Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

Hardly. Obviously it’s impossible to put an exact number on how much more goals we would’ve scored with Kane but we’ve massively underperformed our xG this season and Bruno’s been the top big chance creator in the league, so we’d definitely have been a lot better off with a top class finisher upfront.
I don’t think he’s far off that mark either.

looking at the games we’ve drawn over the season we’ve had massive chances in all those games to put the result to bed. I reckoned around 10-12 points better off if we had a decent top quality striker.
 
Hardly. Obviously it’s impossible to put an exact number on how much more goals we would’ve scored with Kane but we’ve massively underperformed our xG this season and Bruno’s been the top big chance creator in the league, so we’d definitely have been a lot better off with a top class finisher upfront.

There's a massive difference between "Kane would improve us" and "Kane would give us an extra 15-19 points".

Because the former only involves him being better than Martial, Weghorst and Ronaldo. Which, no shit. Whereas the latter involves him making us perform as well as or better than City.

It should be pretty clear to anyone who has actually watched both teams this season that even with Kane in it, our team would still be significantly worse than City's. Worse back five, worse in midfield, worse in attack. We're more than Harry Kane away from being able to perform like City did against Madrid just this week, for example. They're levels ahead.

At which point it should be pretty clear that any goals-maths and results-maths that imagines us outperforming them in the league by dint of that one addition is severely overestimating how directly the additional goals Kane would bring would transfer to points.

If it was that straightforward then adding Haaland to their already league-winning side would have seen City do more than go from 93 points last season to max 94 points this season.
 
There's a massive difference between "Kane would improve us" and "Kane would give us an extra 15-19 points".

Because the former only involves him being better than Martial, Weghorst and Ronaldo. Which, no shit. Whereas the latter involves him making us perform as well as or better than City.

It should be pretty clear to anyone who has actually watched both teams this season that even with Kane in it, our team would still be significantly worse than City's. Worse back five, worse in midfield, worse in attack. We're more than Harry Kane away from being able to perform like City did against Madrid just this week, for example. They're levels ahead.

At which point it should be pretty clear that any goals-maths and results-maths that sees us magically outperforming them in the league is severely overestimating how directly the additional goals Kane would bring would transfer to points.

If it was that straightforward then adding Haaland to their already league-winning side would have seen City do more than go from 93 points last season to max 94 points this season.

I misread his post and thought he said 15-19 goals better off. My bad.
 
Except no. We are the 3rd in goals conceded. We however are 9th in goals scored, Fulham and Brentford have scored more goals. We've had bottom tier CF play all season, if you don't think putting Kane in there wouldn't mean 20-30 more goals and turn some draws into wins and some losses into draw/wins then not sure what to say


loryadphmc0b1.png
tiov2m9a3pya1.jpg


Look at Kane compared to our forwards on this

feizu1eedxya1.png

But if Bruno is missing or off form what then?

That's the problem with saying Bruno is on par or better than KDB for chances created so a new striker will score 30.

But what about the rest of team? City also have three or four more creating chances beyond KdB and we unfortunately don't.

Our creativity in the final third is basically one player. Kane's entire supply would pretty much rely on Bruno.
 
It's surprising to me that after having watched Ronaldo hinder our general play and ability to press all last season in the name of "guaranteed goals", quite so many people are this quick to use the same "guaranteed goals" argument in favour of tying to ourselves to a slowing CF who also in no way suits a side that wants to press aggressively.

There have been years of complaints about our style of play on this forum and I wonder how many of the people who made those complaints are now keen for us to sign Kane, a player who (while unquestionably excellent in his own right) much more closely fits the approach to football I thought we wanted to move away from rather than move towards.

Reading through a Spurs forum a few weeks ago and, while they certainly rightly adore him, their adoration came with qualifications like:

















Are these not exactly the sort of red flags we want to avoid? Because they're exactly the sort of ones we walked right into during the Woodward-era.

It's especially worrying given how easy it is to see what they're talking about when you watch Spurs play as (although a much improved player in other areas) Kane has already clearly declined physically from his peak. And that's his starting point as a signing, that physicality is only going to decline more and more over a 3 or 4 year period. I don't doubt that the people who say "he never relied on pace, etc." are right and he will keep scoring goals. But that doesn't mean those weaknesses don't still hurt the team while he is getting those goals.

I'm just so sick of watching us trying to work around and compensate for players who don't really suit the style of football I (and I assume others) want to see us play. When I think of Kane as a signing I immediately sense years of "he gets goals" vs "we can't play like a modern side with him in the team" arguments incoming, like nothing has changed.
Great post.

Ronaldo scored at a better rate than Kane in his last year at Juve.

For all the fawning over Kane's record this season he has 1 goal in 8 CL games this season and was a complete no show in both Milan games in the last 16. The raw goals numbers might look similar but the impact of his physical decline on his performances are very clear when you watch full games just as they were with CR7 towards the end at Juve. Thus will only become more pronounced as you mentioned.
 
Hardly. Obviously it’s impossible to put an exact number on how much more goals we would’ve scored with Kane but we’ve massively underperformed our xG this season and Bruno’s been the top big chance creator in the league, so we’d definitely have been a lot better off with a top class finisher upfront.

EDIT: I thought the poster you replied to said goals not points. My bad.
Thanks for the edit. I stand by my initial comment.
 
Except no. We are the 3rd in goals conceded. We however are 9th in goals scored, Fulham and Brentford have scored more goals. We've had bottom tier CF play all season, if you don't think putting Kane in there wouldn't mean 20-30 more goals and turn some draws into wins and some losses into draw/wins then not sure what to say


loryadphmc0b1.png
tiov2m9a3pya1.jpg


Look at Kane compared to our forwards on this

feizu1eedxya1.png
When you look at this stats, you have to wonder whether we should play Rashford as striker but sign Maddison instead to play on the left as alternative of Kane if we can't afford Kane. How can they play wide but has poor expected assist. Mahrez, Grealish, Martinelli and Saka are City and Arsenal wide players and have high expected assist, hence why City and Arsenal are above us. The goals won't come if we don't have enough players to create good quality assist/chance.
 
The main reason why we are so bad in scoring goals is because we rely so much on Bruno in creating chances and our forward decision making are so poor.

Will a new striker like Kane be enough to improve our forward decision making and turn us title challenger? Martinelli has almost triple more xA than Rashford but both have equal assists. If anything it's more like that Arsenal are being a Kane away to compete with Man City than us being a Kane away to compete with City. May be someone aggressive and proactive like Osimhen who has good movement and presence in the box can improve Antony and Sancho decision making.

MU-xA.png

Arsenal-x-A.png

Bright-x-A.png

City-xA.png

Liv-xA.png

NU-xA.png
 
Kane seems to score at least one goal in about 75% of games he plays in. I know it’s not as simple as this but surely he’d have gotten us 9-10 extra points this season if you look at games where 1 extra goal would have helped.
 
Unless he is far cheaper than is being quoted why would we even consider buying such an old player with only a year left on his contract?
 
You might be right, but I really won't be surprised if he does.

What do you think will happen to him?
He will be loaned out for 6/12 months to Italy because they will pay his wages and probably a loan fee with the hope he can get some form so the club can sell him for £50-60m, they might even sign up on an extended +1 contract they have an option to protect their investment, highly unlikely he plays in England Again unless he takes Juventus, Milan or Napoli to CL success next season.
 
You might be right, but I really won't be surprised if he does.

What do you think will happen to him?

I can see us selling him to a club abroad, I just don’t think any team in England would want the negative press associated with signing him.
 
He will be loaned out for 6/12 months to Italy because they will pay his wages and probably a loan fee with the hope he can get some form so the club can sell him for £50-60m, they might even sign up on an extended +1 contract they have an option to protect their investment, highly unlikely he plays in England Again unless he takes Juventus, Milan or Napoli to CL success next season.

There's no way he's ever going for 50-60m surely?
He'll be lucky to play at a top level club again. He's already sat about 18months out. Critical development time. You don't just step back into it.
 
I can see us selling him to a club abroad, I just don’t think any team in England would want the negative press associated with signing him.

If he goes it will likely be a loan first, he has not played for 18 months
 
It actually baffles me to see that Uniteds proud history of big money transfers here is used to justify such a transfer for Kane... You'd think, a lessons could have been learned but it seems it didn't.


Amen to that.


This feels a bit like alternate reality stuff, talking about which game would have had this or that result. Football isn't a game of cards plus all you did with your last sentence is running into open doors - nobody denies that we have to improve our striker department. But that isn't tied to going for Kane.

What does that have to do with Kane? Let’s not get into the ball game of pretending that United has a long term history of poor big money signings. There’s two decades worth of big investment that counters the past decade. Even recently, Casemiro has arrived at a cost this season and has been worth his weight in gold.

You name the transfer strategy, the club has tried it post-Ferguson. It hasn’t worked due to a range of factors. That shouldn’t stop us moving for a guarantee like Kane.

Kane is the best striker on the market and he’s got good years left in him. Sod recent history. We need the best players available and have more than enough younger talent elsewhere in attacking areas to compensate for the years Kane already has under his belt.
 
I can see us selling him to a club abroad, I just don’t think any team in England would want the negative press associated with signing him.

Sort of agree with you at the top level.
But there's plenty of scurrillous little clubs who have let all sorts of offenders back in sub premier league level.
 
I have a feeling Kane is going to stay at Spurs
 
I have a feeling Kane is going to stay at Spurs

I agree, he doesn't seem to have much more ambition than become a Spurs legend, which he already is.

He will probably sign a new deal and stay at Spurs rest of his career.
 
For all the fawning over Kane's record this season he has 1 goal in 8 CL games this season and was a complete no show in both Milan games in the last 16. The raw goals numbers might look similar but the impact of his physical decline on his performances are very clear when you watch full games just as they were with CR7 towards the end at Juve. Thus will only become more pronounced as you mentioned.
To be fair, Ronaldo was 36, Kane is 29. That's a very big difference. I do think he has declined a little, but his goalscoring hasn't. He's mobile and gets around the pitch fine.

Even factoring in a gentle decline, he's going to be getting us 20+ goals for at least 3 seasons and a shitload of assists too for our more dynamic wide forwards.
 
Kane seems to score at least one goal in about 75% of games he plays in. I know it’s not as simple as this but surely he’d have gotten us 9-10 extra points this season if you look at games where 1 extra goal would have helped.
His goal against Brentford made him the first player in a 38 game EPL season to score in 25 different matches.
 
I agree, he doesn't seem to have much more ambition than become a Spurs legend, which he already is.

He will probably sign a new deal and stay at Spurs rest of his career.
Or run down his contract and have his pick of clubs next summer.

If he wants to stay in England, there's really very little reason to kick up a fuss this summer. If he were desperate to move to Bayern or PSG and pick up a league title at last then sure, he could try to force Levy's hand. But for a Premier League club... why?
 
Or run down his contract and have his pick of clubs next summer.

If he wants to stay in England, there's really very little reason to kick up a fuss this summer. If he were desperate to move to Bayern or PSG and pick up a league title at last then sure, he could try to force Levy's hand. But for a Premier League club... why?

He doesn’t need to kick up a fuss. I’m sure he’s already made it fairly clear to Spurs that he doesn’t intend to sign a new contract. The ball is now in their court to make sure that they don’t lose him for free. They’ll be doing all they can to maximise profit from him, which means a sale this summer.
 
Agree with that. I’d much prefer a younger and more dynamic striker

We've got all of that on the wings. You need an old hand in there somewhere (see: Benzema at RM) and Kane would probably be perfect for us. I don't see the point in having 3 of the same players along that front line.
 
What does that have to do with Kane? Let’s not get into the ball game of pretending that United has a long term history of poor big money signings. There’s two decades worth of big investment that counters the past decade.
Ah so Ferdinand being a success back in the day is more relevant than all the bad transfers in like the last 5 years? Come on man, you can't be serious. Even if I wouldn't consider that premise to be faulty, the people who successfully brought expensive players in are gone. The people who are bringing in players right now don't deserve anything close to trust. Not saying they will never earn it but right now, there is absolutely no reason to be confident.

Even recently, Casemiro has arrived at a cost this season and has been worth his weight in gold.
He has been really good. But the level he entered was so low that probably even McGinn would have looked like Busquets to us. And I am pretty sure, Real is just as happy with the deal as n us getting 60 million for a guy who has been replaced already by two promising young players in his position.

You name the transfer strategy, the club has tried it post-Ferguson. It hasn’t worked due to a range of factors. That shouldn’t stop us moving for a guarantee like Kane.
Nobody is a guarantee. This is crazy talk, seriously man. Just look at the list of biggest premier league flops and you'll see United take most of the top 10. Nobody is a guarantee. The other poster quoted actual Tottenham fans talking about Kanes shortcomings - do you watch him week in and week out? Do you think you know better than them what he brings and what not?

(add on: based on transfermarkt.de, 7(!!!) out of the Top 20 Premier League transfers (based on fee) are Uniteds, Chelsea 6, City is on 4, Liverpool 2, Arsenal 1. The players of United are
4. Pogba
5. Antony
6. Maguire
7. Sancho
8. Lukaku
16. Di Maria
18. Casemiro

You could argue that Casemiro does look like a good transfer, but it is early days. Antony and Sancho is early days as well but Sancho looks like flop and for Antony it is clear we grossly overpayed. Di Maria - flop, Lukaku - flop, Maguire - Flop, Pogba - flop. So much money gone, so many considered a guarantee. And what have we ended up with?

"We have to pay up to bring in the best" my a**.

Kane is the best striker on the market and he’s got good years left in him. Sod recent history. We need the best players available and have more than enough younger talent elsewhere in attacking areas to compensate for the years Kane already has under his belt.
This mindset is the headline above all the bad decisions in terms of recruitment in the last 10 years. And again - I am not saying that Kane isn't a good player or that he couldn't be of use to us. But he will cost a leg and the money spent on him we won't be able to spend elsewhere on the team. It is the opposite of forward thinking (pun intended). The player made the decision to give his best years to Spurs and some of our fans are rooting for us to provide him with the last big paycheck in his carreer. My mind is boggled.
 
Last edited:
Not sure we're going to be in a position to afford him in all honesty. Unless the ownership issue is sorted pronto, I can see us looking at creative solutions to fill the number 9 position whilst bolstering in other areas of the squad.
 
Or run down his contract and have his pick of clubs next summer.

If he wants to stay in England, there's really very little reason to kick up a fuss this summer. If he were desperate to move to Bayern or PSG and pick up a league title at last then sure, he could try to force Levy's hand. But for a Premier League club... why?

His pick of clubs?

Do you think City, Liverpool will need a ST next summer? How often do those clubs sign a 31 year old ST? Cause that is the age he will be next summer.

United need a ST and Kane would fit in well, United will sign one this summer so really, his options will be limited to Newcastle.
 
Ah so Ferdinand being a success back in the day is more relevant than all the bad transfers in like the last 5 years? Come on man, you can't be serious. Even if I wouldn't consider that premise to be faulty, the people who successfully brought expensive players in are gone. The people who are bringing in players right now don't deserve anything close to trust. Not saying they will never earn it but right now, there is absolutely no reason to be confident.


He has been really good. But the level he entered was so low that probably even McGinn would have looked like Busquets to us. And I am pretty sure, Real is just as happy with the deal as n us getting 60 million for a guy who has been replaced already by two promising young players in his position.


Nobody is a guarantee. This is crazy talk, seriously man. Just look at the list of biggest premier league flops and you'll see United take most of the top 10. Nobody is a guarantee. The other poster quoted actual Tottenham fans talking about Kanes shortcomings - do you watch him week in and week out? Do you think you know better than them what he brings and what not?

(add on: based on transfermarkt.de, 7(!!!) out of the Top 20 Premier League transfers (based on fee) are Uniteds, Chelsea 6, City is on 4, Liverpool 2, Arsenal 1. The players of United are
4. Pogba
5. Antony
6. Maguire
7. Sancho
8. Lukaku
16. Di Maria
18. Casemiro

You could argue that Casemiro does look like a good transfer, but it is early days. Antony and Sancho is early days as well but Sancho looks like flop and for Antony it is clear we grossly overpayed. Di Maria - flop, Lukaku - flop, Maguire - Flop, Pogba - flop. So much money gone, so many considered a guarantee. And what have we ended up with?

"We have to pay up to bring in the best" my a**.


This mindset is the headline above all the bad decisions in terms of recruitment in the last 10 years. And again - I am not saying that Kane isn't a good player or that he couldn't be of use to us. But he will cost a leg and the money spent on him we won't be able to spend elsewhere on the team. It is the opposite of forward thinking (pun intended). The player made the decision to give his best years to Spurs and some of our fans are rooting for us to provide him with the last big paycheck in his carreer. My mind is boggled.
This is why I hate people saying no one can compete with City's spending, we and Chelsea have been.
 
I'm not sure Kane's quite old enough for us to buy him yet. We need him to be getting injured a bit more regularly before we're ready to pull the trigger. Maybe give it one more season so we can be sure to have the 'if only we'd had this guy in his prime' experience we all crave so much.
 
@NZT-One Casemiro has been unquestionably a very good signing.

Let’s not try to downplay things here.

Kane is also as close to a guarantee of success as a striker next season as you’re going to get in the PL he has about a decade of top performances to suggest this.

That’s not to say you can’t argue against him for stylistic reasons but again let’s not downplay what is clearly a very good striker.
 
Our spending has been very close to City's.
Only because we have neglected everything but transfer fees to keep up and even then the Glazers now have to sell because of it.
Citys wealth have allowed themselves to outspend everyone while redeveloping and improving their infrastructure. If we focused on infrastructure now it would curtail our spending big time in terms of keeping up with Citys spending never mind the investment it would take to consistently overtake them.
 


Sounds more like he's keen to stay and be involved in reshaping the club in the summer?
 
I really don't think Kane has the guts to move anywhere else, he is the big fish in a tiny pond at TH.

If he moved somewhere there would be an actual expectation to win something and I don't think he has it in him to carry that responsibility.

Great player but he has held himself back... I do hope I am wrong though and we get him this summer and he steps up even more.
 
Unless he is far cheaper than is being quoted why would we even consider buying such an old player with only a year left on his contract?

Which world class striker are we going to sign this summer for £70-£80m?