It's a massive argument though. If Kane gets a bad injury at this stage of his career then that's it, he'd be Falcao'd.
Osimhen v Kane
- Thread starter croadyman
- Start date
It's a massive argument though. If Kane gets a bad injury at this stage of his career then that's it, he'd be Falcao'd.
Yeah i suppose. It’s similar to saying I’d rather have Osimhen heading the ball over Lewandoski
I don’t know what game you was watching but Martial was like 50% fit he did minimal pressing. He was there to occupy their defence when we was defending and to bring players in. I’m sure Kane presses better than Martial today.
I just don’t see other than age how anyone has a valid argument Oshimen is a better fit than Kane.
Osimhen is comfortably better than Kane in the air. There's a reason he had the most headed goals of any player in Europe's top five leagues last season. And I'm sure Kane presses better than Martial too, but I'm also sure Osimhen presses better than either of them.
He might be a better fit because he's better at some things than Kane is. Or he might not. It depends how much the manager values pace, aerial threat and pressing in particular from his CF, because those are clearly areas Kane fares second best in this comparison.
Osimhen isn't a better goal scorer, though. Kane equals him for goals per game in a far tougher league. He is miles ahead of him.
Kane the way he plays can go til mid 30's IMO. And he is one who would give us an enormous step up, especially as he's the perfect fit, plus knows many of our players. Would come in and fit perfectly with Rashford especially on the left, can be a target guy, hold up play, link up play, creative, but also knows when to stay up and be that goalscorer to let Bruno do his own thing too. Benzema, Lewandowski, Kane... those 3 guys are invaluable as strikers because of their all round play combined with the elite goalscoring. Benzema on a free could be an option too....
Osimhen is class, but I do worry that he would change Rashfords game and I'm not sure if we would net be better as I really think Rashford and a poacher type would clash a bit.
Osimhen is class, but I do worry that he would change Rashfords game and I'm not sure if we would net be better as I really think Rashford and a poacher type would clash a bit.
Comparing their non-penalty goals per 90min for Napoli/Spurs, starting with this season first.
Osimhen: 0.93, 0.64, 0.57
Kane: 0.73, 0.36, 0.55, 0.56, 0.48, 0.82, 0.86, 0.54, 0.66.
You're right to highlight the difference in the leagues they play in, but on-paper the gap in their goalscoring rate isn't as big as you might think.
Kane. Its an easy choice for me. Better player, guaranteed goals in PL and will probably cost almost half as much as Napoli will demand for Oshimen (didn't Napoli pay like 70M+ for him?)
It depends, Kane is a more deep-lying forward so if we get rid of Martial then we should go for Kane or vice versa - it means bye-bye, Tony.
On another hand, if Weghorst's loan fails and he leaves the club after his loan without making a permanent move, then we should go for Osimhen who offers similar qualities: heading ability, pressing machine, clever movement etc.
IMO Ten Hag will look to ensure that he has two different options/profiles from the CF position, as he did now in January, just with a higher level of quality.
On another hand, if Weghorst's loan fails and he leaves the club after his loan without making a permanent move, then we should go for Osimhen who offers similar qualities: heading ability, pressing machine, clever movement etc.
IMO Ten Hag will look to ensure that he has two different options/profiles from the CF position, as he did now in January, just with a higher level of quality.
I'm not convinced these are the options we should be going for. Both would be extremely expensive and I'm not sure that it would be the best use of funds.
If I had to pick, it would be osimhen, due to the long term potential - if we would spend that amount on someone.
If I had to pick, it would be osimhen, due to the long term potential - if we would spend that amount on someone.
Yeah that last paragraph is the crucial bit because Erik will definitely want different dimensions in that forward line
Why don't we go for Kane in the Summer, for say £60m plus add-ons, and get Moukoko in on a free? Then two years later (2025), Osimhen's contract will have expired and we can get him for free as well. That would be pretty good business, and we would have taken the star players off two of the toughest selling teams in the world.
I can't see Levy selling Kane to us for 60M. He hates us and is probably THE most stubborn feck in this business. He would rather sell Kane overseas for half that amount or just keep him until his contract runs out than to let him come to us.
Kane is definitely the better choice but Tottenham will not sell Kane to us & will prefer a buyer abroad.
I'll Go for Vlahovic to be honest, he's the ST that we need IMO
And we could deal with Juve and reduce their price because of their financial situation
And we could deal with Juve and reduce their price because of their financial situation
Neither.
Kane is now overrated. He has peaked and getting slower by the season. The other guy only had one very good season (like many others), is in his mid 20s and he will want to start every game.
I will be very happy to be proven wrong if they sign for us.
Kane is now overrated. He has peaked and getting slower by the season. The other guy only had one very good season (like many others), is in his mid 20s and he will want to start every game.
I will be very happy to be proven wrong if they sign for us.
Remember that Sebastian Haller is the type of striker that ETH has liked to work with over the years (think they worked together at both Utrecht and Ajax last season). If that's his prototypical striker than I would think Osimhen fits that better than Kane. I don't think ETH wants his striker always dropping deep like Kane is prone to do, he wants them constantly occupying the center backs, being a target man, and running into the space. Plus, Kane's pressing will surely decline in the coming seasons, he's getting up there in years. Maybe there is a better striker out there than these two options but I would rather go for Osimhen if that's who is available.
This is spot on imo
I'd go for Osimhen. Kane is too old. We have enough players in and around their 30s already. Just look at Liverpool; most of their starting 11 have got old at the same time and now they need a whole new team.
If Osimhen is too expensive, then we need to sign a young striker with a similar profile.
If Osimhen is too expensive, then we need to sign a young striker with a similar profile.
Osimhen is a beast and would put us over the edge. Pity we are fecking broke isnt it?
He is 24 for feck sake, what is this nonsense?
You all are fecking blind or nuts or both
I don’t like either of these options. Kane will likely start declining soon and I’m not convinced by Osimhen
If it's just between these two and the price is the same then Osimhen.
Unless you can get Kane at a discount then he's the wrong side of 30 now, and by the sounds of it Spurs are still expecting close to £100m for him.
At least if Osimhen doesn't live up to expectations you can recoup some of the money by selling him, like we did with Lukaku.
Unless you can get Kane at a discount then he's the wrong side of 30 now, and by the sounds of it Spurs are still expecting close to £100m for him.
At least if Osimhen doesn't live up to expectations you can recoup some of the money by selling him, like we did with Lukaku.
I'd go for Kane but Martial could be used to get the price of Osimhen down so that might be the way to go,
destroyed Juve yesterday
I’ve often felt like we’ve never taken enough risk in the transfer market, recently signings like Enzo, Caciedo and Alvarez for example but 10mil risks ok. 100+ mil little different so it comes down to price for me. If Kane is available for a decent fee of say 50, then get Kane and just wait to see who emerges. The outlay required for Osimhen will be 100+ given they paid 70 for him.
He looks like he would tick all the boxes for an ETH striker and is clearly a good player but I’m not sure he is 100 mil value striker.
He looks like he would tick all the boxes for an ETH striker and is clearly a good player but I’m not sure he is 100 mil value striker.
I’ve only seen Osimhen from Youtube but he seems to rely on 2 major aspects - breaking behind the defense before scoring and his headed goals.
Since the rise of Garanacho I’m wondering if Rashford as a striker will be seen more regularly as one (though not always) and he is primarily a player who likes to break behind the defense - so I’m not sure if that ability of Osimhen is all that important to us.
Then there is his heading ability which is much more of something we lack in the squad because Weghorst is going to be needed to be replaced one day another.
Kane however, can play like a false 9 and drop deep, can score headed goals, can skip the false 9 stuff and just occupy his positioning in the box, can break the line and score. Can score from long distance just as much as short distance.
For me Kane is just more complete.
If ten Hag wants Osimhen then let’s go for him - but if he saw Kane as a more well rounded striker with the ability to go for all trophies in the next 3 years - then I wouldn’t be surprised about that either.
Since the rise of Garanacho I’m wondering if Rashford as a striker will be seen more regularly as one (though not always) and he is primarily a player who likes to break behind the defense - so I’m not sure if that ability of Osimhen is all that important to us.
Then there is his heading ability which is much more of something we lack in the squad because Weghorst is going to be needed to be replaced one day another.
Kane however, can play like a false 9 and drop deep, can score headed goals, can skip the false 9 stuff and just occupy his positioning in the box, can break the line and score. Can score from long distance just as much as short distance.
For me Kane is just more complete.
If ten Hag wants Osimhen then let’s go for him - but if he saw Kane as a more well rounded striker with the ability to go for all trophies in the next 3 years - then I wouldn’t be surprised about that either.
Really surprised by the poll results but I guess Kane has always been underrated on here. People would take a more expensive player who has only looked top-class for six months in an inferior league over the best English striker ever and a top-3 striker in the world, a virtually guaranteed transformative signing, simply because the former is younger?
Doesn't Kane's contract expire in 2024? Surely they can't expect anything like that much for him with a year left on his contract?
I don’t think the poll reflects who people think is better, there really is little doubt. It would just be that with Kane it is short term and as many have said we already Casemiro, Varane and Erickson who may need replacing as guaranteed starters in 2/3 more years.
That makes sense. So we have players who are at there peak so let’s get a striker who probably needs two years so when he’s fully functional he can operate with our peak players who might not be in their peak anymore.
Makes totally sense.
I've read this forum for a while and it's genuinely bizarre how Kane has been underrated throughout his entire career
He's been in 'physical decline' whatever that means for half a decade
Don’t let Conte’s football fool you. Kane is a phenomenal forward. But considering the age we do need to think long term. I’d sign Kane and then look at Ferguson in a few years.
And in a team like United, Osimhen wouldn't need to playmake that much
Watching an old Rooney, Zlatan, Cavani, Ronaldo I can understand the reservation. United should be looking for a younger hungry striker but at the same time I think Kane would good, we just don't know how long he has, could be a year or four. He's been written off each season only to score a ton of goals and feature in most games.
He did look slow and poor in the World Cup though but he's on 17 goals half way through this season and each season before it's 20-30+ goals.
He did look slow and poor in the World Cup though but he's on 17 goals half way through this season and each season before it's 20-30+ goals.
Players around 30 are in their peak years and today's players usually play longer, we have lots of young players anyway, Kane is a proven PL goalscorer, he's less of a risk and pretty much guarantees 20 or so goals a season, players from abroad don't always always adapt to the English game are therefore a bigger risk
Rooney and Ronaldo started at 16, the mileage is different. Cavani was perfectly fine just injury prone and Zlatan too, he just had a bad injury and was also 35.
The funny thing is calling him slow. He was never quick to begin with.I've read this forum for a while and it's genuinely bizarre how Kane has been underrated throughout his entire career
He's been in 'physical decline' whatever that means for half a decade
Sorry that's not my point when they started their careers, I'm not comparing them like for like. I'm talking about the fans not wanting to see an old striker in general.
Problem with Osimhen is playing alongside Rashford, they wouldn't get the best out of each other. You'd just be adjusting where our main run in behind threat comes from more than anything. Kane would be able to play with Rashford like he does with Son, get the best out of each other. He'd hold up, link up, play others in behind but also be the goal threat with the box movement that compliments Rashfords.