Stig
Full Member
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2019
- Messages
- 1,872
Munich is a lovely city
What are you implying about Manchester?
Munich is a lovely city
What are you implying about Manchester?
Can we change the thread title to Harry Kane please? I mean, we are never signing him in a million years but that is clearly all anybody wants to talk about.
We can make a new Rasmus thread with a disclaimer, Kaniacs keep out.
Who?If he ends up on similar trajectory path like fellow Danish Jon Dahl Tomasson, can he be considered a success despite the steep fee ?
So, one is Harry Kane with a track record ( I don’t see that as being overly optimistic but you may think it is), and the other is basically Martial like. It’s much less likely that Hojlund gets to Kane/Haaland/MBappe level than being the next Jovic, Felix, Havertz, Werner, etc.
And with the extra money you make, you CAN buy the next sure thing. I don’t know, maybe Hojlund will turn into Brazilian Ronaldo, but it’s not likely. I see Kane as the option that has the least risk versus a very expensive unproven 20yr old. With a healthy Kane, it’s not impossible to win a league title and a CL within those 4 years
Yeah but someone with a gcse in business studies has done the analysis and apparently Kane is clearly the best option?Can we change the thread title to Harry Kane please? I mean, we are never signing him in a million years but that is clearly all anybody wants to talk about.
We can make a new Rasmus thread with a disclaimer, Kaniacs keep out.
What were you expecting? A limousine to drop off a leather bound book with the offer at Atalanta HQ?Where is the official bid that was supposed to have been made on Monday???
A verbal offer has been made
I always thought Lewandowski's technique looked a little awkward, but was one of those players where every touch was geared towards getting an inch to get a shot off. Wouldn't put him anywhere near elite technique like an Henry, Berbatov, Bergkamp etc.
Not saying he's an Emile Heskey or anything mind, obviously still in the top percentiles.
There are a lot of all touches videos of him on youtube, here are a couple:
I can see why Ten Hag likes him: big strong player, runs a lot, presses a lot, tries to bring other players into the game. Sort of Wout Weghorst but then a lot better and he scores goals. At Ajax Ten Hag bought Haller for that role. But if Hojland is good enough or will transform our team like Kane would do, I doubt it. But he’s still young.
Yes they will do something like that but it will be much more complicated. They will run sensitivity analyses on all the variables and, I would think, will provide an investment viability report, basically a summary of risks and rewards. I doubt if it’s used to help a manager choose between two signings but it might form part of the internal paperwork needed before funds get approved.Of course, we’re building a business case. This is how you invest in an asset, you run analysis. You have to pick low-med-high scenarios and justify the capital expenditure.
I’m not saying the numbers are perfect, just that the analysis is revenue/profit minus cost. That is how the finance guys will look at this.
Regarding the bolded part, the team financial success or the financial outcome of the deal doesn't rely on Hojlund reaching that kind of level. Your entire demonstration assumes that the team is going to do far better with one player than with the other even though the team has done better that Tottenham without Kane. Surely you see where the problem is here?
I'm telling you this as someone who would take Kane over nearly anyone else if he was available but there is no scenario where I will pretend that the financial commitment that the club would have to make is close to the one linked to Hojlund. For this very simple reason, Kane on his own has not actually guaranteed great performances for Tottenham in the CL and that includes when Tottenham had a better or comparable team than United currently have.
Is he better than Hojlund today? Absolutely, that question shouldn't even be asked but he is also more costly and in order to make the deal as cheap as the alternatives Kane would need to have an impact that he has never had. Keep in mind that as an example Kane has less CL goals than Morata or Mandzukic, he isn't himself at the level of Haaland or Mbappé.
No chance whatsoever that that Spurs CL side would be "better or comparable" to the United side going into this season, assuming Onana is everything he's advertised to be.
But of course we really don't know what we're getting with Onana, and that uncertainty is my greatest concern going into the new season.
Cavani, Lewandowski, Drogba.. you could argue weren't that technically skilled. Would have to agree for the most part, but there are outliers and I don't think it's ultra rare. Depends on how your team sets up to accommodate a striker who may not be gifted technically.
Wout?I've just skimmed the thread but I can't belive we are going to buy a striker who has no technique and never scored a goal.
What are management playing at ?
Jon Dahl Tomasson.Who?
You are assuming a lot here. First of all, the wage amounts, and second, Kane not dropping off in performances. Third, you don’t include Hojlund improving over time.Let’s assume the following just so you see the analysis of how they price an asset like Harry Kane vs. Hojlund.
Revenue pre CL = 500m
Harry Kane £80m fee + 350k/wk, 4yr contract.
- 20m amortized transfer fee +18m/ yr wages = 38m
Assume CL all 4 years, with semifinals, quarters, rd of 16 and semifinals for CL revenue at 90m -80m - 70m - 90m
- 590m - 580m -570m -590m
Hojlund 60m fee + 150k/wk, 5 year contract
- 12m amortized fee + 7.8m wages = 20m
Assume CL 2 out of 4 years, rd of 16, no CL, group stage, no CL for CL revenue at 70m - 0m -60m-0m
Difference
Kane revenue +330m - costs 160m = 170m gain
Hojlund revenue +130m - costs 80m = 50m “gain”
Obviously, you’d choose Kane. Throw in other trophies and it’s even more compelling.
Haaland gets 70 million or so.Source? If it’s the Sun, that’s a complete joke.
That would put him at a salary 10m more than KdB, the highest paid player in the PL.
Fifth: Spurs regularly not making CL with Kane.
Kane is obviously by far the least risk option. This should be obvious to even the ardent Hojlund fan.
I don’t know if Kane would have that type of impact. Nobody does. He may have more of an impact, or less. This exercise was merely to introduce the concept that revenues are as much of the equation as costs. Buying Hojlund is like buying over priced real estate in a so-called “up and coming” part of town. Nobody knows if the capital spent is going to return much profit. Kane is like buying real estate in the nicest part of town. Yes, it’s more expensive, but you can rent it out for more and it’s pretty much guaranteed to turn a profit unless some sort of natural disaster hits (injury).Regarding the bolded part, the team financial success or the financial outcome of the deal doesn't rely on Hojlund reaching that kind of level. Your entire demonstration assumes that the team is going to do far better with one player than with the other even though the team has done better that Tottenham without Kane. Surely you see where the problem is here?
I'm telling you this as someone who would take Kane over nearly anyone else if he was available but there is no scenario where I will pretend that the financial commitment that the club would have to make is close to the one linked to Hojlund. For this very simple reason, Kane on his own has not actually guaranteed great performances for Tottenham in the CL and that includes when Tottenham had a better or comparable team than United currently have.
Is he better than Hojlund today? Absolutely, that question shouldn't even be asked but he is also more costly and in order to make the deal as cheap as the alternatives Kane would need to have an impact that he has never had. Keep in mind that as an example Kane has less CL goals than Morata or Mandzukic, he isn't himself at the level of Haaland or Mbappé.
He is at 75k/wk... stopped reading after that...Hojlund 60m fee + 150k/wk, 5 year contract
You got it. Not sure why the post was so controversial. It’s basically, here’s a possible scenario where Kane would make more sense that splashing 70m on Hojlund. And yes, their deep dive on the data would allow for all kinds of scenarios and variables.Yes they will do something like that but it will be much more complicated. They will run sensitivity analyses on all the variables and, I would think, will provide an investment viability report, basically a summary of risks and rewards. I doubt if it’s used to help a manager choose between two signings but it might form part of the internal paperwork needed before funds get approved.
It sounded like you were saying a case would be made such as: “this is what we assume will happen” therefore we should buy Kane.
We must be from a different generation I have no ideaJon Dahl Tomasson.
Harry Kane had 32 goals and 5 assists last season. He may drop off performance wise, but he might not. Lewandowski hasn’t, Benzema was great 30-34.You are assuming a lot here. First of all, the wage amounts, and second, Kane not dropping off in performances. Third, you don’t include Hojlund improving over time.
Fourth: we made third place without Hojlund. Who is he replacing? Weghorst. Are we improving with Hojlund over Weghorst? Hell Yeah.
Fifth: Spurs regularly not making CL with Kane.
Worst post I’ve seen in a while. Are you Kane’s agent?
We must be from a different generation I have no idea
Jon Dahl Tomasson.
Joint highest international scorer for Denmark. Currently managing in the English Championship.We must be from a different generation I have no idea
Sad for him, he won’t have that feeling of actually paying attention to Blackburn when they were on Match of the Day, just in case Morten Gamst Pedersen did some bizarre outrageous shitAre you a teenager?
Sigh, kids these days get their information from FIFA.
The one that I've been thinking of recently is Louis Saha. Tall, rangy, and a combination of speed and strength that was an absolute handful for defenders.The player I have in mind is Ivica Olic, potentially I can see a player that is jack of all trades but at a good level. Today it's a bit of anachronistic with most strikers being seemingly pretty specialized, you basically have the great technicians on one side and the great athletes on the other, with very few in the middle at top level.
Cavani, Lewandowski, Drogba.. you could argue weren't that technically skilled. Would have to agree for the most part, but there are outliers and I don't think it's ultra rare. Depends on how your team sets up to accommodate a striker who may not be gifted technically.
How don't we? He's not some unknown quantity that no ones seen played before!
I’m not hyping up Hojlund and making up numbers to make him look good.Harry Kane had 32 goals and 5 assists last season. He may drop off performance wise, but he might not. Lewandowski hasn’t, Benzema was great 30-34.
You talk like Hojlund is a sure thing. He is really unknown as a prospect and barely played 1800 minutes in Serie A.
I am Harry Kane’s agent! Are you Hojlund’s agent?
Your point that Hojlund wants to come here and Kane could not care less apparently, is overlooked here.A couple extra points on this Kane vs Hojland (and personally I'd love both!)
- In 5 years time Kane will be worth 0 and Hojland somewhere between 0 and 150m inflation adjusted.. I didn't see the guy doing the figures factor that in.
- I think everyone would agree that Cantona was better than Sheringham, but the latter came in and we won the treble, and Ten Hag certainly thinks that the team is more important than any individual.
- Has anyone considered that Kane might be mentally shot to pieces having just seen Citeh win the treble with Haaland upfront instead of him? Not only does he have "that could have been me" to deal with but he can also see Haaland already progressing towards his top Premiership scorer record that he hasn't even achieved yet. Add to that the World Cup penalty miss, honestly I don't think Kane is as sure a signing as everyone assumes. He would be under immense pressure from himself to achieve.
- Hojlund absolutely wants to be here.
I honestly don't think that if we (I know it won't happen) signed both that Kane would be head and shoulders above Hojlund, and if anything I can imagine Hojlund being just as loved. We love Weghorst at the start for his effort alone haha.. we loved Alan Smith even though he came from Leeds.
If Hojlund comes in and works his socks off and gets the occasional goal, it'll be great.
I haven't seen the comparison often here but I think he's like a young Cavani and we enjoyed, albeit briefly, the original.