the club the year before Orta, but, according to the YEP article I used to compile the list of senior signings, he was signed on a permanent basis after Orta's arrival. My assessment was done on Sacko's time at the club on a permanent, where he struggled to make much of an impact at all.
I think you have missed the point on the scoring system. Good scores +11 in its entirety because it has 11 players at +1 within it, whereas superb scores 10 because it has 5 players worth +2. The same applies for the negative scores, but with minus points allocated, obviously.

comment by VOF - I can see clearly now.... (U17124)
posted 30 minutes ago
It's all about individual views based on what they see.

Not a bad assessment though, but is flawed as you've focussed exclusively on players. He was the architect of Bielsa coming to Leeds - so that's +100 right there. He's the Director of Football at the club, not Director of Players. I also don't get why a player goes down a category based on there fee & earnings? He's either performed or he hasn't. Remove the comment and leave him in the ok bracket and i'd not really argue. As my old school teachers used to say, "could have done better". …
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't understand why you wouldn't take into account money spent? Victor Orta is, as you have said, in charge of football at the club. he will be participating (at the very least) in negotiations. So how succesful he has been in his role should absolutely take into account the negotiations that he has done. this is not an assesment of individual player performances, its an assesment of how well Orta has done in the transfer window, which takes player performance, and other aspects, into account

comment by Yorkie_116 (U2965)
posted 23 minutes ago
As I just posted on the Watkins chat, Orta brought us Bielsa. The turnover of players was poor first season or so but they then changed and focused on quality over quantity.

In amongst his flops, you have the core of the promotion side in Costa, Meslier, White, Alioski, Douglas, Klich, Bamford, Harrison, Roberts

You also have to pay credit to Monk for Pablo and Ayling

There is a challenge on Ortas record but ultimately he is the one DOF who helped take us back up where many other management teams failed.

In addition, he is absolutely off his rocker and also seems popular in the group. He’s a good fit for Leeds and has enough about him as a DOF to give Bielsa the freedom he wants and needs. He understands the manager and doesn’t interfere. The Radz - Orta - Bielsa axis works so wel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Orta and Radrizanni have had some of the best celebratory moments, for me. Orta just the entirety of that week was insane. So much passion and love for the club and what he is done.

What stuck in my mind about Radrizanni is him interrupting an LUTV interview with Cooper to call him his captain and give him a hug. The guy was clearly over the moon.

I don't understand why you wouldn't take into account money spent?

------------------------

Because if you're going to base a judgement on earnings for one player, then you have to assess others similarly, for your assessment to stack up. Why not move the likes of Meslier, Strujik, Poveda and others up because they're on a fraction of what Bamford earns? Not saying your placement of Bamford is wrong, I just don't agree with the linkage to earnings. ….

comment by VOF - I can see clearly now.... (U17124)
posted 15 minutes ago
I don't understand why you wouldn't take into account money spent?

------------------------

Because if you're going to base a judgement on earnings for one player, then you have to assess others similarly, for your assessment to stack up. Why not move the likes of Meslier, Strujik, Poveda and others up because they're on a fraction of what Bamford earns? Not saying your placement of Bamford is wrong, I just don't agree with the linkage to earnings. ….
----------------------------------------------------------------------
yeah while getting bargains is great it doesn't make a player better.

i like your placement of saiz. there's a player who divided opinion. i myself would put the little git under the bus.

lubo wheres ayling?

comment by VOF - I can see clearly now.... (U17124)
posted 29 minutes ago
I don't understand why you wouldn't take into account money spent?

------------------------

Because if you're going to base a judgement on earnings for one player, then you have to assess others similarly, for your assessment to stack up. Why not move the likes of Meslier, Strujik, Poveda and others up because they're on a fraction of what Bamford earns? Not saying your placement of Bamford is wrong, I just don't agree with the linkage to earnings. ….
----------------------------------------------------------------------
because it isn't all I'm taking into account. As said, it's a mixture of both. Struijk, meslier etc have not had enough of an impact on the first team for me to describe them as superb bits of business just yet. Bamford has had that, but is about in line with what I would expect given the money invested in him.

I know I'm one that people don't take notice of and to tell the truth I'm use to it, but, as always, I'll say what I have to say and people can ignore all they want!..

I truly hope that Leeds are forced to take Augustin on, he's getting grief from people around here that know nothing about him, glad the coaching staff and players think he's from what they've seen good!..

And I said on the other thread, but I've said it a few times, Hsv paid the biggest chunk of Lasogga's wages, so he wasn't as dear as people make out!..

comment by LufcGermany (U6066)
posted 11 seconds ago
I know I'm one that people don't take notice of and to tell the truth I'm use to it, but, as always, I'll say what I have to say and people can ignore all they want!..

I truly hope that Leeds are forced to take Augustin on, he's getting grief from people around here that know nothing about him, glad the coaching staff and players think he's from what they've seen good!..

And I said on the other thread, but I've said it a few times, Hsv paid the biggest chunk of Lasogga's wages, so he wasn't as dear as people make out!..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know plenty about Augustin, and think prime him would be great, was excited by the signing. Unfortunately for him it hasn't worked out, and he appears to be unable to get past his injuries right now. With a different manager this may be able to be accomodated, but with Bielsa I just don't see him being able to get to the right levels on his fitness regime.

Not sure you have to waste much energy defending
your OP Lubo. I think your assessments are fine.

But do agree, Orta's celebrations (Derby binoculars)
were passion to the nth in my mind. And MB gets him keys to the city IMO. And as someone said, Orta was
the guy at the helm during our return to Prem.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Cal, what about him belting out songs while press
were trying to interview Bamford (Bamford's brilliant reaction to it)? I'm starting to like the bloke more.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator