Scott Sinclair or Jermain Defoe

[| wolfswinkel | 0]

Both could be available at £6m pound each! Would you want to see Sinclair here with some added pace and competition or have we got too many wingers? Or Defoe a nataral finisher but we have hoops and Wolfe and becchio! Defoe would be a real treat! But wages are going to be the cripple!

[Nicko 0]

Both?

[can u sit down please 0]

People keep mentioning Defoe, he''s well out of our range. Wages plus he''d attract an Everton/Liverpool type club.

[lake district canary 4,531]

[quote user="can u sit down please"]People keep mentioning Defoe, he''s well out of our range. Wages plus he''d attract an Everton/Liverpool type club.[/quote]

I think we compare quite well to Everton, or will do by the end of this season.  There''s also the Hughton connection, which has helped with some of the other players we have bought.

[lharman7 39]

Defoe! Proven premier league goal scorer with bags of experience.

[ref89 0]

Definitely Sinclair.  Defoe would be hugely expensive for someone who has misfired for years now.

[KeiranShikari_2 0]

[quote user="ref89"]Definitely Sinclair.  Defoe would be hugely expensive for someone who has misfired for years now.[/quote]

The 15 and 17 goals he got in the last 2 seasons sure aren''t bad for somebody who has been misfiring for years.

For me neither player is what we need though, unless SS has the awareness to play in behind the main striker.

[Green and Yellow fellow 0]

I''d take Scott Sinclair any day of the week, top class player, young and English, Redmond and Sinclair have the potential to make a quality England partnership. As for Defoe, we already have a player who is described as being very similar. McVeigh on talksport when asked who he would compare Gary Hooper with, said he is the same type of player as Defoe. We need a bit of power IMO in the likes of Quag.

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="ref89"]Definitely Sinclair.  Defoe would be hugely expensive for someone who has misfired for years now.
[/quote]

 

I thought he''d retired !

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="Webbo118"]

[quote user="ref89"]Definitely Sinclair.  Defoe would be hugely expensive for someone who has misfired for years now.
[/quote]

 

I thought he''d retired !

[/quote]

 

He had a couple of nasty injuries last season and I think he has missed a bit of pre-season as he is on medication to reduce blood clouts.

 

Would like to know how that recovery is going before any money was commited to him, would be an excellent addition though (although not is a position Norwich really need any more players).

[ZLF 271]

[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

(although not a position Norwich really need any more players).[/quote]

 

I think thts the crux of it for sinclair - plenty of that type now at the club.

 

Not sure about defoe;  with rvw and hooper ideally I would like someone who is a slightly better footballer to complete our complement of strikers - I agree with the earlier comments about being similar to Hooper - although I would probably have chosen defoe over hooper given the choice.  Great prem player (not an international imo) so if we chose to buy wouldnt grumble!

 

 

[pilksfanclub 0]

Sinclair isn''t a great player. Defoe is a better player. They play different positions also and I don''t really know here Sinclair would fit in. Also Defoe won''t happen now we have spent £12 million on two new strikers

[Dubai Mark 0]

Putting aside whether we could afford them or not, surely it has to be Defoe (210 goals in 513 appearances mainly in the EPL is very decent), he is one of the best proven Premier league strikers around and it would be brilliant seeing him in a City shirt, but it wont happen, oh I said I''d put that aside.

[KeelansGlove 0]

Don''t need Sinclair.

Don''t want Defoe. last years news, this years chip paper

[chicken 0]

I think Sinclair is vastly overrated. He did very well in a good Swansea side, you''d have to question his motivation for the move to Man City where it was clear he was never going to get into the side ahead of the players they had in their attacking array.

He was purely there to be the home grown quota.

He''s quick and definitely classy but I''m still unconvinced that he is consistent and really as good as he feels he is.

I wouldn''t want him now simply because we have Redmond and I think we have enough in wide positions for now.

Defoe would be a massive coup. He is a quality proven premiership player. Scored goals wherever he has been and is widely said to be a top pro. He is loved by a lot of Spurs fans because he constantly seems to be on the verge of leaving only for the manager at the time to realise he is a lot better than some of the other tat they have tried.

[Salopian 1]

As some have said, Defoe would not cost much to sign but his wages are likely to be excessive. Sinclair may also have high wage expectations arising from his present club. Defoe may be the more likely to score and Sinclair is a wide player, and we already have four of these!

 

The each have strengths, I would not be unhappy to see either signed if the wage level did not cause problems, but I fear that wages may be too high.

[Juggy 0]

We don''t need a winger, and we don''t need a #9. 

So neither. We need a #10 and an attacking centre midfielder, or a player who can play both. 

Neither Defoe or Sinclair fit the bill.

NEXT!