Harry Kane

[Spursberg]

They won't give a shit about ffp mate . They could buy the league if they wanted.

indeed, we all see how FFP have punished City or Chelsea right.

First they will get an absurd shirt sponsor with some shady dealings in the back with payouts through other canals, like city did with the stadium, then they wil lget a new insane stadium sponsor.
and if PL ever DARE to do anything about it, Prince Salman, will call Boris again and let him know that ALOT of trade will stop if he doies not have a"chat" with the PL. These lot are soooooo corrupt you do not even know, there is no stopping them

 

[makeveli]

Nothing to worry about he always start slow and ends up top scorer top assist , he has the talent just abit of patience is required

 

[spursfan77]

Simon Jordan: He's been out of sorts for about 6 months now

which puts us right around mid April, the Neville Interview. Correlation <> causation but it's a hell of a coincedence.

I think Neville is still in his ear and that’s the problem. There’s a reason he keeps on mentioning it when on commentary. He’s trying to get him to Man Utd next summer. It’s so obvious.

 

[FibreOpticJesus]

Any commodity is only worth as much as the market is willing to pay. Just who can afford to buy Kane in the current market, and what is he worth given players like Haaland at the top end of the market, Watkins in the middle and Ings somewhere below that, in value terms?

We have to assume that Kane wants to go somewhere that can afford to challenge for trophies, which in the UK means City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Man U, France only PSG, in Spain I think only Real Madrid maybe Athletico. Germany it’s just Bayern Munich.

How many of those clubs actually need a forward? Bayern probably as Lewandowski wants out. Would they be willing to pay 100m? They have a record of picking up players on frees (Lewandowski, Goretzka) they don’t often bid huge amounts but they could…

Why would any of those clubs bid 100m for Kane when they can have younger, fitter, hungrier players for the same or probably less? Haaland is available for 75m in 2022!

I’m sure we had reliable sources that Kane wanted to stay in uk and city was his only choice.

 

[spursfan77]

Its a new football trend. I think it stems from FIFA and modern fantasy football to be honest. All these players having "in form" cards and their value being determined on what they did in the last week has passed into normal football fandom.

It’s not really that bad on here compared to twitter but it’s still disappointing. I guess a lot of it is down to people still being pissed off with him over his behaviour in the summer rather than actual facts. If that’s the case though they should state they are still crying over it rather than making out he’s now shit and will only ever be shit in the future.

 

[yankspurs]

Not hindsight but is educated guesswork.

If we'd sold Kane for £125m most would think we'd got a really low fee for him.

The reality is that we don't know what City were offering. It appears they weren't making offers too high to refuse.

We only received 1 bid according to Ally. £75m+add ons. Either cash or a combination of players making up that valuation. There were rumors toward the end they'd go to €125m.

 

[yankspurs]

He's been in relatively bad form - that happens. The guys is absolutely top drawer and has a very resilient nature. It won't be long before we see him score in the league and get his form back.
I was upset and annoyed over the last 6-7 months with the circus that surrounded him and his. But for the time being he is our player and I strongly believe will find his form sooner rather than later.

Maybe it's form & maybe not. IMO, there's a few factors here. Firstly, he has zero interest in playing for Tottenham Hotspur. None whatsoever. He does not want to be here at all. His head isnt in it anymore. Secondly, there is something to be said about the amount of football he's played up to this point. Just way too much so it is entirely possible that this is the beginning of a downfall & he's on the tail end of his career now. And if he is, we only have ourselves to blame for never even attempting to sign decent cover & always rushing him back from injury.

 

[Goobers]

Maybe it's form & maybe not. IMO, there's a few factors here. Firstly, he has zero interest in playing for Tottenham Hotspur. None whatsoever. He does not want to be here at all. His head isnt in it anymore. Secondly, there is something to be said about the amount of football he's played up to this point. Just way too much so it is entirely possible that this is the beginning of a downfall & he's on the tail end of his career now. And if he is, we only have ourselves to blame for never even attempting to sign decent cover & always rushing him back from injury.

The point you make about the amount of football he has played so far is a great one - a huge amount and actually without that much of a break ! I totally agree.
The point about him not wanting to not be at Spurs anymore I can see although I am not sure I fully agree with but I do think the person that wants Harry Kane to be the top international, European and Premier league goal scorer and performer is Harry Kane. I think his won legacy is massively important to him and I don't think he will lie down whilst his form is at it is.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

With hindsight perhaps this is the case, but how long does Kane have to dispel this theory? If he bags a brace v Newcastle, kick starts his season and ends up with 20 league goals + again will you hold firm to this statement? Or are you from now guaranteeing that this won’t happen?

As others have pointed out, when Modric, Berbatov, Keane, Carrick, Bale and Walker wanted out, a mutually beneficial price was agreed and the deals happened. Surely this suggests that on this occasion its the buyer who weren’t willing to do what needed to be done, not the seller. Levy has form for being unable to shift players recently admittedly, but that’s been underperforming players on bigger contracts than they’d get elsewhere, not the league’s best player who’s attracting interest from a club that would double his salary happily.

Once again are don’t know this, it all how on how he’s performed come the end of the season. Signs currently aren’t good but it only takes one match to turn it around. And with 2 years left on his deal, his value is still there.

And even if you are right and at most Kane fetches £90m next summer, if the most City would have gone to this Sunday is the purported £125m including add one, is that potential circa £35m really worth more than a year of a striker off this quality?

And here I are, I would be delighted of Newcastle bid some stupid amount which took Kane up north and we could reinvest in several good players. I wanted him gone in the summer for the same reasons as you did, but equally, for all Enics mistakes this summer, I think this one is on the Sheikh.

Potentially it would have, but as I said further up, you have to weight up what the value of 1 more season of Kane could bring IF, and I accept it’s an if, he gets back to normal. Has to happen soon admittedly, but if it happens then Enic will have been right not to knock on City’s doors to do a deal.

Several thoughts:

1. Its not about whether Kane scores goals or provides assists - its about whether keeping Kane provided some tangible return - such as CL qualification. If we finish 8th and Kane bags 20 goals - was he worth keeping for the season? (The answer is: "No.")

2. Kane's value is limited due to several factors, most of which are out of the control of Kane and/or Spurs. Its not a function of how "good" Kane is, or how much Spurs want to keep (or sell) him. This is a particularly bad time to be a 28yo on the open market. The Spanish Giants are skint, ditto the Italian clubs, that leaves Bayern and PSG as viable foreign teams, and both have forwards they prefer to Kane. So, no foreign competition to drive up his value - if Kane even wanted to leave the PL. Then, when you consider the domestic market, realistically, you are looking at Man City, Man United, and Chelsea as viable suitors. Both Chelsea and Man United opted for different options: Lukaku and Sancho/Ronaldo. That leaves Man City - and they are not going to bid against themselves, and quite clearly did not value Kane at the same level as most in here (or Levy). But, lower demand = lower value. I am really surprised so many people don't understand this. There is not a long line of teams waiting to sign Kane for £100m+ - that is the harsh reality for Kane and Spurs to acknowledge.

3. Is £35m worth a year of Kane? This is the one viable argument that Kane supporters have. But, its a pretty black and white calculation - will Spurs generate £35m this year - due to having Kane? I think the answer is pretty likely no. I think to get that kind of value, Spurs would need to qualify for CL in 22-23. I don't think qualifying for Europa would get those returns. And, this is where I gave Levy a bit of leeway this summer - keeping Kane made sense, if Spurs were committed to making the top-4, but that required additional investment into the current squad (i.e. not players for the future). Given that Levy did not make that investment, it seems to be a long-shot for Spurs to finish in the top-4. And, that makes keeping Kane, a poor financial decision. (You could also argue that keeping Kane for an extra year would be worth it if it enticed other players to join - but that does not seem to have been the case.)

4. That leaves us with Newcastle as a potential suitor. I think they would overpay to get Kane, which would then get the ball rolling for other bigger name players to join. The real question will be whether Kane wants out so badly, that he takes a chance on Newcastle being able to put together a top team in a short-period of time. They could easily be 2-3 years away from being competitive for trophies - still, I could see Kane making the move.

 

[BringBack_leGin]

Levy). But, lower demand = lower value. I am really surprised so many people don't understand this

While I don’t overtly agree or disagree with the rest of your post, just see it as a thought out point of view which you’ve conducted well and which I has some resonance with me, I do want to pick up this point. Demand by itself doesn’t dictate value/ cost/ price. Supply and demand does. And while demand may have only been from City, supply was purely from Spurs. City wanted only Kane, no other forward, and we have the only Kane, we’ve have a monopoly over Harry Kane. If City had gone and bought another striker I’d say your point about the demand equating to value was more valid, but they didn’t, they only wanted him. He had a price which they didn’t meet.

 

[Bluto Blutarsky]

While I don’t overtly agree or disagree with the rest of your post, just see it as a thought out point of view which you’ve conducted well and which I has some resonance with me, I do want to pick up this point. Demand by itself doesn’t dictate value/ cost/ price. Supply and demand does. And while demand may have only been from City, supply was purely from Spurs. City wanted only Kane, no other forward, and we have the only Kane, we’ve have a monopoly over Harry Kane. If City had gone and bought another striker I’d say your point about the demand equating to value was more valid, but they didn’t, they only wanted him. He had a price which they didn’t meet.

Low supply does equal higher price - but only if the demand for the scarce asset exists.

In this case, nobody wanted Kane at the price Levy wanted - no matter how rare the asset.

I have never said that Levy could not set his own price. Nor have I ever said that Spurs were obligated to sell at City's price. But, Spurs making a demand simply does not set the market value of the player. Kane was never worth the £150m+ that people believed. He was not worth that for Spurs, nor was he worth that for City.

These are not easy calls to make - but this is what Levy is hired to do. Make tough business decisions. Given everything that had gone on, and considering the short and medium term market for Kane - Levy should have been more engaging with City to figure out exactly how high they would go. Or, conversely, Levy should have said, we are keeping Kane and will invest in the squad to make of for the depreciating asset. Levy really did not do either - and that was to the detriment of the club.

 

[wearetheparklane]

3. Is £35m worth a year of Kane? This is the one viable argument that Kane supporters have. But, its a pretty black and white calculation - will Spurs generate £35m this year - due to having Kane? I think the answer is pretty likely no. I think to get that kind of value, Spurs would need to qualify for CL in 22-23. I don't think qualifying for Europa would get those returns. And, this is where I gave Levy a bit of leeway this summer - keeping Kane made sense, if Spurs were committed to making the top-4, but that required additional investment into the current squad (i.e. not players for the future). Given that Levy did not make that investment, it seems to be a long-shot for Spurs to finish in the top-4. And, that makes keeping Kane, a poor financial decision. (You could also argue that keeping Kane for an extra year would be worth it if it enticed other players to join - but that does not seem to have been the case.)

Good post - and I understand you are looking at things from a purely financial standpoint however that isn't really how football works. Is that £35m 'loss' in keeping Harry Kane for this extra year worth it if he scores 10 goals in the FA cup, including a hat trick in the final against Arsenal? I think every one would agree it was. I think that is the gamble being taken and I think it is worth it against say, the value in getting the extra money and reinvesting.

 

[AnotherSpursFan]

Send him on loan to Leyton.

 

[Tucker]

 

[wooderz]

Apart from the first 15 mins when he was anonymous, thought he did alright today

 

[southlondonyiddo]

Apart from the first 15 mins when he was anonymous, thought he did alright today

Yep. Think he touched the ball once in the first 20mins…

 

[WannaDanceWithUdogie]

Put a shift in at least

 

[Montalbano]

Got the monkey off his back.

 

[nicdic]

Loved that goal today.

 

[easley91]

Watched MOTD2's analysis. I really didn't appreciate the run he made for his goal. He curved it, came back on and scored. I still don't get why he didn't think he was on when he was looking at Manquillo and didn't celebrate initially?