If he was willing to come would you pay 20-25 million for Lukaku?

[mythbuster]

explain how hernandez does not fit our system. Lukaku just stood there at saint's, hernandez would actually make runs to make things happen, come short, go beyond etc. And he provides the plan b of just putting dangerous crosses in to the box like we needed vs cp, those crosses that del whips in would be dinner for him. Quick and a great finisher. As for traore, that will be a risk, but you have to that in football, but I like the look of him from seeing him in previous years

He's not a lone striker. Think he'd do well with Naismith though. But can we afford to have a player who is only effective with a strike partner?

 

[Del]

cool, that's your opinion, I think Hernandez would be boss.

I would love him here

Don't see it though

 

[gianthogweed]

his 1st touch is really poor and for such a big fella he ain't that good in the air and to top it off he is lazy

these 2 players combined would get us more goals ...Jordan Rhodes Loic Remy get them both for the same price bracket as Rom

 

[steken1]

People think you can can only play a big strong type up top if you play one up front, that's not the case. It depends on what you've got behind them too.

 

[mythbuster]

That's just one season. Rideout's Everton career was like 1-in-5. Yak also had one good season. Cottee had 6 good seasons.

We need a striker who's consistently bagging 1-in-2 over several seasons.

Would make sense if you never mentioned Yak at all then mate

 

[dholliday]

Would make sense if you never mentioned Yak at all then mate

I mentioned it to disregard one-season wonders as I knew lids would mention them

 

[Dozbik]

Yes, I would, as I am convinced he will be worth significantly more in a few years. A five year contract and let's say he moved on after three seasons and we could definitely get 35-40 million for him plus three ~20 goal seasons.

 

[Garrick]

He's not a lone striker. Think he'd do well with Naismith though. But can we afford to have a player who is only effective with a strike partner?

Depends, what's the price?

Between his utter lack of playing time as of late and the fact that he's not from Europe or South America, I think you could get a pretty good deal on Chicharito.

 

[Moomin]

Kenwyne Jones for 1.5 million, we can spend the rest on packets of sour haribo sweets.

 

[deipnosophist]

I would not pay 20 million pounds. I think he might get worse not better as defenders cotton onto the fact that he is not good in the air, has terrible ball control and for the size of him he is a bit 'soft'. I realise I am going to get shot down in flames for my view, but as per the question raised by the OP, that is what it is.

PS he was MUCH better with his old hair.

 

[mythbuster]

Doesn't read like that to me mate.

If we take away Yak's one good season, we have to go back all the way to Tony Cottee since we've had a regular 1-in-2 striker.

 

[Matthew mcdonnell]

Not the greatest passer in the world, can't really link play up or play for 90 minutes effectively. He fades in and out of games, like Lukaku yes but Lukaku has more about him than Hernandez.

fair one on the passing, but hardly like lukaku is too. When you say link up, you don't need a lone striker to be a big target man, like a guy just said, it's what have behind them, good fluid passing and it could well work. Look at city for example with aguero, yes we can't pass it like them, but it does work. As to fading in and out of games, well he hasn't really had many full 90 mins so we can't really judge him on that can we? remember how good he was in his first season?

 

[Dario Terracotta]

Ta ra Rom.

 

[deipnosophist]

Mad Max max

 

[Del]

Max Clifford