Yes I've always thought this was the case. Now I'm not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing against every team. Against team's that sit back and park the bus, then obviously we need a player like Kane to score goals. But against teams that are attack minded like a Man City, I've always thought that Kane slowed the attack down. In many situations, it seemed like our runners would intentionally wait for Kane to catch up and/or Kane's mere presence would clog the middle of the pitch creating less space for our runners.
It's a controversial point of view but when you actually look at our record without Kane over the past 3 seasons, we looked fine without him so long as we had another goal scorer like Son playing.