Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

UNITED ACADEMY said:
If we sign Kane next season, this will be the state of our squad (exclude keeper):

30 or above: Kane, Casemiro, Varane, Eriksen, Maguire, Fred
24-29: Rashford, Shaw, Malacia, Dalot, Lisandro, Bissaka, Martial, McTominay, Bruno, Lindelof, VDB
20-23: Sancho, Antony, Elanga, Amad, Pellistri
Under 20: Garnacho

Assume if we sell Maguire and Fred, while buying 26 years old or under players means only Kane, Casemiro, Varane, and Eriksen on their 30ish plus Bruno on his 29, which is on paper looks good and well balanced squad.
Click to expand...
Leaves us needing a new CB, DM, CM and CF around the same time.

We should be a looking to get a striker coming into their prime for me rather than past their best.
 
Zen said:
Reference for these Levy stuff? Anything I find about that is Summer 2021.... he's not discussed or hinted at his sale since the City flirtation from what I see. £85m-100m seems about right for a 1 year left 30 year old though as per what's being generally guessed in most reports.
Click to expand...
From the City bid. Tottenham wanted £150m and Levy hasn’t wavered in that. I can see them accepting £100m this summer but why not just wait another year and get him for nothing?
 
Leftback99 said:
Leaves us needing a new CB, DM, CM and CF around the same time.

We should be a looking to get a striker coming into their prime for me rather than past their best.
Click to expand...
Yes but not for another 3 or so years. If we bring in Kane, we could also get a young up and coming DM or CM. Next summer a young striker and so on. We have enough time to sort it out while also maximising the talent that we have now. What would be the point in having now a young striker that needs 2 or so years to adapt/ develop while Casemiro and Varane are at their prime?
 
Leftback99 said:
Leaves us needing a new CB, DM, CM and CF around the same time.

We should be a looking to get a striker coming into their prime for me rather than past their best.
Click to expand...

That's not big deal since we need to sign a new CM this summer and I expect that new CM to be around 22-26 years old. And if we sell Maguire (which I think we will due to him wanting to leave for more playing times), it only makes sense if we replace him with young centre back for development to replace Varane in the future. In one summer, we will manage to sign two of new young CB, DM, CM, and CF.
 
30 and 12 months on his contract.

Insanity to pay more than 20mill for him when he is available for nowt such a short time later

His signature doesn't guarantee trophies
 
McGrathsipan said:
30 and 12 months on his contract.

Insanity to pay more than 20mill for him when he is available for nowt such a short time later

His signature doesn't guarantee trophies
Click to expand...
I’d argue it all but does. Look at the RVP effect.
 
crossy1686 said:
I’m against Kane solely on the premise that it will probably cost us around £100m, anything under £60m then it should get done, but I’m operating under the assumption Tottenham won’t let their crown jewel go for anything less than a British transfer record + United tax, and massive salary.

Also, ‘brilliant right now’? How about in 18 months? Ronaldo was brilliant last season, this season he looked to have aged 5 years overnight. The problem when you’re dealing with players at this age of this calibre you have no idea when they’re about to drop off. Kane is only ever another ankle injury away from being done, and he’s prone to them.
Click to expand...
I can't imagine there'll be a single club willing to spend 100 million plus on a 30 year old player with only a year left. At the end of the day, though he's a tough negotiator Levy is also a pragmatist. He'd clearly rather sell abroad, so if Bayern or someone similar come in for him then he'll nudge him in that direction but if Kane wants to stay in the prem and refuses all other moves Levy would absolutely rather take something for him then nothing.
 
UnitedSofa said:
I’d argue it all but does. Look at the RVP effect.
Click to expand...

SAF effect is more likely.

Anyway even if the PL was won would it justify massive money when he's actually available for free 12 months later.

Massive money should be kept for long term investment
 
crossy1686 said:
Yep, there’s no way he’s leaving for anything less than £100m, Levy has repeatedly said £150m for Kane this summer. There’s literally no point in pursuing this transfer.
Click to expand...

£100 million is still a bargain really when the options are of much more questionable quality and more expensive. That said, I doubt we’d have to pay that. It would just be bad business for Spurs to demand £100 million when they will lose him on a free a year later. Bayern’s position is very different as Lewa is potentially the difference for them between a CL win or not.
 
Doracle said:
£100 million is still a bargain really when the options are of much more questionable quality and more expensive. That said, I doubt we’d have to pay that. It would just be bad business for Spurs to demand £100 million when they will lose him on a free a year later. Bayern’s position is very different as Lewa is potentially the difference for them between a CL win or not.
Click to expand...
Well we could just wait another year and get him for nothing instead? We need midfielders also.
 
crossy1686 said:
Well we could just wait another year and get him for nothing instead? We need midfielders also.
Click to expand...

We can’t go another season without a number 9 unfortunately. We need to pay the money to sort it out this summer. Otherwise, we are wasting another season of Varane/Casemiro particularly.
 
Doracle said:
We can’t go another season without a number 9 unfortunately. We need to pay the money to sort it out this summer. Otherwise, we are wasting another season of Varane/Casemiro particularly.
Click to expand...
Well we can, we can just sign someone else who can hold up the ball and rotate that person with Martial, maybe get Rashford to develop his game there also. Sign some quality midfielders and have more control of games, and therefore fashion more chances on a regular basis. Then next season, when he's available on a free, add him to the cause and get rid of Martial.

Varane and Casemiro are wasted playing next to Maguire, Fred, McTomminay etc. Not playing next to Harry Kane doesn't change anything for them.
 
Di Marzio has said Conte is leaving spurs at the end of this season. I do wonder if poch came back, whether harry would be stupid enough to stay for another season...
 
crossy1686 said:
Well we can, we can just sign someone else who can hold up the ball and rotate that person with Martial, maybe get Rashford to develop his game there also. Sign some quality midfielders and have more control of games, and therefore fashion more chances on a regular basis. Then next season, when he's available on a free, add him to the cause and get rid of Martial.

Varane and Casemiro are wasted playing next to Maguire, Fred, McTomminay etc. Not playing next to Harry Kane doesn't change anything for them.
Click to expand...

Varane doesn’t play next to Maguire. He plays next to Martinez. Similarly, Casemiro plays next to Eriksen. Martial is the most injury prone element of our starting 11, he’s one of weaker parts when he does play and we have minimal cover for him (moving a world class LW to play a position where he is weaker is not a good option). Number 9 is the position we absolutely have to permanently sort out in the summer and paying £30 - £40 million for a second tier option to “rotate with Martial” is not going to be good enough.
 
McGrathsipan said:
30 and 12 months on his contract.

Insanity to pay more than 20mill for him when he is available for nowt such a short time later

His signature doesn't guarantee trophies
Click to expand...
Arsenal just paid £27m for Trossard when he had 6 months left. It would be insanity to only offer £20m for Kane because you would be laugh out of town.
 
Doracle said:
Varane doesn’t play next to Maguire. He plays next to Martinez. Similarly, Casemiro plays next to Eriksen. Martial is the most injury prone element of our starting 11, he’s one of weaker parts when he does play and we have minimal cover for him (moving a world class LW to play a position where he is weaker is not a good option). Number 9 is the position we absolutely have to permanently sort out in the summer and paying £30 - £40 million for a second tier option to “rotate with Martial” is not going to be good enough.
Click to expand...
We don’t control games, we need to do that before we worry about scoring goals. We should be putting De Jong next to Casemiro and create more chances than we currently do. That way we won’t have to rely on a deadly forward to score one of the 4 chances we get a game. We’ll get more out of Antony and Sancho, plus rashford looks like he might kick on. We’ll be fine without wasting £100m on Kane.
 
acnumber9 said:
Arsenal just paid £27m for Trossard when he had 6 months left. It would be insanity to only offer £20m for Kane because you would be laugh out of town.
Click to expand...

As far as I'm aware Brighton had the option to unilaterally extent his contract for a year, so effectively it was with 18 months left.

But yes, £20m for Kane is a ludicrous notion. He should cost around the today equivalent of what RVP did years ago, which (as per an article in The Athletic charting fee inflation) is approx. £52.7m. So being safe, around £60m.
 
I honestly think any potential kane transfer away from spurs has Chelsea written all over it this summer with the way their owner has behaved in the transfer market
 
crossy1686 said:
We don’t control games, we need to do that before we worry about scoring goals. We should be putting De Jong next to Casemiro and create more chances than we currently do. That way we won’t have to rely on a deadly forward to score one of the 4 chances we get a game. We’ll get more out of Antony and Sancho, plus rashford looks like he might kick on. We’ll be fine without wasting £100m on Kane.
Click to expand...
You can have 90% control of the ball but if you don't score it's irrelevant

Scoring goals is all that matters
 
acnumber9 said:
Arsenal just paid £27m for Trossard when he had 6 months left. It would be insanity to only offer £20m for Kane because you would be laugh out of town.
Click to expand...

Probably does seem low but that's my take.
If kane was 28 then yeah pay more.

I just think money can be spent better
 
sullydnl said:
As far as I'm aware Brighton had the option to unilaterally extent his contract for a year, so effectively it was with 18 months left.

But yes, £20m for Kane is a ludicrous notion. He should cost around the today equivalent of what RVP did years ago, which (as per an article in The Athletic charting fee inflation) is approx. £52.7m. So being safe, around £60m.
Click to expand...
Yeah they did, but that would extend to the same as Kane has left. So £27m for an extra four months of play time and a vastly inferior player. Kane is going for nothing south of £60m. I would roughly agree on the value you’ve given but Kane is more valuable to Spurs than Van Persie was to Arsenal. They continued to qualify for Champions League. Spurs would struggle massively.
 
crossy1686 said:
We don’t control games, we need to do that before we worry about scoring goals. We should be putting De Jong next to Casemiro and create more chances than we currently do. That way we won’t have to rely on a deadly forward to score one of the 4 chances we get a game. We’ll get more out of Antony and Sancho, plus rashford looks like he might kick on. We’ll be fine without wasting £100m on Kane.
Click to expand...

We aren’t getting De Jong mate - let’s not waste another summer chasing a player who doesn’t want to join. However, even if we did sign him, the improvement he’d make to our starting 11 is questionable. I think he will struggle in the premier league and, at best, would be a slight upgrade on Eriksen. Combined with his lack of enthusiasm to join us, he looks a disaster waiting to happen.

In contrast, Kane will give us more control of games, with his hold up play and ability to link up with others, and score goals. Sort out your weakest position first and then upgrade others as we go along. Hopefully, a world class number 9 will also help Antony/Sancho as we need one of them to step up as our first choice RW.
 
Doracle said:
We aren’t getting De Jong mate - let’s not waste another summer chasing a player who doesn’t want to join. However, even if we did sign him, the improvement he’d make to our starting 11 is questionable. I think he will struggle in the premier league and, at best, would be a slight upgrade on Eriksen. Combined with his lack of enthusiasm to join us, he looks a disaster waiting to happen.

In contrast, Kane will give us more control of games, with his hold up play and ability to link up with others, and score goals. Sort out your weakest position first and then upgrade others as we go along. Hopefully, a world class number 9 will also help Antony/Sancho as we need one of them to step up as our first choice RW.
Click to expand...
Well there’s no way we’re signing Kane either without oil money so I don’t even know why we’re discussing it. I’ve said everything I have to say at this point.
 
crossy1686 said:
Well there’s no way we’re signing Kane either without oil money so I don’t even know why we’re discussing it. I’ve said everything I have to say at this point.
Click to expand...

£60-70 million may well be sufficient to get Kane this summer, which really should be doable for us, but yeah, perfectly fine to prefer other targets. If we can get a world class midfielder in, I certainly think that will make a big difference - just not as much as Kane.
 
Doracle said:
£60-70 million may well be sufficient to get Kane this summer, which really should be doable for us, but yeah, perfectly fine to prefer other targets. If we can get a world class midfielder in, I certainly think that will make a big difference - just not as much as Kane.
Click to expand...
It really won’t. This summer will see higher transfer prices than ever before. We have Chelsea to thank for that.
 
Never mind eh lads? Maybe if we splurge £100m on Kane we’ll be able to defend in the last 10 minutes of the game.

Maybe now you realise where our real issues lie.
 
crossy1686 said:
We need more than Casemiro, we need someone to replace Eriksen and backup for Casemiro
Click to expand...

In an ideal world, yes we do. However, put Kane and his ridiculous holdup play in our team and he instantly gives us far more control of the game. Even without Casemiro, we win that match with Kane upfront.
 
McGrathsipan said:
30 and 12 months on his contract.

Insanity to pay more than 20mill for him when he is available for nowt such a short time later

His signature doesn't guarantee trophies
Click to expand...

20 million? You're estimation is so far removed from the reality of the current transfer market. Arsenal just paid 27 million for Trossard with 6 months on his contract.

It'll take a minimum of 50 for spurs to consider selling him.
 
Seems like a no brainer, although we should be looking at the next Harry Kane who is 8 years younger and able to contribute for a decade over a 30 year old.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.