The model of spending on low unproven players with potential is only successful at clubs with the best possible scouting and analytics departments and a comfortable environment where players are given time to develop as there isn't any pressure to compete at the highest level season after season.
The transfer hit rate largely depends on the quality of your scouting and analytics team whether you're Man City or Brentford.
Absolutely, and that's what has significantly impacted us. I'm all for us going after some big name, big money signings because they are the ones who are/can be just that next step up from a really good to a great player. But I also think that we need to have a healthy balance between those players and the less proven, potentially high reward ones.
You were criticizing the Nkuoudou and N'Jie acquisitions, but some of those players just aren't going to hit but they are relatively a very low risk for the few gems you will find. So few players are going to be anything close to a guarantee star, so to your point that's where the analytics and scouting becomes so important. We've spent big money (and yes, we could have spent a lot more) but we've been terrible at both our bigger purchases and the smaller ones.
My whole point is that some less proven players at lower salaries isn't inherently a bad thing, and could actually be a better strategy for some clubs as long as you have a plan and logic behind it.