Simple question... Cash in and sell, or keep? My opinion, if we can get anything over 2m, then sell. Even though he never hit the heights when we had him on loan, but I think Chris Woods would be the perfect replacement for Murphy, and will score you plenty of goals in this league.
Its a hard one really, mainly because Murphs is so important in our style of play and the work rate he produces. But at the age of 32, 33 during next season its got to be thought about. personally if Cardiff wanted to pay us 3million straight up plus Nicky Maynard then I would say yes. anything less then I would say no.
edit this, just realised nicky maynard has been released. I would say for a flat out price of 5 million before we even consider!
Obviously every player has a price and its unlikely Murphy could ever command as high a price. But we have to go into the window aiming to keep our strike force together. Focus needs to be reinforcements in other areas.
I would be surprised if Murphy wanted a move, by all accounts he and his family are well settled down here, not sure at this stage in his career he would be interested in a move, MM does not strike me as the type to move a player on that has served him so well in the past!
I think Murph is well settled in the area now, I believe he has just bought a house just outside ipswich. I don't think for one minute he will look for a move, he has done enough of that over the last few years and this is the first time he is settled for ages.
It would have to be a silly offer for us to sell, in my opinion (something like £6-7m). After all, he is integral to the way we play. He undoubtedly provides our best aerial threat and he has formed an effective partnership up front with Sears. If we were to sell it, it would put an onus on us to replace him despite, as Mike pointed out above, the need for us to reinvest in weaker areas, such as the midfield. Yes, he is pushing 33, but he's a settled striker, who relishes working with our coaching staff, so I'd prefer it if he stayed. He didn't cost anything, so the need to sell him off to recoup money isn't there.
On the other hand, if we didn't have his aerial presence we would need to play differently, with balls in to feet if it was McG and Sears up top. I don't think we should sell Murph but if the offer is right then we should take it.
Murphy cost us a decent sum and only really paid back the form he showed at Sunderland last season. With his age aND if the chance to recover 2m or more came along he has to go provided some of that money can be used towards replacing him. Data analysis shows that clubs that invest in ageing pros on big salaries are a waste, whereas investing in higher player wages and freebies, rather than transfer fees, produces higher league positions for teams that do it so if Mick felt he could get a younger guy in that could contribute what murph gives us but on a free and we could cover his high wages (quality don't come cheap!) then it has to be a goer. But if he feels murphy's physique means he has another 2-3 seasons at last years level then there's every reason to keep him and add more quality around him to build a team more capable of going up.
Alhare, I thought Murphy was a free. It's a difficult one because he's not the most talented striker but has clearly just been in the form of his life, as TC and Mick have really worked on him, given him confidence a good run in the team and he seems settled. For me it's one of those where I feel an opposition team would be silly to pay alot of money for him because I doubt he could replicate this elsewhere and we'd be silly to sell because whilst he's not the most talented striker and has never really shown goalscoring form until the last couple of seasons, we relied on him heavily last season not just goals but as a target man and our style of play. He also built up a really good partnership last season with Sears. I can see both sides of the coin with this one but more me I'd keep at the moment.
