How much would Lamela have gone for if Roma kept him for another 2 years?

Di Marzio claiming the price is 30m euros + 2 in bonuses, without agent fees. He was brought from River Plate at 17m. I think Roma really jumped the gun on this one, they just sold Argentina's most promising talent since Aguero for a measly fee in this transfer market. Had they matched tottenham's offered wages and kept him I'm sure they could have sold him for much more, especially when players like Bale are going for 100m.

Depends on the market.

In this current market, probably around 50-60m.

Markets just going to get inflated now with "above average" players going for close to 100m...

I always felt that he'll be a Monaco player eventually in a season or two.

With the way he's progressing ,he wouldnt have gone for anything less than 50m.

Agreed Surag. I think 50m is a good price estimate. And considering that the market is still inflating ridiculously I could even see it go above that. The thing that surprises me is that even if Lamela stops progressing altogether and stays as he is now for the next 2 years, which is of course incredibly unlikely, I really doubt they wouldn't on the very least break even on his purchase. So I see a lot of upside and not that much downside.

Really puzzling business decision by Roma's management. The only explanation I can think of is that they're scrapped for cash.

These type of threads never make sense to me, you don't know whether a player would do good in another 2 years or whether he would do bad.

If he did good =50-60 million

If he did bad = 20-30

Either way they would profit or break even, Roma ruined what couldve been a great mercato for them by selling Lamela.

He could have declined in two years, so no one would know. However if he kept up his current level, then I'd say around 45-50m.

Yohan Modric wrote:He could have declined in two years, so no one would know.

Exactly. Roma have got a good fee for him. As long as they put it to good use, they won't look back.

Casciavit wrote:These type of threads never make sense to me, you don't know whether a player would do good in another 2 years or whether he would do bad.

If he did good =50-60 million

If he did bad = 20-30

Weighted average of probability x prospected price.

Suppose you think the following:
25% chance he does bad and gets sold for 25m
75% chance he does well and gets sold for 55m

Then his current value is (.25*25)+(.75*55)= 47.5m

If he kept up his current rate of progress, 60m.

Roma bought him for 17? huh..I figured they got him for a couple of mil or something..bad business selling him IMO

BarrileteCosmico wrote:

Casciavit wrote:These type of threads never make sense to me, you don't know whether a player would do good in another 2 years or whether he would do bad.

If he did good =50-60 million

If he did bad = 20-30

Weighted average of probability x prospected price.

Suppose you think the following:
25% chance he does bad and gets sold for 25m
75% chance he does well and gets sold for 55m

Then his current value is (.25*25)+(.75*55)= 47.5m

You simply cannot make up stats to validate your argument.

Erm, what?

Didn't ask you a thing, so run along boy.

What stats? It was an example.

BarrileteCosmico wrote:What stats? It was an example.

So you just pull percentages from thin air to calculate a current value? Interesting.  

It depends on your assessment. Different people would have different assessments of the likelihood of Lamela fulfilling his potential, or even about his potential roof. If you try to make that kind of analysis you have to assign probabilities. These can be educated guesses but yeah in football it would come down to a lot of guesswork.

So you calculate a player's current value using an equation, which relies upon totally made up figures, which themselves are heavily biased depending upon your own opinion of the player?

Isn't any prediction of his future value entirely based on "your own opinion of the player"?

Don't see what's so controversial about what I did.

Except you're using your biased opinion of his potential to calculate his current value, which interestingly is way higher than the fee Spurs are reportedly paying.

Anyway, I just wanted clarification as so in future I can steal this crackpot idea for my own means.

The_Badger wrote:

BarrileteCosmico wrote:

Casciavit wrote:These type of threads never make sense to me, you don't know whether a player would do good in another 2 years or whether he would do bad.

If he did good =50-60 million

If he did bad = 20-30

Weighted average of probability x prospected price.

Suppose you think the following:
25% chance he does bad and gets sold for 25m
75% chance he does well and gets sold for 55m

Then his current value is (.25*25)+(.75*55)= 47.5m

You simply cannot make up stats to validate your argument.

he didnt even discount the time value of money

Didn't feel the need to bring up that level of (admittedly low) sophistication as I would have to explain it and that was simply too much effort for very little reward

if he stays fit and doesn't get a serious injury than 45-50 maybe more he is hell of a talent even thou his character is not among the best but he is a winner something I like