Would be over the moon if we got Kane. I know he's only had one season in the EPL, but he just looks like he's got what it takes to be a top player for a number of years. We'd have to pay a lot of money, but I can imagine we'd have him for 10 + years if all goes well.
Harry Kane
- Thread starter orangeboom999
- Start date
- Status
Just look at Costa's goal scoring record before his break out season at Atletico. He went seasons without scoring a single goal. Strikers dont always just score for the sake of it; they need the right team around them & beleif based on their ability.
Can anyone actually tell me a better strijer hwo is available?
If Kane does it again next season, then buy him for £50m or whatever. That amount after one season? I think it's crazy, also don't think we'll try it either, considering Levy and all.
How much is he worth to Spurs? What will it cost to replace him and add to the squad to improve it?
Harry Kane had four seasons before last, some of which were spent in league one and the championship, and he didn't put up good numbers in any of them.
I don't think any well run club should pay massive sums for players who have only had one good season. It's simply too risky.
How old was he then?
Bale was the butt of jokes until his first good season.
That's not the point. He's had one good season in five years. Is it possible that he's 'broke out' and will keep this level up? certainly. But it's just as likely that last season was the one off.
He'd need to have a much better resume to justify the fifty million or so that he'd cost (imo).
As is basing not buying him after an average second season too right?
Based on your logic about how unbinary it is.
Irish Red said:
Agree with this, but...
This is a bit too harsh. He scored 1 in 3 at 18 years of age in the Championship and just less than 1 in 3 in League One at 17 years of age. Pretty decent for a young player.
Right this calls for a thread! "Harry Kane, hedge your bets, 1 season wonder or real deal" get some sort of poll in there, get people to state how many goals they reckon he needs not to be a failure etc.
It will be impossible for Spurs to replace him with anyone as good. And we already have more than enough money to sign additions to the squad (additions intended to improve it) from the pool of players who might realistically sign for us - pace Alderweireld (it seems), Wimmer, Alli, Trippier so far. So in selling Kane we'd be weakening the team in exchange for a lot of cash that wouldn't be of any effective use player-wise.
Some might argue that we need money to help finance the new stadium. But the short answer is that we don't - and this will become even more clear from very significant stadium-related news that'll be announced in the next few weeks.
In summary, there is no real incentive for Spurs to sell Kane. Therefore, unless Kane kicks up a fuss about wanting to leave (which he won't), he won't be sold. It really is as simple as that.
Thats what im saying. Talking on a purely business purpose; it makes sense to go for kane because there is no one better than him currently available; not for us and not for you.
What's your assessment of Kane - do you think he can realistically maintain last season's form over the coming years, or did he overachieve?
An awful lot. His wage is quite low at the moment and he is tied in for 5 more seasons, any striker that could be an immediate replacement/improvement would command a much higher wage - over 5 seasons that would be a huge difference in financial cost.
At the moment I'd say he's worth far more to Spurs than he would be to any other side, and certainly he's worth far more to Spurs than anyone else would be willing to pay.
He will kick up a fuss if we start bidding.
He would Treble his wages.
He would Treble his wages.
Well, asking any striker to continue scoring 31 goals per season, year after year, is asking for almost the impossible. Added to that is the likelihood that he'll now be subjected to much greater attention from defenders ... although this would have the benefit of providing more space/time to other attacking players.
So I don't think he'll get as many goals this coming season, and possibly he'll never score as many as 31 in a single season again. But I do think he'll get 20+ (in all competitions), barring injury, and be capable of maintaining that as an average over the next few years. But it's not just his goals that count for me: he contributes a lot in other ways too.
Spurs aren't really our rivals
According to former France manager Raymond Domenech, who gave Lloris his international debut in 2008. the keeper should not join United as they are "not a big club".
"I have no decision to take for him, but in my opinion he has to play in Chelsea, Arsenal, or Manchester City, to play in the European Cup," Domenech said.
"Tottenham is a big club – it is not the biggest. Manchester United qualified for the Champions League, but I can't see really the difference with Tottenham."
What a JOKER!!!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...-with-Spurs-over-40m-move-for-Harry-Kane.html
Domenech .. lol.
Why are you comparing Kane as though he's openly for sale? Question should be, are there better players and the answer is yes
This would be extremely exciting. Could be a genius or a flop.
I havent watched many of his games but what do you consider his main qualities? If i see him playing i see a big guy with good finishing, decent heading and a good functional technique but i dont really consider him to be a very special player. Would current elite clubs like Barcelona, Real Madrid, Bayern or even Juventus, Atletico, Chelsea, PSG or Dortmund want him?
I'm not saying it's terrible or anything but, for the sort of money he'd cost, you'd expect a player that's been, at the very least, performing to a high standard in a top league for multiple seasons.
Are we really still wasting our time with this?
It's not happening.
It's not happening.
I find it difficult to isolate his main qualities, because they all sort of blend together in making him an all-round player ... rather than just being a goal poacher or a target man for example. He's pretty good at almost everything ... or at least has no obvious real weaknesses. So, for instance, although he doesn't have a lot of pace, his turn of speed when needed is decent.
If pushed I'd pick out his being two-footed (so defenders can't steer him their preferred way), his footballing intelligence/quick-thinking and his work-rate/energy levels.
Why not? Three bad games in to the start if the season & we will be fighting for top 4 again just like the rest of them.
If we end up competing with Spurs next season then its a bit of a disaster really
The only reason im on these forums is because iv been keeping an eye out on van gaals past. If we get ahead of ourselves, being dissapointed after only one full season after the moyes disaster; we are going to do something stupid and sack a manager that is fundamental to our future.
I say we aim for the top and give a win or bust ultimatum to van gaal by the 3rd season. Any earlier will be stupider than putting moyes in charge in the first place..
If the board does somehow think like i do rather than the way of others; getting players in early and allowing them to settle/learn van gaals ways is essential.
We don't know what are Glazer's long term interests? Getting money year after year by taking dividents, or not taking dividents but reinvesting all the money into the club in order to raise the value of the club and then get money from the stocks they sell. Or some combination.
Anyway, with the new deals, in a few years United should be able to outspent every other club (assuming that PSG/City owners don't start spending 250m each summer) while also the owners taking some money from the club.
I guess time will tell but they haven't struck me as free spending, last summer being the exception over 12 years or something, but we'll see
£40m-£50m is alot for such a young player that has had only 1 good season so far but the talent is clearly there and you'd see why we would want him having the need for a new striker now.
The thing is I don't think Kane is looking for a move, Tottenham is ideal for him now, he is a star there, guaranteed playing time and won't have the same pressure he'll have here (if only from the huge price tag). I mean he'll likley get criticised here if he does anything less than what he did this season. I can see why Kane would not feel ready for such a move just yet.
Than there is Tottenham who like all english sides don't need the cash so won't be tempted into a sale for "just" £40m-£50m. They will say he is not sale and they hold all the cards with that new contract Kane signed. I can't see them agreeing for any price that could remotley be labeled as fair (they will demand a BPL record fee for sure claiming him to be the best striker in the league).
I'd say this has a very low likleyhood of happening even if we offer £50m for him.
The thing is I don't think Kane is looking for a move, Tottenham is ideal for him now, he is a star there, guaranteed playing time and won't have the same pressure he'll have here (if only from the huge price tag). I mean he'll likley get criticised here if he does anything less than what he did this season. I can see why Kane would not feel ready for such a move just yet.
Than there is Tottenham who like all english sides don't need the cash so won't be tempted into a sale for "just" £40m-£50m. They will say he is not sale and they hold all the cards with that new contract Kane signed. I can't see them agreeing for any price that could remotley be labeled as fair (they will demand a BPL record fee for sure claiming him to be the best striker in the league).
I'd say this has a very low likleyhood of happening even if we offer £50m for him.
We spent 80m on Moyes season, and around 50m for each of the previous two seasons.
Before that we weren't spending near enough, although impossible to know if it was cause of them or cause of Fergie. Anyway, time will tell but I would be very surprised if we don't continue spending a lot. At least 100m or so for each year.
Bid £50m, leak to Kane & the media he will be on £160k a week if he signs and I'm sure we'll see some movement.
He would be worth it too imo.
He would be worth it too imo.
I agree with Glaston, for a change. They need Kane more than the money. All their other strikers are stinking the place up with their lack of quality. Even if they get an insane 50 million for Kane, who in the top tier of strikers would want to join Spurs? It is a no brainer for them. Keep Kane and hopefully try and get a CL spot this season.
Benteke would do well at Spurs
£35 million and Hernandez might do the trick.
Doubt it
if they were smart they could get Hernandez + benteke plus pocked 5 million. I'm sure they're not smart though. Firstly Kane might pick up an injury and he might not get as many goals. So I'm sure they would reject but it would actually be a good deal for them.
I'd rather not bid for Kane at all and keep Hernandez. Kane has had one good season, I'm still not convinced he will be a top player.
- Status