But if he'd scored 50 for United, with his appalling technical ability, that would be fine
Harry Kane
- Thread starter orangeboom999
- Start date
- Status
But if he'd scored 50 for United, with his appalling technical ability, that would be fine
Quite.
Exactly. Rooney would be first choice ahead of chicharito because Lvg also values his strikers being good footballers.
Obviously you're responding to things that haven't actually been said given I didn't say we should say sign Higuain.
M point is that whoever we buy, whether he's 18 or 27, should be capable of meeting the standard we need. The standard set is Rvp, Rooney, Rudd Van Nistelrooy. Our strikers this season didn't work out but I'd rather give that a shot to someone who can reach there or already is, than go for Ings, Austin etc who don't even have the potential.
@Duafc I never said I wouldn't want him, I said I wouldn't be convinced by him because his ball skills are so average. We're talking about a record breaking fee for an English footballer here. Now, if in 2 years he's continued to pump out 30 goal seasons then absolutely we should look into spending big money on him, but my overlying point here is that he's had one season with 30 goals so far and in that season I'm yet to be convinced because I just don't think he looks like a particularly good footballer. If he scored 50 goals I still wouldn't think he looks like a particularly good footballer. Obviously 50 goals would go a lot further towards justifying the huge fee but it doesn't change my point that he's technically average. I think he needs more than one good season because of that.
It'd be an entirely different story if we were spending that sort of money on a 21/22 year old player like Hazard or Neymar, who clearly looked like they were incredibly talented players with the ability to become elite players. Can anyone honestly say Kane looks like that? I doubt it.
It'd be an entirely different story if we were spending that sort of money on a 21/22 year old player like Hazard or Neymar, who clearly looked like they were incredibly talented players with the ability to become elite players. Can anyone honestly say Kane looks like that? I doubt it.
you're really missing the point here. There's a large difference between spending circa £50m (which we likely wouldn't even get him for) on a player at another club who you don't believe has the technical ability to match that price tag, and discussing a player who is already at your club and there's absolutely no risk involved. They're entirely different scenarios.But if he'd scored 50 for United, with his appalling technical ability, that would be fine
30 mil plus Hernandez. Job done
Loan them januzaj also
Loan them januzaj also
I personally don't want either higuain or Kane. One's peak could end soon and the other's peak I'm not convinced is even good enough. If those are the choices if rather keep Hernandez and wait till the right striker becomes available.
Hey Cina old boy, I agree with you 99% of the time - all I did here was quote you. You did make a rather sloppy point this time
While I don't necessarily disagree with the broader premise of your argument, a couple things stand out.
Very few strikers are elite in terms of their overall game at the age of 21 (approaching 22). Van Nistelrooy wasn't elite at 21, Vieri wasn't, neither was Inzaghi, nor Villa or Drogba or Eto'o, and so forth. We look at the likes of Lewandowski now as a veritable prototype for a modern #9, but at the age of 21, he too was a work in progress and was a couple notches below what he eventually became in 2012 and beyond (both in terms of creativity and goalscoring). Infact a lot of supporters were opposed to buying him even in 2012 at the age of 24 (we were linked with both him and Kagawa in the summer) because Van Persie was deemed a better, more proven and accomplished striker overall, something that seems a bit misguided in hindsight with Lewandowski's elevation is status. This isn't to say Kane will replicate the level of improvement and consistent productivity that Lewandowski did, or some of the other modern striking greats did, but at the same time he isn't exactly technically stunted to be honest, is still a rather young player and will progress as he gains more experience, and confidence, and learns the subtler nuances of the position. We aren't going to buy for what he's already done, but more with an eye for what he could do in the future.
The Rooney example isn't supposed to be a rule of thumb either. Someone like Rooney has arguably been superseded by Costa, who was terrible at the age Kane is right now. Another like Shevchenko delivered on the initial promise at Kiev and Milan. Moral of the story - different players progress at different rates, some are more naturally gifted but are eventually overtaken by their more determined counterparts, so it's disingenuous to arbitrarily bring up Cesc or Rooney. You're right though, from a strictly objective standpoint - Kane doesn't have a great overall body of work to extrapolate a reasoned judgement. And he might never become an elite striker for all we know, but he fits Van Gaal's requirements really well. What if he develops into an elite type forward in 2-3 years' time, and we pass up on the opportunity to sign him, while he's scoring 30+ goals each season for a rival ? Sometimes you just need to grow a pair, trust your gut, and make a semi-educated guess (which might be what Van Gaal is doing right now if the media reports are to be believed). It might backfire, but United has been served well by trusting developing players and have always been one of the more progressive clubs in terms of acquiring raw young talent, and polishing them into the final product rather than buying a glut of players in their prime off the shelf. Maybe it's an archaic notion and it could be argued we've had a lot of flops in recent seasons, but the policy shouldn't be forsaken in its entirety, watching younger players grow really is part of the charm of the club, and something that's embedded in its DNA.
As for the fee - it is largely based on his projection, not just Kane's current level as a player. So that, alongwith the premium on homegrown players and Levy factor means that the figure is going to be naturally inflated. And it shouldn't ideally concern normal fans like us. If the owners and Woodward are willing to pay that figure, does it really matter ? We have more than nough money going around to fill other holes in the squad even if he pay the touted transfer fee for Kane.
@Duafc Good post and I completely agree with you. Kane is in no way an average footballer. He'd add excellent value to a possession based system. Can score goals and loads of intelligence aged 21. I'm sold
There have been many players who have had a run of success for a short time. Let's see what he achieves on a consistent basis over a few seasons. We tend to be very quick both hyping players or throwing them on the scrap heap over such a short period. Unless we as posters without professional or specialised knowledge are missing something obvious about Kane, I sure hope United do not buy at this moment in time.
Besides, United have better strikers than Kane on United's books.
Besides, United have better strikers than Kane on United's books.
The money is 100% the issue but still, if in your example we wait two seasons and he scores 30 and 30 - it's not 50 mill its 100 mill and that point is moot anyway because Real are getting him.
See what I mean? the luxury to wait is there but if he cracks on we then make it harder to compete for him anyway and push the price even further.
On your second point, you're comparing him to two of the top 5 players in the world... that's a fecking high standard Cina! we cant always sign Messi at 21. Nani, RVN, RVP, Rooney even... all good signings but I wouldnt have said at the time of signing they would all reach those levels, because hardly anyone does! Fact is they all contributed and had very very good seasons, some more than others and they are all totally different in terms of attributes and technique.
For 50mill you expect top quality, Absolutely. However 50 mill for British, from Spurs, at 21, when you'r United isn't necessarily an accurate reflection of what 50mill gets you.
Still think he's better technically than you give him credit for, despite not being at all as good technically as Neymar or Hazard... though i feel that goes without saying for 95% of world footballers.
It's pretty clear from my post, that I'm not convinced yet that he has displayed the potential to be improve like those strikers did and hence be good enough for Manchester United. We bought Ruud when he was on the brink of being top notch which was the perfect time. I'm not sure why you think I have decided Kane can't progress either. I'm not convinced he can progress enough, based on what I've seen so far, based on what I consider a sample size that is simply too small.
And Chelsea bought Costa when he had made that step up. Had they spent 40 million on a Costa who was "terrible", it would have been a "terrible" decision.
Obviously if Lvg is convinced that this guy suits him to a tee one would hope it works out. And I'm in no way writing Kane off. But like I said, I'm personally not convinced yet. It being in our DNA is fine and I'm a sucker for signing younger players with bags if potential. But that belief in the potential indeed being big is the premise that must come first.
Of couse it matters because I'm giving my opinion on whether this is a good idea or not. Otherwise I would have said almost 30 million Fellaini was a fanstatic idea. I didn't, and I still don't.
Yeah, of course his fee will go up if he continues like that, but that's the nature of the beast. It depends on whether you want to spend an already vast amount on a player who has yet to prove he will justify such a fee in any way, or wait and spend more money on a player who by then is almost a guaranteed success for us. It's a tricky conundrum and probably depends on personal preference.
I mentioned Hazard and Neymar because for me, that's the sort of 21 year old you should be spending 50-60m on, both were being talked about as almost nailed on world-class players at their age and producing the sort of goals/assists numbers Kane has (for more than one season), regular internationals and most importantly, looked a million times better with a football at their feet. In contrast, clearly everyone's still very, very unsure as to whether Kane will ever fit in that bracket, and that's the big difference here when you talk about astronomical figures like that.
I just don't like the idea of spending £50-60m on a footballer who's had one good season so far, it seems like sheer madness to me, quite frankly, and if it wasn't for Spurs and him being English then I doubt we'd even be discussing half that price.
I personally think it does affect us fans what the club spends. Club such as United has a budget. If we buy the wrong players it affects the club massively over time - both financially and the pitch. Basically, we'd be cash strapped for future player investments.
Catch yourself on! I'm responding to precisely what you've said.
"Higuian would be class for us, Kane is a risk."
Or words to that effect, You're nto saying we should sign him but you're infering that a 27 year old striker never to have played in the league is a less risky choice.
~ 3 years left best case scenario and no guarantee he will suit the league (Falcao)
So in that example, you're seeming to suggest that 50mill on someone who could give you 10 years and has already shown he can score 20+ goals at an inferior club in the league is more risky that 20/25mill (I dunno how much Higuain would cost) on a journeyman striker approaching 30, who has never been able to cement a place at a top club and hasn't played in the league, despite having obvious quality.
You didn't say we should sign Higuain but you brought his name up alone, completely unprompted, in a thread in the Transfer forum... about Harry Kane. If you don't want me to talk about him as a comparrison then don't make it... simple.
He has had one good season. I dont want him. Especially at the price Spurs will want.
Amen to that
Quite. The fees talked about in the press is for the finished product.
I don't like this kind of reply but THIS !
You should probably read the posts by the poster I was responding to first before ranting away. "Completely unprompted" indeed.
I was merely highlighting that the pros and cons. I've already stated that I wouldnt want of sign either of them.
I doubt we would, though still a sizeable amount because his achievements is his career so far are still being criminally under rated here. 1 Season yes, but how many seasons can a 21 year old show you for Christ sake!
On Neymar and Hazard, clearly better players and showed that at that age, but both played in vastly inferior leagues, it has to be said. I'm more impressed by breaking through and having a standout season in thr EPL than dominating the French or Brazilian. Naturally they were and are better players, no debating that.
We always over pay, it's what comes with being United... we also always buy youth and always try and give British a chance, even at personal cost or risk. I like that a lot and I love to see British players at United... so I'd take the risk for 50million... the money doesnt mean anything to me really, its not mine and the people in charge know what we can afford, I trust that. We need re-invigorating, particularly up top. Having watched 3 OAPs muller around up top for the year I would have thought more would welcome the idea of a direct and exciting young prospect.
Realisitically, we need a striker, who in world football - that we can actually sign - would be better?
Didn't Neymar cost Barcelona nearer £90M, with the payment to his father? By contrast to the Neymar/Bale/Ronaldo/Surez & Messy fees & values, we are shopping in the bargain basement, with a £45M package for Kane - this is the new world of transfer fees.
The window of opportunity to buy him is now, IMO. Over the next couple of seasons (if not right now), City and Chelsea will be in for strikers of similar profile.
If the rumours are genuine the real worst part is having to deal with Levy, it'll be denied and denied and pushed back and pushed back until the last week and the whole summer will be one big dick teasing head melting money grab.
This all reminds me of the Rooney transfer: A young English striker with a brilliant debut season could be leaving an average team for a large sum. if we give them £50m and he turns out to be a 30 goal a season striker for us then its all happy days, but you just have to look at Chelsea signing Torres to see how that can blow up in your face. The media would have a field day too, we didn't even sign Falcao and people were mocking us about him being a flop.
I'd take a gamble and spend up to £40m but otherwise the risk is too high. Its crazy to think though that if Harry Kane was a different nationality, playing in a different league for a club on a similar level as spurs he would be half the price he is valuated at currently.
I'd take a gamble and spend up to £40m but otherwise the risk is too high. Its crazy to think though that if Harry Kane was a different nationality, playing in a different league for a club on a similar level as spurs he would be half the price he is valuated at currently.
We hold the cards - Kane is one of a number of options & he's not being pursued by any other Club at this time. We give Mr Levy one offer & three days to accept it, or we move on & he takes the risk that Kane does not develop or gets an injury that holds him back, a la Falcao. We are the big boy in this game, Mr Levy just jumps to our tune or he can pi$$ right off.
Well Hazard cost £32m so it works both ways doesn't it?
Also your players listed are ridiculous, you've just listed 4 of the 5 best players in the world
If the PL showed anything think season Duafc, it's that it ain't what it was five years ago and isn't exactly a top class league at this moment in time. The defending by the majority of teams has been diabolical! Let's not forget that Charlie Austin scored 18 PL goals too for a far worse side than Spurs, and I doubt anyone considers him to be a particularly great striker.
Your second last paragraph just continues on from what I said about personal preference really, if you feel he's worth the punt for that fee then fair enough, I don't, I also think it sets a bad precedent. I wouldn't mind bringing Kane here at all, I would mind spending insane amounts of money, and I don't even think we'd get him for £50m, this is Levy and Spurs we're talking about, then add on the fact that he's English and just signed a new contract. I reckon we'd be paying far more, scarily enough!
I agree with the last part though, there are certainly a lack of top young strikers in the game right now, which I guess is why we're chasing Kane in the first place, although I'm sure there are posters much more versed in European footie than me who could name a few, like Icardi maybe?
We're not getting him, we'd be wasting our time this summer going up against Levy with this little leverage to back up a bid, even the factor of big money and potential reinvestment of it wouldn't be a big factor in Levy's thinking, considering how little they got back from the 85mill Bale money.
We shouldn't be wasting our time with this regardless of what we think of him as a player.
We shouldn't be wasting our time with this regardless of what we think of him as a player.
Charlie Austin scored just 3 goals less than Kane in the premise league. Whoah.
I really don't know enough about the talent "pool" to say.
We should be improving our strike force ideally, of course.
Kane scored more than Costa and only 5 less than Aguero. Whoahhhhhhhhh pointless facts.
Have you got something up your bum? Or a spurs fan perhaps? You seem like a giant fan of this guy. It's leading to all sorts of bitchy comments. The first involving getting your facts horribly wrong. Didn't dven apologise for that one.
Aguero is obviously twice the player Kane is. His overall game is on a different level.
Me neither really, not in any depth. I fancied Martinez, have the feeling not signing a striker would be disaster but I would like to see Chicharito get a bit of time.
Benzema in the DDG deal would be just the best, wont happen though.
Just stop thinking about it and get on the Kane Train CHOOO CHOOO next stop Old Trafford, tickets only 60mill @GlastonSpur
Fair enough.
But I'd argue that Kane has shown more in a 50+ game span than he is given credit for. When talking of a typical center forward and the qualities they possess, he has shown really good hold up ability - which will likely improve as he gets stronger and works on his positioning. He has shown the ability to score from range, inside the box, with both feet. He has shown that he can be dominant even against good opposition - evidenced by the games against Chelsea and Arsenal. He has shown that he can function well in the air against the likes of Terry. More importantly, he showed heart and exceptional work-rate to go with a keen nose for goal, and progressed mentally through the season, something that bodes well for the future alongwith the fact that seems quite grounded in contrast with some of his contemporaries.
Those are all scale-able qualities that the club would be taking a calculated gamble on, and hoping to refine the overall play. In an ideal world, he'd have shown that on a consistent basis over multiple seasons, but if we are going to wait for another Ruud or Cole to pop up rather than preemptively targeting a bright prospect, then we might have to wait a while because there aren't a lot of suitable strikers of that caliber available in the market, while we really need a #9 for Van Gaal's system to function at the optimal level. All transfers are inherently risky to a degree, and sometimes a club needs to improvise because the influx of talent isn't enough to sustain the demands at a particular position.
But there's no Costa-type striker available right now. So we have to take a chance on someone who might arguably be the best of the bunch. People speak of Lacazette or Vietto but based on Van Gaal's history they aren't great fits. Morata and Kane are more aligned with his requirements, so it's very much a case of slim pickings and we might have to pull the trigger at some point.
Also I can understand why you're not convinced. Truth be told, even I'm not 100 % certain, and I doubt even Kane's biggest fans can provide a prognostication for his performances in the years to come. But as said before, the options have been narrowed, and in terms of potential and being a systemic/ functional fit, he is towards the upper end of the spectrum of #9s who we can realistically sign in the short term.
Ok, that's your prerogative and you're certainly entitled to that opinion. But to be honest, I never really understood the fixation on the transfer fee from a supporter's perspective. The club isn't going beyond its means ala Leeds, and isn't exactly strapped for cash. Most of the figures are largely dictated by the selling club, United isn't intrinsically bent on overpaying, and a few will always find faults with our approach. If Woodward overpays, he's slammed because he's a charlatan who can't negotiate a lower fee. But conversely when Gill operated with a clenched fist, hoards of fans decried the 'value' approach, and the whole missing out on players bit as a consequence. It's kind of a no-win situation. One can't always find an optimal fee band in the fluid world of football transfers, especially when Levy is involved in the transaction.
Didnt get a single fact wrong pal, just cant really abide a mind numbing lack of objectivity. Not Kane's biggest fan by any means.
@Invictus to be fair we do have Rooney. It's not inconceivable that he could have a great season. So waiting for another summer isn't totally out of the question.
Who brought up higuain?
- Status