Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

-Supreme- said:
Let’s just assume that they will complete for top 4 with Kane next season as much as I can’t see this happening, is it really worth losing on a 100m asset in the following year?
Click to expand...

You also have to factor in how difficult it will be for a new manager and a new DOF to identify that key Kane replacement just after walking in the door. That extra season buys them time to get their recruitment in order.

If I was them I'd sell this summer and try to sign a replacement, but it's a lot easier said than done. Especially if every club you approach knows you've just received that 80-100m.
 
-Supreme- said:
Let’s just assume that they will complete for top 4 with Kane next season as much as I can’t see this happening, is it really worth losing on a 100m asset in the following year?
Click to expand...
@sullydnl covers their predicament quite well. I think everyone is coming at this problem from a Manchester United fans perspective. I haven't seen a single spurs fan that are advocating selling Kane this summer for 80-100m
 
Morty_ said:
No, i think Kane would improve your side by quite a bit, the problem in winning the title is the league is stronger now, especially City is very hard to compete with over 38 games.

If you can sign him for a reasonable fee, i'd say its a no brainer.
Click to expand...
I didn't say he wouldn't improve the team so I'm not sure what you're saying no to. It's obvious he would.

But the point you're making here is why I think the play should be to keep building up this squad under ten Hag with some patience. Not just throwing money at Harry Kane thinking he'll solve all our problems when he won't. City are very, very good. That's not to be defeatist, it is just realism, we are absolutely miles off that throughout our squad and what I want to see is joined up thinking between the manager and recruitment team so that we have a continually improving side. One that improves now, but also 3-4 years down the line when maybe we can exploit changes at City. Not racing to use Harry Kane's limited prime and then ending up the lame ducks in the transfer market again as we realise that shortcut wasn't oven ready in view of our squad, and now we've got several key players with old legs. Cue rebuild number 1000.

I would honestly rather blow our entire load on Osimhen, for the simple reason that while it compromises our moves in the current market, there will be a long term vision as a compensation for how expensive he is.

Harry Kane made perfect sense when City wanted him. What do you know...City making good moves in the market. He would have scored loads, maybe not as many as Haaland, but more creative and involved. He was the cherry on top for them. For us it just isn't like that at all, we're at least a few seasons away from a genuine challenge.
 
Lash said:
Who in their right mind is going to hang their hat on Son and Richarlison to replace his goals? Not only that, if you're selling to someone in the league, you're just pushing yourself further down.

100m is feck all to replace your all time top goalscorer and improve your squad. People are moaning that's our budget this summer.

I know they'd want it resolved, I'm just suggesting what decent manager is going to want to go there if they're going to sell their best player? There's a chance teams will move on and then at least they can attempt to convince him to stay with a new manager.
Click to expand...
You aren't following.
Their squad is in need of major investment across all areas of the pitch, including GK. They will almost certainly need to sell in order to fix a lot of these issues, and £100m is a big opportunity cost of keeping Kane on for an extra year and seeing him leave for free anyway. That's the first point.

The second is the reputational damage. If Harry Kane is made to stay an extra year then he'll go for free next season, where Chelsea will almost certainly go in for him. Levy is a nutjob but he's not the nutjob that would risk seeing Kane go to Chelsea if he can stop it.

Finally I never said the new manager will need to hang their hat on Son and Richarlson alone. You did. I said that these players can actually find form under the new manager, they aren't shit players, they're actually very good and there is a plausible scenario where a replacement striker for Kane + better form from Richarlson/Son would equate to the goals he provided. £100m is actually a feckton of money to replace an all time goalscorer. Remember there is a budget of x + player sales. The budget of x won't fix the squad issues, but £100m + x will certainly go a long way.
 
Really hoping we sign a striker more mobile and pacey than Kane. I remember how I couldn't stand Berba because of this, and Berba was arguably faster than Kane.
 
Isotope said:
I really hope we sign a striker more mobile and pacey than Kane. I remember how I couldn't stand Berba because of this, and Berba was arguably faster than Kane.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. He's slow and old already and Levy will over charge. Get him on a free next year if you want. If he wasn't England captain we wouldn't be talking about him.
 
glazed said:
Totally agree. He's slow and old already and Levy will over charge. Get him on a free next year if you want. If he wasn't England captain we wouldn't be talking about him.
Click to expand...
His type are world class until 33/34. He will age like Benzema imo
 
If we do get him I hope ETH drills it in his head that he needs to stay forward. We don't need him dropping deep when we have Bruno. Boggles my mind when I see Tottenham attacking and Kane is jogging back from midfield
 
It's wild that I've followed this guy's career from "let's not sign him yet because he might be a one season wonder and he needs to prove himself" to "let's not sign him now, he's too old and slow", and the whole time he's been banging in 20+ goals each season and consistently doing it in the big games. Fergie would have signed him in like 2016.
 
cyberman said:
His type are world class until 33/34. He will age like Benzema imo
Click to expand...

He's not world class now. Did you see the World Cup? He did nothing.

I don't doubt he'll score 20 goals a season if he comes. Just think we can do better.
 
cyberman said:
His type are world class until 33/34. He will age like Benzema imo
Click to expand...
I tend to agree. He is just a super skilled player at his position rather then reliant on pace. Almost 30 goals in the PL with such a mediocre team. He would be transformative for us.
 
-Supreme- said:
His type is similar to RvP but he finished at 30
Click to expand...
He's very much of the Lewa ilk for me. Ages like fine wine - his creativity is actually ridiculous and he's doing it in the toughest league.
 
Abraxas said:
I just think it takes far more than a striker, and if we buy Kane we are deferring other needs because he's so expensive. But more than the expense my major worry is that by the time we get round to ironing everything out we could be sat scratching our heads about why we bought an aging Kane who is now trending downwards when we could have taken a longer term perspective and bought someone who will grow as we build this squad. There's a real danger of short term thinking coming back to bite us on the ass as the squad and Harry Kane head in different directions. If we buy a younger striker I am confident that with the right pick everything will be working in tandem.
Click to expand...
Beautifully put. On a free transfer or for a relatively cheap fee (like Lewandowski to Barcelona) signing him could be a shrewd move. For 100m, we are essentially banking our future on him, and on the hope he ages like Benzema as opposed to Sanchez, Rooney, or Van Persie.
 
glazed said:
Totally agree. He's slow and old already and Levy will over charge. Get him on a free next year if you want. If he wasn't England captain we wouldn't be talking about him.
Click to expand...
A 30 goal Premier League striker with one year left on his contract would be talked about regardless of his nationality bro. :lol:
 
glazed said:
He's not world class now. Did you see the World Cup? He did nothing.

I don't doubt he'll score 20 goals a season if he comes. Just think we can do better.
Click to expand...
I see what he does in England where we play though? And the record he set today?
 
cyberman said:
Was he not?
Click to expand...
Only because we won the title in his first season. Kane would come on a huge fee and likely won't win the title right away, so if his performance levels after year 1 are like RvP's, then it would be a terrible signing.
 
-Supreme- said:
Stats says otherwise clearly?
Click to expand...
I think his second season is underrated personally because of the situation the club was in. Plus wasn’t he bought with Ronaldo coming back in mind?
Kane is over his injury problems, has somehow found more goal scoring consistency while refining his heading game at 29. The man is somehow still improving.
Is it his age that scares you because it isn’t his performances on the pitch.
Also Kane is 2x the player RVP was anyway.
 
cyberman said:
I think his second season is underrated personally because of the situation the club was in. Plus wasn’t he bought with Ronaldo coming back in mind?
Kane is over his injury problems, has somehow found more goal scoring consistency while refining his heading game at 29. The man is somehow still improving.
Is it his age that scares you because it isn’t his performances on the pitch.
Also Kane is 2x the player RVP was anyway.
Click to expand...

Kane is fantastic but come on now this is a massive hyperbole
 
cyberman said:
I think his second season is underrated personally because of the situation the club was in. Plus wasn’t he bought with Ronaldo coming back in mind?
Kane is over his injury problems, has somehow found more goal scoring consistency while refining his heading game at 29. The man is somehow still improving.
Is it his age that scares you because it isn’t his performances on the pitch.
Also Kane is 2x the player RVP was anyway.
Click to expand...

No doubting Kane‘s ability on the pitch, however at his age it’s a very risky investment particularly when we have so many gaps to fill and we can revisit Kane the following year should he still be available IMO…
 
cyberman said:
I think his second season is underrated personally because of the situation the club was in. Plus wasn’t he bought with Ronaldo coming back in mind?
Kane is over his injury problems, has somehow found more goal scoring consistency while refining his heading game at 29. The man is somehow still improving.
Is it his age that scares you because it isn’t his performances on the pitch.
Also Kane is 2x the player RVP was anyway.
Click to expand...
Up until this last sentence I didn’t realize it was meant to be comedy.
 
cyberman said:
Kane has literally everything over RVP? RVP was too hampered with injuries to be near this.
Click to expand...

You can make an argument Kane is the better player, I've no problem at all with that but RVP was exceptional too. Kane definitely isn't 2x better than RVP was.
 
What exactly is the rationale behind people advocating 80-100 million on him this summer, anyway? What exactly are we really envisaging him doing next season that justifies this fee, when you can just get into his and his agent's ear and throw a huge paycheque at them both for the following summer? I can't get my head around that situation.
 
Hulme91 said:
A 30 goal Premier League striker with one year left on his contract would be talked about regardless of his nationality bro. :lol:
Click to expand...

There's no doubting he's good. Is he worth what he would cost? Is he that good? No. Will he have to be replaced in three years time. Yes.

Players at that age come at discounts for a reason. Get him on a free in 2024.
 
Wing Attack Plan R said:
Up until this last sentence I didn’t realize it was meant to be comedy.
Click to expand...
It’s not. It’s true and I’ve criticised Kane plenty of times on here so I’m not his biggest fan.
Kane has him on every attribute and by quite a distance.
Wherever he goes now we’ll be seeing him boss it ala Benzema or Lewa at the highest level until he’s 33/34. He’s never relied on pace and that’s resulted in the two records he set this season that aren’t reliant on what he did in his prime and eased into as he lost a step. Only an alien Haaland stops him adding a golden boot to that as well.
 
I agree with what some are saying, he's very good but a total waste of money.
 
Abraxas said:
I'm not convinced he brings us a title in those 2-3 years. If I thought that was a high probability I would definitely be for it even if he was done as an elite striker in that time, because it would mean so much. That's probably the difference between RvP and Kane for me...this squad is just okay, it's not just about sticking the cherry on top.

I just think it takes far more than a striker, and if we buy Kane we are deferring other needs because he's so expensive. But more than the expense my major worry is that by the time we get round to ironing everything out we could be sat scratching our heads about why we bought an aging Kane who is now trending downwards when we could have taken a longer term perspective and bought someone who will grow as we build this squad. There's a real danger of short term thinking coming back to bite us on the ass as the squad and Harry Kane head in different directions. If we buy a younger striker I am confident that with the right pick everything will be working in tandem.
Click to expand...

You make good points, but looking at the current striker market I'd say Kane is our best bet. Nobody knows how Kolo Muani or Osimhen will translate to the PL and they are both equally if not more expensive. I'd want Vlahovic if he's available, but other than them the market is pretty scarce and we need to have a competitive team for next season, especially the way the PL is looking these days. I don't see a cheaper guy like Goncalo Ramos as a long term problem solver either. I don't like short term thinking, but Kane would solve our biggest issue straight away and by the time he needs to be replaced our team, or club as a whole, SHOULD be in better shape. This is one of the rare occasions where I'm convinced the short term option is the best option out there, but yes there is always the danger that it doesn't work out how we expect it to.

I'm also not convinced that he would bring us a guaranteed title, but I don't believe in title or bust. We should be aiming to be consistent and at least compete and not go anywhere near the Europa League places again. At least with Kane in this squad I don't see us falling out of top 4 next season (or the one after that), but that's how I see it.
 
VP89 said:
You aren't following.
Their squad is in need of major investment across all areas of the pitch, including GK. They will almost certainly need to sell in order to fix a lot of these issues, and £100m is a big opportunity cost of keeping Kane on for an extra year and seeing him leave for free anyway. That's the first point.

The second is the reputational damage. If Harry Kane is made to stay an extra year then he'll go for free next season, where Chelsea will almost certainly go in for him. Levy is a nutjob but he's not the nutjob that would risk seeing Kane go to Chelsea if he can stop it.

Finally I never said the new manager will need to hang their hat on Son and Richarlson alone. You did. I said that these players can actually find form under the new manager, they aren't shit players, they're actually very good and there is a plausible scenario where a replacement striker for Kane + better form from Richarlson/Son would equate to the goals he provided. £100m is actually a feckton of money to replace an all time goalscorer. Remember there is a budget of x + player sales. The budget of x won't fix the squad issues, but £100m + x will certainly go a long way.
Click to expand...
I am following. I agree they need major investment, even with Kane there, so weakening themselves by selling him, just means you have to spend more anyway. There's a huge opportunity cost as well if you sign a striker and he bombs. Kane is guaranteed goals for spurs.

There's reputational damage selling this summer too, selling their all time goal scorer after their worst season in a while.

That's such a gamble though. You need two players to find all those goals and hope whoever you sign, hits the ground running. Firstly, is anyone going to spend £100m on him? I'm not so sure. With the stadium debt, missing out on CL, I don't really see them having a big budget anyway. We're being quoted 40m for Diogo Costa, Kim Min-jae perceived as a bargain is 40m and then when you get to strikers 100m appears to be the starting point. That's before taking into account who's actually going to want to come.

If I see a spurs fan who actually wants to sell to us for 80-100m, then fine, but I mainly see people on here rationalising how we'll sign him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.