Harry Kane

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sarni said:
His value would probably drop to around £65m if he got 10 goals the whole season.

But seriously I'd put his real value currently at maximum £30m including English tax and to be fair I think he is currently £15m - £20m player.
Click to expand...
Shaw cost near as much, while Everton refused 26m for Stones. Kane is a striker, they cost far more.

I think that he is probably a 40-50m player. Sterling cost 49m and is a better player, but on the other side Kane seems a top professional, not a cnut like Sterling.
 
Revan said:
Shaw cost near as much, while Everton refused 26m for Stones. Kane is a striker, they cost far more.

I think that he is probably a 40-50m player. Sterling cost 49m and is a better player, but on the other side Kane seems a top professional, not a cnut like Sterling.
Click to expand...

Shaw was overpaid by £10m and Stones is more proven than Kane. One good season won't make him a £40m player especially as it had been preceeded by average ones.
 
Sarni said:
Shaw was overpaid by £10m and Stones is more proven than Kane. One good season won't make him a £40m player especially as it had been preceeded by average ones.
Click to expand...
Bit harsh on Stones and Shaw when you consider Sterling/Rooney costs at a young age and limited experience.

As for Kane, not sure what he is worth, but when you think of established strikers Suarez/Costa/Iba and what they would cost, if you believe the potential is really there, and convinced you are not buying a balotelli, then the sum might be about right if you get someone to stay and perform the length of time Rooney has at United.
 
Sarni said:
Shaw was overpaid by £10m and Stones is more proven than Kane. One good season won't make him a £40m player especially as it had been preceeded by average ones.
Click to expand...
Stones isn't more proven than Kane. Kane has more games than Stones in EPL, or outside of it. Kane last year was one of the best strikers in the world, Stones wasn't even near one of the best CB in his own league.

The market is the way it is. I agree that we overpayed for Shaw, and Chelsea is/will overpay for Stones, but that is what you must do if you want top English players. Obviously, you can do shopping outside of EPL and get players of the same quality for around half the price. But that isn't the point, English players cost more than the others. If Shaw and Stones cost near 30m, then a striker who is around their age (in fact slightly older) and has played in a far different level to them in the last season, should normally cost 40-50m.
 
Revan said:
Shaw cost near as much, while Everton refused 26m for Stones. Kane is a striker, they cost far more.

I think that he is probably a 40-50m player. Sterling cost 49m and is a better player, but on the other side Kane seems a top professional, not a cnut like Sterling.
Click to expand...
And thats seriously rare in this day and age. That also adds to his worth imo. The fact he isnt a giant douchebag makes him the perfect Utd signing,
 
Santiago_KinderBueno said:
Shaw was a seemingly one season wonder to some of ya'll and we payed 30 mil for a defender not even from a significant rival. Kane is worth 30 but will cost 40-50 if he scores atleast 2 goals until the end of the window.
Click to expand...
Good luck with that.
 
There is no fecking point in this thread, or the Mueller thread, or the Ramos thread. The clubs have plenty of money, the players are happy at their clubs. They won't be selling.
 
sincher said:
He won't be sold at all.
Click to expand...

Quite so.

At the start of last season, Kane had not yet broken through into the first XI. Now he has, and Poch plans to re-construct our attack with Kane as the focal point. So the new forward players that the club are about to sign - or hoping to sign - are not preparations for Kane's departure, but quite opposite.

With the season already started, the idea that the club is now going to abandon this plan at the 11th hour is a total non-starter. Because otherwise not only would Spurs be thrown into a chaotic scramble to find a replacement for the plan's key component, it would also raise questions about the type and identity of the new attackers that are intended to mesh with Kane.

I know that people find it entertaining in this thread to debate what Kane is or is not worth. But Spurs don't care what valuations other clubs may or may not put on him. It's simply irrelevant to a plan that won't be changed.
 
Say he was available for £50m. Who could Spurs buy to bridge that gap? They don't have CL football, so they don't have an in with top players. Say they spend £35m odd and buy the likes of Austin and Berahino to try jointly replace him. Neither of them are close to the level of the player they'd be replacing, though both are obviously good, PL-proven players. We already know Spurs have been stung on that front in the past when they spent the Bale money. So they've made a profit of £15m and probably have a worse team, thus almost guaranteeing they won't get the CL football that would allow them to improve the side.

Even if Kane somehow wanted out this quickly, which I don't believe is the case, there's very little in it for Spurs. They're reasonably well off. The money's no good to them if they have to keep taking punts on players becoming as good as what they've already given away.
 
For transfers to be viable, either the club wants or needs to sell (much less common now especially for the big clubs as most of them are pretty rich), or the player wants out, or both. I cannot think of a single transfer where one of the two hasn't been true.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Quite so.

At the start of last season, Kane had not yet broken through into the first XI. Now he has, and Poch plans to re-construct our attack with Kane as the focal point. So the new forward players that the club are about to sign - or hoping to sign - are not preparations for Kane's departure, but quite opposite.

With the season already started, the idea that the club is now going to abandon this plan at the 11th hour is a total non-starter. Because otherwise not only would Spurs be thrown into a chaotic scramble to find a replacement for the plan's key component, it would also raise questions about the type and identity of the new attackers that are intended to mesh with Kane.

I know that people find it entertaining in this thread to debate what Kane is or is not worth. But Spurs don't care what valuations other clubs may or may not put on him. It's simply irrelevant to a plan that won't be changed.
Click to expand...

This is all fine and dandy but you forget that at the end of the day you still remain Spurs, a feeder club for anyone with a fat enough chequebook and if United or someone else comes calling, whether this year or the next you'll roll over to have your belly tickled like a good little puppy. And that's not even half of it, because no matter how much money you get, have or spend, you'll never improve enough to be able to challenge because all you do is sack managers for being unable to achieve the impossible when all you do is buy duds for them. So what is it that you have going for you to keep you relevant in the Premier League? Being a feeder club.

With that I'd like to end this by welcoming to Manchester United Harry Edward Kane!
 
LitterBug said:
... I'd like to end this by welcoming to Manchester .... Harry Edward Kane!
Click to expand...

I can feel the pride bursting through your chest ... has he come up for a day-trip to The Lowry or somewhere?
 
GlastonSpur said:
I can feel the pride bursting through your chest ... has he come up for a day-trip to The Lowry or somewhere?
Click to expand...
He said 'welcoming to Manchester United', not just 'welcoming to Manchester'

Paraphrasing a quote and using ellipsis doesn't mean you can literally take key words out of its meaning.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Say what? :lol:
Click to expand...
You took the 'United' out of the quote, so that you could conveniently say he was in 'Manchester' for some other reason.

Maybe you weren't even aware you did it.

I'm pointing out that you can paraphrase a quote (and remove words) but you can't take a key word out and then pretend it isn't part of the quote at all, in order to change its meaning.
 
Speak said:
You took the 'United' out of the quote, so that you could conveniently say he was in 'Manchester' for some other reason.

Maybe you weren't even aware you did it.

I'm pointing out that you can paraphrase a quote (and remove words) but you can't take a key word out and then pretend it isn't part of the quote at all, in order to change its meaning.
Click to expand...

It's just a bit of fun - no need to take it so seriously. Btw, you should look more closely at post #2457 above ;)
 
He will be sold within 2 seasons max if he is the real deal. Spurs wouldn't pay him half what the big boys could.
 
KingMinger22 said:
He will be sold within 2 seasons max if he is the real deal. Spurs wouldn't pay him half what the big boys could.
Click to expand...

If someone offers 40+, I think Levy would cash out. He doesn't look a special player to me, and I would bet good money that he wouldn't have another prolific season like last season anytime soon, if at all.
 
i dont think he'll move this season...but after a while, he'll realise that he's tired of consistently finishing behind Arsenal, and with a little bit of ambition , he'll seek better things.

Unless he doesnt hit the heights, whereby he'll stay at spurs for a while, and gets moved to another small London club.
 
golden_blunder said:
Stones more proven than Kane? Eh?
Click to expand...

Two seasons in Premier League as opposed to one that Kane has. Kane will be worth £300m if he has two decent seasons so understandbly Stones who has actually had two decent seasons should be considered more proven.
 
Last edited:
Sarni said:
Shaw was overpaid by £10m and Stones is more proven than Kane. One good season won't make him a £40m player especially as it had been preceeded by average ones.
Click to expand...

Also its easier to defend than to attack (numerical advantage)
 
can't some people still discuss his possible transfer to us this summer, he's not for sale this year and we, with all the money we have, won't change it.. complete waste of time
 
Stones has 45 appearances in the PL and has done well without ever really looking amongst the best in his position.

Kane has 49 appearances in the PL and has looked like one of the best players in the country in his position for quite a long stretch.

Kane is clearly more proven.
 
RedMachine03 said:
Click to expand...


The tender has been filled with coal, the firebox stoked up and the axles all greased. The conductor cries out "All aboard!". The engineer gives a long blast on the steam whistle. The Kane Train is ready to roll ...
 
GlastonSpur said:
The tender has been filled with coal, the firebox stoked up and the axles all greased. The conductor cries out "All aboard!". The engineer gives a long blast on the steam whistle. The Kane Train is ready to roll ...
Click to expand...

Wise move by him to start after the match at OT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.