This post won't be exclusively about Robert Lewandowski and Borussia Dortmund. In fact, I will talk about two points
- Why Robert Lewandowski leaving for free was better for Borussia Dortmund
- How to determine whether a player leaving for free is better or not
Why Robert Lewandowski leaving for free was better for Borussia Dortmund
To be clear, I would never say that him leaving Dortmund flat was better for them. There are so many things that might have gone differently had Lewandowski stayed at Dortmund.
Statistics show during the season which Dortmund had a painful drop in league ranking that they were creating the same amount of scoring chances. So maybe, had Lewandowski stayed, they wouldn't have dropped in form and Klopp wouldn't have left Dortmund/ The variables and reactions of Lewandowski staying could literally mean Barcelona's manager might still be Valverde. That's how far the rabbit hole of Lewandowski leaving Dortmund goes.
However, Dortmund went into the 2013-2014 season knowing that their Polish star man won't be signing a renewal and still decided not to sell him. It is not like they didn't have offers, Borussia Dortmund director Michael Zorc spoke all the way in February 2013 that Lewandowski wouldn't be signing a renewal. So, financially it made sense that they sell him, right? Well, not exactly.
Robert Lewandowski didn't have a replacement lined up, so he was kept in the club in his last year. The club also made two purchases; Henrikh Mkhitaryan and Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang. While they could have done that either way and still made the sell, the last year of Lewandowski served as an integration period for the duo to get used to the Dortmund system as well as the league atmosphere without the pressure of having the cloud of replacing a player like Lewandowski immediately hanging over their heads.
The duo then left for profit, and Aubameyand in specific was sold for over 50 million profit, which is more than what Lewandowski sell would have made Dortmund on his last year. All of that was done while keeping the money from UCL participation that they might have lost if Lewandowski was sold and the pair didn't play well under pressure. So financially, keeping the player was better as well as from a sporting perspective.
How to determine whether a player leaving for free is better or not
In the Mbappe case, PSG should consider the value of him staying with the club and the money he would bring in by leaving. PSG still has a weird conviction, that might still work I don't know, that Mbappe would end up staying, but considering the player's statement especially after he saw Lionel Messi winning the Ballon d'Or from his time in Barcelona, it doesn't look like he is staying. In my opinion, a sale here is better.
But still, there are many factors to consider in any player's last year, marketing, having players develop under his umbrella who'd replace him eventually, the sporting results as a miss on the UCL might be more disastrous for PSG than Mbappe leaving for free.
We don't even have to look far to see the benefits some clubs had from keeping their players. Liverpool for example got a UCL spot by the teeth, that wouldn't have been possible without Wijnaldum, same if Ramos left Real Madrid and they lost the stability in the back. AC Milan was second in the league last season but only 2 points ahead of 5th place, so Donnarumma staying last season benefitted them more despite them exiting the UCL early this season.
Many clubs have financial advisors whose sole job is determining whether or not they should sell or keep a player on their last year of the contract. So, the situation is much more complex than just an immediate cash grab for clubs.