Harry Kane

Status
Not open for further replies.
Would prefer us signing someone more explosive.

Kane doesn't warrant a big fee at the moment either. It would be a huge and unnecessary risk on the back of one good season. Let him properly prove himself first. Even then I'm not sure he's the kind of striker I'd personally prefer at United.
 
amolbhatia100 said:
Would prefer us signing someone more explosive.

Kane doesn't warrant a big fee at the moment either. It would be a huge and unnecessary risk on the back of one good season. Let him properly prove himself first. Even then I'm not sure he's the kind of striker I'd personally prefer at United.
Click to expand...


For £45M, we could get pretty much any striker in the world, what a crazy number....it isnt as stupid a figure as Andy Carroll or David Luiz were bought for but after one good season, it is a ridiculous amount....but an amount that definitely seems Levy-like.
 
the hea said:
At Ajax he played Litmanen as a shadow striker who would drop Into midfield when defending I could see Rooney played in a similar role behind Kane.
Click to expand...

+ Muller at Bayern.

Plus Wazza scoring in a Champions League final with Chicha as the #9, scored that goal against City with Berba on the pitch, scored a brace against City the last time we won the league playing behind RVP. Not to forget scoring 27 league goals or so playing mostly as a second striker or what SAF reffered to as a '#10'. He'd be more than fine, and I personally think he's even better there than as a true #9. At Chelsea Mourinho would play him in the Oscar role I think, not in Diego Costa's spot unless he was injured.

This doesn't mean we should sign Kane though, since we really shouldn't, definitely not this summer.
 
ravi2 said:
For £45M, we could get pretty much any striker in the world, what a crazy number....if isnt as stupid as Andy Carroll or David Luiz but after one good season, it is a ridiculous amount....but an amount that definitely seems Levy-like.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Chelsea got Costa for less. Arsenal got Sanchez for less. 40 plus is elite player territory. Kane being good enough to command that sort of fee is just borne out of the whole English youth striker hype.
 
If we're relying on Goldstein's rumour, isn't he the guy who 'tricked' us into some transfer news last summer and then told us it's all bullshit and he was trying to collect money for some charity or something?
 
amolbhatia100 said:
Absolutely. Chelsea got Costa for less. Arsenal got Sanchez for less. 40 plus is elite player territory. Kane being good enough to command that sort of fee is just borne out of the whole English youth striker hype.
Click to expand...


hey it could be worse, we could be paying liverpool £50M for Sterling.

PS: or even worse £55M for Cavani.
 
the hea said:
Why is the price so important to you? Do you own shares and wants the money paid out as dividends? I couldn't care less what we pay for a player as long as he is good and as an English club I feel we should get the best English talents and I think Kane currently is best young English striker so if LVG feels he needs another striker I think Kane is as good as any.
Click to expand...

:lol: That's the type of lines i come out with all the time & i stand by that logic too.

The price is important in this instance to me though & to many others on here aswell; because we'd be payin it to Spurs & that prick Levy more importantly. He's a little slime-ball that most fans seem to hate - apart from Spurs fans of course.

If Kane played for a different English club (non top 4 & not Everton) - we'd guarantee to get that £45m fee down to a realistic figure that pleases both parties (it wouldnt even be that rediculously high in the 1st place either) - but not with Levy & Spurs..
 
Red Hand Devil said:
:lol: That's the type of lines i come out with all the time & i stand by that logic too.

The price is important in this instance to me though & to many others on here aswell; because we'd be payin it to Spurs & that prick Levy more importantly. He's a little slime-ball that most fans seem to hate - apart from Spurs fans of course.

If Kane played for a different English club (non top 4 & not Everton) - we'd guarantee to get that £45m fee down to a realistic figure that pleases both parties (it wouldnt even be that rediculously high in the 1st place either) - but not with Levy & Spurs..
Click to expand...

Spurs would just blow it on crap players, they always do.
 
Cassidy said:
Price dictates risk, thats why. If we're spending that amount of money then I would want that to be on a top class proven player, not someone who has had one good season, and the season before wasn't considered better than James Wilson, seaosn before was @ Leicester and was poor. Not saying Kane isn't a good player, we just don't know if he is the real deal yet, another year would show us.

Its not a given he is the best young English striker either, hes had a good season.
So did Andy Carrol once, so did Charlie Austin, there is also Danny Ings who may have scored more goals at a better club.

You compared him to Memphis who has had more than one good season, and a good world cup to boot, plus the fee £22m reflects the fact that he is still unproven @ the big club / big league level.

If we bought Kane for £22m I wouldn't be expecting 30 goals a season, but if we spend £45m on striker, he better be scoring around 30 goals a season thats the difference.
Click to expand...

Good post!
 
I suppose you could look at it this way:
£45 million (or thereabouts) has been earmarked for Falcao (this will have been accounted for in the club's finances from last year) and he's on what, £300,000 p/w?
So if we do buy Kane for the same figure and pay him, say, £180,000 p/w over 5 years then actually we have saved £31,000,000 over the course of 5 years.
 
If we paid £45mil for Harry fecking Kane, we would never again be able to accuse City and Chelsea of inflating the transfer market.
What a joke.
 
To compete, you have to do what you have to do. The higher ground is in some peoples heads.
 
Zen said:
Pretty sure most sane people thought LVG and Woody insanely overspent last year....desperation fees and selling clubs got what they wanted from them.
Click to expand...

"Insanely overspent"? Liverpool nearly spend as much as us & they bought shite..

We got Di Maria & Falcao - best summer in years, fantastic signings they were & well worth the punt. It hasnt worked out, but thats not LvG & Woody's fault - its those players that have failed us.

We've insanely underspent for years under Fergie / Gill & always seemed to go for the cheap alternative that "may" turn out to be United standard.

Moyes was left with a squad that needed massive rebuilding. LvG will probably need another few windows to get it right & for us to be successful & a force in Europe once more. I'd love him to try & get it sorted as best he can this window though & thats gonna cost a shitload too.

I hope Woody & LvG spend tons of millions (£200m+) this window & get the team sorted once & for all.. But we'll have to listen to folk on here moanin about it though - as if its their money.. :rolleyes:
 
orangeboom999 said:
I suppose you could look at it this way:
£45 million (or thereabouts) has been earmarked for Falcao (this will have been accounted for in the club's finances from last year) and he's on what, £300,000 p/w?
So if we do buy Kane for the same figure and pay him, say, £180,000 p/w over 5 years then actually we have saved £31,000,000 over the course of 5 years.
Click to expand...
Kane's supposedly on £35k a week. No chance he'd get £180k a week here over five years. £80k would do. With increases dependant on performance. Add in his resale value, even if he flops, which I'd say is a good £15 million at the age of 24/25, and with international caps to his name. I think there's a limit to how badly he could flop here too, personally.
 
My point is, I think the club has already accounted for splurging £45,000,000 on a striker this summer. Whoever that ends up being if they reduce the wages we're paying for Falcao (by paying less to the new person) then we are effectively making savings on projected outgoings. So Ed's in a win - win here. Because he signed Falcao last Summer. That hasn't worked and now he can make another stellar signing using the same money he 'signed' Falcao with.
 
Red Hand Devil said:
"Insanely overspent"? Liverpool nearly spend as much as us & they bought shite..

We got Di Maria & Falcao - best summer in years, fantastic signings they were & well worth the punt. It hasnt worked out, but thats not LvG & Woody's fault - its those players that have failed us.

We've insanely underspent for years under Fergie / Gill & always seemed to go for the cheap alternative that "may" turn out to be United standard.

Moyes was left with a squad that needed massive rebuilding. LvG will probably need another few windows to get it right & for us to be successful & a force in Europe once more. I'd love him to try & get it sorted as best he can this window though & thats gonna cost a shitload too.

I hope Woody & LvG spend tons of millions (£200m+) this window & get the team sorted once & for all.. But we'll have to listen to folk on here moanin about it though - as if its their money.. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Jesus not long ago everyone was moaning about 500m debts. Now no one seems to care if thats 700m or 700bn!
 
Mciahel Goodman said:
I'd rather he stayed at WHL for another year or two. See if he's the real deal or not.
Click to expand...

Fee-wise this makes sense. He's £45m now, and even if he has another good season they can't really push that up a whole lot (unless he turns into Messi or something, which I can't see happening), so it's not like we're getting a bargain by taking the risk.

But...

Another good season, and everybody will be in for him. Whereas if a club takes a gamble on him now, they face a lot less competition.
 
Don't buy falcao, sell chicharito and buy Kane as a RvP longterm-replacement.
Rooney first choice and Kane as second choice makes sense.

I don't care about the fee all that much, it seems the club has loads to spend. I'd love to feel more assured about Kane keeping a similar level next season, but it is always a risk.
 
Price seems fair.

+ 10 mil cause he's English
+ 10 mil cause it's levy
+ 10 mil cause they'd probably rather keep him than sell
+ 10 mil because he's had a cracking season
+ 5 mil because he is a unit, and quick
 
Still not convinced. Would rather stick with Rooney as a main striker, with RVP and Wilso as back up and assess the situation again next summer.
 
Honestly looked like nothing against us. Did see him score a few before his England debut, against some crap team.

Not an exciting idea to me. Andy Carrol romped for a season once too.
 
KingMinger22 said:
Get with the times mate. Players pick where they want to play. The best a club can do is drag it out for one season.
Click to expand...

The "times" are this summer, because that's what these transfer threads are focused on. There is not even the slightest possibility that Kane will be sold this summer, but if United want to waste their time trying that's their lookout.
 
GlastonSpur said:
The "times" are this summer, because that's what these transfer threads are focused on. There is not even the slightest possibility that Kane will be sold this summer, but if United want to waste their time trying that's their lookout.
Click to expand...
Doubt United are interested. Needs to continue his development at Spurs right now.
 
The the new Andy Caroll or a potential United legend ?

Judging this case i have been observing that there is a drift of opinions. The argument of one season wonder is a bit silly, how do you know ? Is it not from a rational perspective more reasonable to let nature do its work and judge him the season after before categorizing him as such ? To be fair i don't see Levy selling him after his what i called 'drove his price up' season. Kane has paid the net a visit, but it is now his burden to show the football world that he is the real deal and not one for the statistics who came and vanished even faster. In his defense, Lacazette for example is doing what Kane should be aiming for in his full second season. Last season Lacazette scored 15 goals and he doubled his figures this season to earned him the credits he is receiving now. Kane however came guns blazing with 20 goals in 30 game and that is quite impressive to say the least. While i think it's to earlie to hunt for his autograph i would not lose any sleep of having Kane up front in stead of Falcao whom we are not fully sure that he will (ever) return to the form that made him the feared assassin.
 
UnitedBoy said:
Price seems fair.

+ 10 mil cause he's English
+ 10 mil cause it's levy
+ 10 mil cause they'd probably rather keep him than sell
+ 10 mil because he's had a cracking season
+ 5 mil because he is a unit, and quick
Click to expand...
He's not particularly quick.
 
Yea, Levy is waiting to gift wrap and hand deliver Kane to United for 45 million.....not. There is absolutely no fecking way that Levy will let him leave for that amount.
 
30-35 is fair valuation for Kane. You don't find many 21 year olds in the Prem capable of 30 goals in call comps. Add another 5m for United tax and another 5m Levy greed surcharge and you've got 40-45m
 
amolbhatia100 said:
Doubt. When the first part is about him being a "unit" hence physical characteristics.
Click to expand...

To be fair RVN ( Van Nistelrooy) wasnt particulary known for his pace but was scoring goals for absolute fun. Not comparing the two mind you, just stating that you can succeed as a striker without thundering pace.
 
In what world is Harry Kane a 'unit', 10st at 6'2 is a scrawn. Not exactly a bulldozing Shearer type is it.
 
Jando said:
I would be extremely pissed of if we signed this guy considering we have a young exciting striker in our ranks straight from the academy who deserves a chance,
Wilson has showed it in the under 21's and even at first team level, he just needs a run of a few games and Im convinced this guy is going to be a superstar for us.
Click to expand...

I thoroughly agree with this, I'd much rather take a punt at Wilson than spending 40m+ on Kane.
 
LazyRed-Ninja said:
To be fair RVN ( Van Nistelrooy) wasnt particulary known for his pace but was scoring goals for absolute fun. Not comparing the two mind you, just stating that you can succeed as a striker without thundering pace.
Click to expand...
I wasn't correlating pace with quality. Just disputing the point regarding his speed.

Of course there have been plenty of great strikers who were particularly quick. Rvp and rvn at United were two of the best strikers I've seen at United and neither was very quick or anything. Ibrahimovic has been fantastic as well.
 
He's my first choice if we're buying a new striker, which is a necessity. We're crying out for new, young blood up front. Falcao and Van Persie are past it, Rooney is no spring chicken and Wilson is unproven. Kane has all the attributes to his game to be the leading front man at United for years to come if he continues his progress from this season.

That's the risk - not giving him a second season to prove he's not a flash in the pan is a real gamble.

I see a lot of similarities between Kane and Alan Shearer as players. Around the same age, Shearer scored a less than stellar 13 goals in 1991/92 for Southampton before moving to Blackburn (snubbing us, the cnut) for a British record fee. The rest is history.

Kane has done a lot better than that this season so despite the fee is probably worth the risk.

Regardless, I don't see it happening, sounds like silly season fluff. Spurs would be mad to sell him and he's a born and bred Tottenham lad so he might not want to leave anyway.
 
2 Neville's said:
In what world is Harry Kane a 'unit', 10st at 6'2 is a scrawn. Not exactly a bulldozing Shearer type is it.
Click to expand...
He's not as physically imposing as drogba or Costa, but he has got a presence. At 21 the physical side of his game is pretty good.

He reminds me of muller more than anyone right now albeit he's more an out and out striker. But I can't judge him seriously as early as this.
 
We paid £30million for Luke Shaw, so obviously Tottenham are going to rinse us for Kane. I'm sure he would be worth the £40million anyway, assuming we actually made the deal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.