Harry Kane

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Raiders said:
lol you were talking about us being only slightly better with Kane. What has it got to do with Son?
Click to expand...
Because when we have obviously struggled when BOTH of them are out so it skews the data. If we have Son starting while Kane's out, we've played well if not better.

Since the 18-19 season w/o Kane but w/ Son in the line-up

EPL
9 Wins
5 Losses
2 Draw

Champions League
Dortmund (1 leg) - Win/Advance
Man City (2 legs) - Win/Advance
Ajax (1 leg) - Win/Advance

Europa League
Lask (1 leg) - Win

FA Cup
Middlesbrough - Win/Advance
Southampton - Win/Advance
 
Joshking5 said:
Can’t think of a single good reason for him to stay past this summer. The only thing that may cause him to stay is the fact that not many big clubs will be willing to pay what levy would ask for at the moment, he may need to ride his contract down a bit.

Although if somebody (city?) does make that bid this summer he is gone and who can blame him.
Click to expand...
I think Chelsea, City and Liverpool will all be interested, possibly Utd too.
 
NDomBadBoy said:
Because when we have obviously struggled when BOTH of them are out so it skews the data. If we have Son starting while Kane's out, we've played well if not better.

Since the 18-19 season w/o Kane but w/ Son in the line-up

EPL
9 Wins
5 Losses
2 Draw

Champions League
Dortmund (1 leg) - Win/Advance
Man City (2 legs) - Win/Advance
Ajax (1 leg) - Win/Advance

Europa League
Lask (1 leg) - Win

FA Cup
Middlesbrough - Win/Advance
Southampton - Win/Advance
Click to expand...
I don't understand the shifting of the goalposts. It doesn't skew anything. Things happen with Kane playing and things happen when he isn't playing. It isn't complicated. That is what you were asserting. Skewing the data would be removing 60% of the data because you don't like the results.

So when you said: "we" are only slightly better with Kane playing, you meant "we" are only slightly better with Kane playing compared to when Kane isn't playing and Son is playing?

As you know, the win percentage from the data you presented is 56.25%, so I guess we are only marginally better with Kane playing compared to when he isn't and Son is. :mourweird:
 
Raiders said:
I don't understand the shifting of the goalposts. It doesn't skew anything. Things happen with Kane playing and things happen when he isn't playing. It isn't complicated. That is what you were asserting. Skewing the data would be removing 60% of the data because you don't like the results.

So when you said: "we" are only slightly better with Kane playing, you meant "we" are only slightly better with Kane playing compared to when Kane isn't playing and Son is playing?

As you know, the win percentage from the data you presented is 56.25%, so I guess we are only marginally better with Kane playing compared to when he isn't and Son is. :mourweird:
Click to expand...
I'll clarify and summarize:

-When both Kane and Son are out of the line-up, we fall off a cliff
-When we have Son in the line-up, our results have shown that we are marginally better without Kane

Conclusion: Our results only fall off a cliff when BOTH Kane and Son are out.
 
NDomBadBoy said:
I'll clarify and summarize:

-When both Kane and Son are out of the line-up, we fall off a cliff
-When we have Son in the line-up, our results have shown that we are marginally better without Kane

Conclusion: Our results only fall off a cliff when BOTH Kane and Son are out.
Click to expand...
From the league data you presented it shows we are marginally better in the league with Kane, but it doesn't matter.
 
Raiders said:
From the league data you presented it shows we are marginally better in the league with Kane, but it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
Instead of taking 250 games over seven years with thousands of variables, isn’t it more telling to use Kane’s lengthy absences through injury over the last three seasons and get an idea of how well we have done without him?

That way your percentages won’t include games like Preston where he came on with ten minutes left at 5-0 up, as another game we were “better” because Kane played

:harrysmile:
 
sammyspurs said:
Instead of taking 250 games over seven years with thousands of variables, isn’t it more telling to use Kane’s lengthy absences through injury over the last three seasons and get an idea of how well we have done without him?

That way your percentages won’t include games like Preston where he came on with ten minutes left at 5-0 up, as another game we were “better” because Kane played

:harrysmile:
Click to expand...
As was made clear several times, it only includes league games... :harrysmile:

Edit: And if you want the analysis, do it; but over the last three years we have been worse in the league with Kane out (I am sure of that). I am sure because the data with him used to go the other way: it showed a slightly higher win percentage with him out. Around 3 years ago it started to go the other way dramatically. Suggesting we were becoming more reliant on him.

I doubt anyone disagrees with the idea we are terrible without Kane AND Son. If both of them are out, we have no hope.
 
Last edited:
sammyspurs said:
Oh are you having a laugh?

If Kane and Son miss 10 games at the same time and we lose them all, you’ll simply chalk that up as “we lost all 10 without Kane”?
Click to expand...
Not me, that is what he said: "Our result have been marginally different" and "we are marginally better without Kane". I showed he was wrong, he changes it to without Kane but with Son. Not on me.
 
Last edited:
NDomBadBoy said:
For the 10th time, take a look at our record playing without Kane over the past several seasons. Our performance/results has been marginally different without Kane.

As far as playing without Kane this season... yes we did struggle playing without Kane against Chelsea and Brighton but our attack looked even more useless against Man City. Our two goals against West Brom was to be expected with or without Kane.

As a most recent example, look at our performance against Everton in the first half when Kane wasn't playing. Most would agree that our attack looked the best it has been in a longg time. We looked free flowing, exciting and unpredictable during those 45 minutes.
Click to expand...


yep and we also conceded 3 goals in 1 half. Not sure you can shove Everton as some sort of positive because Kane wasn’t playing in the 1st half. He comes on and guess who scored immediately to turn the game around ? Harry Kane. It seems like you and Sammy are literally the only people that are hugely critical of one of our best players of all time in the premier league era. I’m not saying you can’t criticise him if he’s having a bad game, but don’t give me this bullshit of “ohhhh we play so much more attacking without Harry “ .... errrr no we don’t. We miss Harry Kane whenever he’s not on the pitch. Take Harry Kane out the team for 3 months and guarantee you won’t be telling me how great we are without him. Load of horse shit.
 
Last edited:
Raiders said:
Not me, that is what he said: "Our result have been marginally different" and "we are marginally better without Kane". I showed he was wrong, he changes it to without Kane but with Son. Not on me.
Click to expand...
But he’s not wrong because you don’t know if some of those games were due to losing both Son and Kane at the same time.

You can play semantics as much as you like but if Kane and Son are missing is chalked up as only losing Kane, you’re being dishonest.

Without Kane on the pitch it’s unequivocal
 
sammyspurs said:
But he’s not wrong because you don’t know if some of those games were due to losing both Son and Kane at the same time.

You can play semantics as much as you like but if Kane and Son are missing is chalked up as only losing Kane, you’re being dishonest.

Without Kane on the pitch it’s unequivocal
Click to expand...
Sammy, I am not getting into an argument with you. If you want to do a sophisticated analysis of all the players who were out at different points when Kane was out and what effect it had, be my guest. Seriously, do it and send me the xlm, it would be interesting.

I am doing the opposite of playing semantics, I simply compared the data (which doesn't include this year btw) of him playing and him not playing. You clearly think that is pointless and whatever result it shows is wrong. What must be done is excluding and including the "right" games. Again, if you want to do that sort of sophisticated analysis, do it. You may need to use SQL, so I hope you are proficient with it.
 
Zomby DDS said:
I think Chelsea, City and Liverpool will all be interested, possibly Utd too.
Click to expand...
Not at the price levy will quote. We don’t deal with Chelsea, Liverpool don’t buy expensive ageing players, City are the only ones but they are heavily linked with a younger cheaper option (the monster at Dortmund I forget his name, he has a release clause) who would make more sense longevity wise.

City are the only ones that worry me, but they wouldn’t even pay what Napoli wanted for koulibali, for levy to let Harry move with in the premier league we are talking 160million+, and even more with add-one, I honestly believe that.
 
Raiders said:
Sammy, I am not getting into an argument with you. If you want to do a sophisticated analysis of all the players who were out at different points when Kane was out and what effect it had, be my guest. Seriously, do it and send me the xlm, it would be interesting.
Click to expand...
I don’t need to because I’m talking specifically about how our squad does when Kane is not playing.
There isn’t any other variable I need to consider other than Kane being out
 
Last edited:
Joshking5 said:
Not at the price levy will quote. We don’t deal with Chelsea, Liverpool don’t buy expensive ageing players, City are the only ones but they are heavily linked with a younger cheaper option (the monster at Dortmund I forget his name, he has a release clause) who would make more sense longevity wise.

City are the only ones that worry me, but they wouldn’t even pay what Napoli wanted for koulibali, for levy to let Harry move with in the premier league we are talking 160million+, and even more with add-one, I honestly believe that.
Click to expand...
I think Utd, City and Chelsea all pay that.
 
sammyspurs said:
But he’s not wrong because you don’t know if some of those games were due to losing both Son and Kane at the same time.

You can play semantics as much as you like but if Kane and Son are missing is chalked up as only losing Kane, you’re being dishonest.

Without Kane on the pitch it’s unequivocal
Click to expand...
There were longish spells when both were out, Harry do to usual injuries and Son because of his red cards and his arm injury. Games without Son and Kane made up almost 7-8 games if I’m not mistaken. According to, Raiders Raiders data, Spurs have played 32 games without Harry so 8 games is a pretty significant number. From what I can remember, of those 8 games, we didn’t win a single game without Kane and Son.

The 25 or so games we did have Son but not Kane we have played very well if not marginally better based on points/results.

I’ll dig up the stats later.
 
The data is night and day. Since the 18-19 season, it's clear that when Kane has been out injured, Spurs have:
  • Performed in-line, if not marginally better if Son is playing while Kane is out
  • Played significantly worse when BOTH Kane and Son are out - in 7 matches, we have won 0 matches when BOTH are out

Since the 18-19 season w/o Kane but w/ Son in the line-up

PL
9 Wins
2 Draws
5 Losses

Champions League
Dortmund (1 leg) - Win/Advance
Man City (x2 legs) - Win/Advance
Ajax (1 leg) - Win/Advance

Europa League
Lask (1 leg) - Win

FA Cup
Middlesbrough - Win/Advance
Southampton - Win/Advance

Since the 18-19 season w/ BOTH KANE & SON OUT

PL
0 Wins
2 Draws
2 Losses

Champions League
RB Leipzig (x2 legs) - Eliminated 4-0 on aggregate

FA Cup
Norwich - Loss/Eliminated
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom