Osimhen v Kane

Well...

  • Total voters
    986
  • Poll closed .
Amarsdd said:
First of all, exception doesn’t prove the rule, so when you bring up Salah I can give you Lukaku coming from Inter, Higuain, etc and a ton more if we're talking about other than the Italian league. Second, you’re comparing Lukaku, Maguire vs Kane, not in terms of type of player, but the quality of player and also the state of the team they were/will be coming into? Third, I’m all for signing your 50-60m player who you can give time to bed in, but not a 120m+ player who we want to be the spine and the lynchpin of the team from get go as we have no one in his position.

Hey, I’m all for players like Kvara, who I don’t think will have the same pressure to perform right away given the cover we have in the wings.
Click to expand...

I didn’t say Salah was a proof that Serie A was a good league to recruit from, just as I don’t believ that Maguire, AWB, Sanchez… are a proof that the PL is a bad place to buy players from… Higuain was washed when he joined Chelsea… Mid-table Milan wanted rid of him… Chelsea signed Torres when he was among the very best of the PL and made him look like a complete donkey… it‘s not about the league, it’s about what player you get and how you use them.

Every player should be judged on their individual quality and how they play football at the high level. The main difference between Serie A and the PL is considered to be the intensity. But there are still enough games with high intensity in Serie A that should be more than good enough to judge how a player perform in these high intensity games, even without having seen him in the CL. We are not talking about the Qatari league…

Salah is a good exemple of scouting working well and identifying a player who matches what the manager is doing with his team Perfectly. Lukaku to Chelsea (or Zlatan to Barcelona, to lesser extent he is still a great player and he helped them) is a good example of the recruitment being wrong in identifying what profile works for the team…. But it has nothing to do with Serie A, he is failing now under Inzaghi even more than he failed under Tuchel. And he performed for Martinez’s Everton just as well as he did for Conte’s Inter…. It about the player and the system, more than about the league…


If Osimhen matches what ETH wants to do then he would be a great signing for us. Every time we‘ve seen him against PL opposition in the european competitions he looked more than up to it…
 
Doracle said:
He definitely isn’t less mobile than current Martial - who sadly looks like he is running through treacle after his various injuries - but still is good enough as a link man to work well for us. Kane is far more able to get around the pitch and probably has better acceleration now.

Kane is the perfect striker. I’d have preferred to have got him 2 years ago but he should have 5 years at top level left, so not a major issue. Benz and Lewa are the only comparable players in world football and they are 5 years older. We get Kane and it’s our best signing since Cantona.
Click to expand...

Long way from the truth. No way on earth is Kane faster than Martial.
 
watching wout makes me worried about osihmen. we would get pace & pressing but not the technical ability to play rashford in on goal
 
Bebestation said:
watching wout makes me worried about osihmen. we would get pace & pressing but not the technical ability to play rashford in on goal
Click to expand...
It would be Bruno's job to play both Rashford and Osimhen in on goal... And they can play each other on goal but with less quality than what Kane would offer.
 
Pintu said:
It would be Bruno's job to play both Rashford and Osimhen in on goal... And they can play each other on goal but with less quality than what Kane would offer.
Click to expand...
Rashford as striker gives us a pacey player that can press & bruno can play in behind on goal, we saw it even today. Osihmens heading is class but so is kanes. Kane gives us a player that will play in inverted fws like rash,antony, garn, sancho,amad
& another whilst scoring himself
 
Amarsdd said:
First of all, exception doesn’t prove the rule, so when you bring up Salah I can give you Lukaku coming from Inter, Higuain, etc and a ton more if we're talking about other than the Italian league. Second, you’re comparing Lukaku, Maguire vs Kane, not in terms of type of player, but the quality of player and also the state of the team they were/will be coming into? Third, I’m all for signing your 50-60m player who you can give time to bed in, but not a 120m+ player who we want to be the spine and the lynchpin of the team from get go as we have no one in his position.

Hey, I’m all for players like Kvara, who I don’t think will have the same pressure to perform right away given the cover we have in the wings.
Click to expand...

The belief that Lukaku tore the Serie A apart the way Halaand is doing the PL is a pure myth, entertained by some bias…

Using Lukaku as a stick to beat Osimhen’s Serie A performances is not fair. Lukaku scored 24 non penalty goals in the PL… His best tally in Italy, being serviced by the best team of that league was 18 non penalty goals..


D718082-E-50-FC-4-F99-A3-D1-F2910-AC2733-C.jpg
 
Mainoldo said:
Kane’s too good to be picking Osihmen over him.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it’s not even close. A bit worried at the moment that he’s so good that he’s going to drive this average Spurs team to top 4.
 
Harry lives for personal accolades over actual trophies. If he just admitted it we could all move on
 
Kaos said:
He's the safer bet for sure, but I still think Osimhen is the better value signing. Considerably younger, lower wages, and more suited to Ten Hag ball too I'd say.
Click to expand...

Na he’ll cost more than kane and I don’t think having Osimhen for 5 years doesn’t give us the same value as having Kane for 3 years.
 
I'd take Kane in a heartbeat. Maybe dangled a certain 21 year old player who hasn't played for us in a year (and who shall remain unnamed) in front of them to see if they bite.
 
Raoul said:
I'd take Kane in a heartbeat. Maybe dangled a certain 21 year old player who hasn't played for us in a year (and who shall remain unnamed) in front of them to see if they bite.
Click to expand...

You cannot want a player to not play for us and want them to play for another club based on the circumstances.

Personally I find that wrong. But each to their own..
 
Kane would be the safer bet since he is PL proven but in the summer will be 30. Nothing hugely wrong with that of course but you would expect in 3-4 years he may start to slow down.

The good thing with Osimhen is that he is at an age where you could have a top quality striker for 10 years. Obviously the risk is if he can adapt to the PL.
 
Red Rash said:
Kane would be the safer bet since he is PL proven but in the summer will be 30. Nothing hugely wrong with that of course but you would expect in 3-4 years he may start to slow down.

The good thing with Osimhen is that he is at an age where you could have a top quality striker for 10 years. Obviously the risk is if he can adapt to the PL.
Click to expand...

List the top quality strikers we’ve had that have given us a good 10 years as number 1 over the last 35 years.
 
Mainoldo said:
List the top quality strikers we’ve had that have given us a good 10 years as number 1 over the last 35 years.
Click to expand...

I meant because of his age, he could easily be a starting striker for us for 10 years and if not he would have resale value.

For sure not many but Wayne Rooney and Mark Hughes played for the club for a decade.
 
People are far too obsessed with needing a striker for 5+ years. How about we try and win something before worrying about longevity.
 
BenitoSTARR said:
People are far too obsessed with needing a striker for 5+ years. How about we try and win something before worrying about longevity.
Click to expand...
This. We have guys like Casemiro, Varane, Bruno, Shaw, DDG and others all in their prime years. We should absolutely aim to win now.
 
Hawks2008 said:
This. We have guys like Casemiro, Varane, Bruno, Shaw, DDG and others all in their prime years. We should absolutely aim to win now.
Click to expand...
In my mind the sensible thing is sign a Harry Kane then add a young striker who can grow into the role.
 
Ted Lasso said:
I remember when there were serious doubts and even outrage at signing Robin van Persie.

In the kind of functional team ETH is building that's the level of impact I would expect from a striker of Kane's quality.

Also think it should be a case of signing both.
Click to expand...
Thing is kane wont cost 24m pounds.. no where near that.
 
It would be Kane for me, he has everything that would help compliment our current attacking set up.

I doubt we get either though.
 
Swordsman said:
Knowing levy he might pushed it to 100m or over 100m
Click to expand...

Levy isn’t an idiot. Faced with nothing next summer or 80m this summer, he’ll take 80m. All depends on Kane confirming he wants to leave though.
 
Pintu said:
That’s only true of “league goals”… If you include other competitions, he’s scored 20+ in 3 of his 4 seasons in European football. 26 last year.


B6600-C1-D-A0-FE-478-F-9111-7-FA11-CA8-BD2-D.png
Click to expand...
If you call NT football for Nigeria European football, then he has scored 20+ three times. If you're talking about European football, then no, only that one time in Belgium were he scored 20 in 36 games.

He's been excellent this season though, for the first time in his career, and that despite being less involved in games than Haaland. Like a pure goalscorer should, he's a lot to handle for defenders.
 
Said before it's too early, Spurs could qualify for the CL again and Kane stays, they're in with a good shout from here. Either us or Spurs could get a few injuries and slip down as well, we're both so reliant of a couple of players. Levy probably would hang on to him for a final year anyway unless they really hit the buffers.
 
I don‘t believe we will go after Kane. He is still great but declining already. He could be a good signing for 1-2 years but too expensive for that.
 
Swordsman said:
Thing is kane wont cost 24m pounds.. no where near that.
Click to expand...

Even account for inflation and all that, it's a fair point. Transfer fees have become insanity in general which is why more players are letting contracts run out.

We shouldn't have paid what we did for Sancho and Antony. Those were $100m gambles. Harry Kane would not be a gamble, he'd be a sure thing in comparison. I'm all for it.
 
I'd prefer for us to sign younger (than Kane) players in the summer, since we already have a spine of players around 30 years, which will need replacing at about the same time.

I don't really see why Kane would move to us in any event. If he leaves Spurs it should be for a club that more or less guarantees trophies. We don't really do that yet. You could argue that no English club does that at the moment, and that the one that did signed Haaland in the summer.
 
Dyslexic Untied said:
I'd prefer for us to sign younger (than Kane) players in the summer, since we already have a spine of players around 30 years, which will need replacing at about the same time.

I don't really see why Kane would move to us in any event. If he leaves Spurs it should be for a club that more or less guarantees trophies. We don't really do that yet. You could argue that no English club does that at the moment, and that the one that did signed Haaland in the summer.
Click to expand...

Did you just answer your own question? :lol:
 
BenitoSTARR said:
People are far too obsessed with needing a striker for 5+ years. How about we try and win something before worrying about longevity.
Click to expand...

This, in 3, 4 years, we will have some new great strikers on the horizon to pick.

That being said, I don't think Spurs will sell him.
 
For those without access to that article it mostly just says what we already know. Osimhen a better fit for ETH stylistically, Kane a more proven quantity, Levy will look for £100m for Kane, Osimhen will cost a huge amount too, etc.
 
Now I appreciate that Kane is a vastly superior player to Weghorst, but for me, in terms of style and intensity of our attack - I think one half of Weghorst centre forward and one half of Rashford tonight showed the difference of how we could look with either Kane or Osimhen. I just think in terms of profile, we’d find it harder to attack with the same intensity that we showed in the last 30 mins with the Kane profile.

I’d be happy with either option, although I do wish it was a 26 year old Kane who was more intense. Would be a no brainer for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.