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
If we're talking strikers of quality who are not dependent (which essentially means they beat players for fun) there's not many out there and if there is they're at elite clubs.

Kane is as good as it gets for us. Which is fine as he's amazing and a living legend.

He's not so limited that we should think of ourselves as better off with only more mobile players. Unless we're playing some serious old school Barca tiki taka which is unlikely to happen anytime soon. He can act as a target man, goal poacher and playmaker. On days he's clearly fit he can even run the channels. The only limitation is pace and dribbling.

Switching Kane for someone less good at what he is good at but better at dribbling and faster won't improve us either imo. It will be like watching Vardy for England.
 
Harry Kane has his faults, one of them is returning long before he should and therefore looking sluggish. He is by far the best we can do, certainly a top 10 striker in the world and one of the best passers in the English game. Best of all - he is Spurs.

Even with Lewandowski, Haaland and Mbappe at the club I'd rather look at how to use him with those players.

He is a club legend and we should keep him as long as possible. He may want to leave at a certain point, selling him should be no option under any circumstances.
 
todd1882 said:
Back at ya!


Fair and not in dispute by me. My point is not about the quality he brings but the bigger picture. I won't rehash that but to say a dependent player can be replaced and to suggest that we won't necessarily suffer too much in the grand scheme if we do it right (there is another argument to be had about our front office's ability to do it right but that is another matter that doesn't detract from the merits- IMO - of this point). We are absolute shit with him presently so moving him on and reinvesting the money throughout the squad would seem a reasonable perspective. I think folks are just scared.


My charge was more innocuous than that. We are all Spurs' supporters and Harry scores our goals. Hard to be objective in that situation.


Yeah, I see it differently but that's ok. I CBA to check the stats and you couldn't care less about them but it would be interesting to see the disparity between actual and xG for his career. Probably still be hard to convince folks of it as it has also been to show that his goal tallies is a product of chances. He doesn't get those chances anymore and hasn't done for some time.
Click to expand...
Some very fair points.

I just think there's only so much a player (or two really, including Son) can carry an under performing team).

He's probably missing chances because he's shocked to even get them. He certainly can create his own chances, but he's too busy playing out of position.
 
Trotter said:
Using the term "front office" and purely stats, and viewing and using them to skew a discussion in one specific way based on a conclusion you started with, to me shows you have no feel or understanding of team sports, outside the world of stats based American sports
Click to expand...
Well done buddy. You win the jingoist bingo today. Nice job. But I don't even recognize your name. Thing is, I usually recognize folks on here that have said something of value in the football discussions.

And congrats! You've deciphered that I'm American. Such perspicacity from you considering how much I try and hide that fact considering how shameful a thing it is. Ain't that right?

Why don't you show us how much football I don't know then by displaying your footballing knowledge instead of your detective skills?
 
Team Tanguy said:
If we're talking strikers of quality who are not dependent (which essentially means they beat players for fun) there's not many out there and if there is they're at elite clubs.
Click to expand...
Yes, the very point I've always made only to be met with "but but but he scores out of nothing" and other unsubstantiated claims. All of which are silly because no one is denying the value in what he actually does.

Team Tanguy said:
Kane is as good as it gets for us. Which is fine as he's amazing and a living legend.
Click to expand...
This is where I have my quibble but if you are viewing it as "striker = goals" then sure. But I don't view football that way and neither do many of the top managers (sorry to appeal to authority here but I'm trying to head the next member of the peanut gallery off at the pass before they chime in with some stupid personal attack instead of arguing the points - that's not meant at you obvs).

Team Tanguy said:
He's not so limited that we should think of ourselves as better off with only more mobile players. Unless we're playing some serious old school Barca tiki taka which is unlikely to happen anytime soon. He can act as a target man, goal poacher and playmaker. On days he's clearly fit he can even run the channels. The only limitation is pace and dribbling.
Click to expand...
Good points but his 'target man' role could use work and his days of running channels and pressing are pretty over.

Team Tanguy said:
Switching Kane for someone less good at what he is good at but better at dribbling and faster won't improve us either imo. It will be like watching Vardy for England.
Click to expand...
Sure, but that's not the proposition is it? That's more red herring than anything anyone has suggested. And I've seen how 'loyal' folks are round these parts. If DL had Haaland ready to sign then 90% of the purists on this board would be wanking themselves silly and saying Harry who?
 
todd1882 said:
Yes, the very point I've always made only to be met with "but but but he scores out of nothing" and other unsubstantiated claims. All of which are silly because no one is denying the value in what he actually does.


This is where I have my quibble but if you are viewing it as "striker = goals" then sure. But I don't view football that way and neither do many of the top managers (sorry to appeal to authority here but I'm trying to head the next member of the peanut gallery off at the pass before they chime in with some stupid personal attack instead of arguing the points - that's not meant at you obvs).


Good points but his 'target man' role could use work and his days of running channels and pressing are pretty over.


Sure, but that's not the proposition is it? That's more red herring than anything anyone has suggested. And I've seen how 'loyal' folks are round these parts. If DL had Haaland ready to sign then 90% of the purists on this board would be wanking themselves silly and saying Harry who?
Click to expand...

I think people may say that because he sometimes can create goals out of nothing. Shots from difficult angles and distances, clever skilled headers that turn shit crosses into goals etc. I'd agree it's not frequently enough to put him in that category of strikers who constantly create something out of nothing with flair/dribbling/speed.

He's not a perfect target man but it's more than good enough particularly alongside his other attributes. Most strikers who are superior as target men will be even more reliant on service (crossing and linking up) and offer much less in other areas.

I don't think that was a red herring. My point is that a player with the profile you seek would have the same result as Vardy for England simply because we won't have space. Unless of course it's an elite player with that profile but there's not many of them in the world. Kane as he is is better than a poor man's Suarez/Aguero etc.

Even formations with 3 interchanging speedy forwards rely on high levels of quality (I presume that's what you're alluding to re: top managers).
Sane/Aguero/Sterling
Neymar/Suarez/Messi
Mane/Firmino/Salah

Not to mention when Pep was at Bayern he kept Lewandowski and used him. If having faster players who can create for themselves was the priority that wouldn't have happened and I'm sure there's other instances of progressive ball playing teams playing with strikers who have a similar profile to Kane.
 
Team Tanguy said:
I think people may say that because he sometimes can create goals out of nothing. Shots from difficult angles and distances, clever skilled headers that turn shit crosses into goals etc. I'd agree it's not frequently enough to put him in that category of strikers who constantly create something out of nothing with flair/dribbling/speed.
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree.
Team Tanguy said:
He's not a perfect target man but it's more than good enough particularly alongside his other attributes. Most strikers who are superior as target men will be even more reliant on service (crossing and linking up) and offer much less in other areas.
Click to expand...
Sure, but your analysis is still falling down based on the conventional wisdom of "striker = goals". What happens if you set your team up with a striker that works harder and has more quality in all the other areas of the job and scoring is secondary or incidental for that player?

You've already stated that the fabled type of striker is rare, only exists at the very top, and that Harry is not that type of striker. I agree wholeheartedly on all of those points. But your critique of 'target men' is rooted in the old English #9 archetype. That is not the type of player to which I am referring. I'm talking about an actual footballer with the ability to do the other technical aspects of the position ie those skills that can be trained and honed.

Team Tanguy said:
I don't think that was a red herring. My point is that a player with the profile you seek would have the same result as Vardy for England simply because we won't have space. Unless of course it's an elite player with that profile but there's not many of them in the world. Kane as he is is better than a poor man's Suarez/Aguero etc.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you misunderstood the qualities that I prefer in that player. In no way am I talking about a Vardy type player or a poor man's Suarez/Aguero. And the last two were made to work for the team later in their careers when paired with more dynamic players...like Kane was made to do by Mou and everyone was so blown away by such a simple idea and tactical wrinkle yet they argue with me about the same point I've been making for years and am making right now.

Team Tanguy said:
Even formations with 3 interchanging speedy forwards rely on high levels of quality (I presume that's what you're alluding to re: top managers).
Sane/Aguero/Sterling
Neymar/Suarez/Messi
Mane/Firmino/Salah
Click to expand...
Sure, it may require a certain level of quality but those players are easier to find than the goals scoring striker that you have already acknowledged to be very rare indeed. What they also are is more dangerous than any lumbering striker so why continue to attack with one?

Team Tanguy said:
Not to mention when Pep was at Bayern he kept Lewandowski and used him. If having faster players who can create for themselves was the priority that wouldn't have happened and I'm sure there's other instances of progressive ball playing teams playing with strikers who have a similar profile to Kane.
Click to expand...
Lewandowski is levels above Harry in terms of athleticism. Perhaps you didn't notice him in his BVB days but he could run and would still outpace Harry in his advanced years now. Lewa is one hell of an athlete and team player.

And sure, there might be a few teams playing with a more traditional striker but does that mean we have to if it is to our advantage to seek a different direction? If we keep doing what we've done we will keep getting what we've always gotten. Just like FBs flying, GKs sweeping, and #10s going the way of the dodo, the thinking has to evolve in order for the play to evolve. Strikers can be something other than big-headed goal scorers. And my contention is that it will confer an advantage to the coach and team that chooses to implement it sooner rather than later. Or we can just stay focused on the shiny objects.
 
There are 8 teams below us.
Kane’s goals v top 8 this season = 4

2 v Utd when they were 16th
2 v West Ham when they were 8th

10 games and not a single goal against a team that was currently in the top 6 at the time of playing them
 
Last edited:
Harry Kane is a superb player. Everyone thought the guy was gonna be a one season wonder but he has well and truly smashed that out the window.

He has been a consistent 20 goal a season striker for the last how many years. We will do well to see another striker like this for our club.

Also, his reputation is brilliant, he has great respect. Keeps himself out of the news for doing silly things. England captain.

World class.
 
Top_Spur said:
Harry Kane is a superb player. Everyone thought the guy was gonna be a one season wonder but he has well and truly smashed that out the window.

He has been a consistent 20 goal a season striker for the last how many years. We will do well to see another striker like this for our club.

Also, his reputation is brilliant, he has great respect. Keeps himself out of the news for doing silly things. England captain.

World class.
Click to expand...
Who said he isn’t a good guy?

What, if he was cheating on his missus or racing sports cars we would be allowed to criticise his form?
 
sammyspurs said:
Assists against top 8 = 3

1v Utd when they were 16th
1 v City when they were 11th
1 v West Ham when they were 8th

So not a single top 6 assist at the time of playing them
Click to expand...
He was never known for being an assist man though. Maybe a couple assists a year on average.

He had a string of games at the beginning of the season where he racked up a lot of assists because we exploited a tactical loophole and because of his teammates' clinical finishing.

He's had 1 assist or something like that over the last dozen matches or so which is more normal for Kane.

Not sure if we should start hailing Kane as the next KDB.
 
todd1882 said:
Sure, but your analysis is still falling down based on the conventional wisdom of "striker = goals". What happens if you set your team up with a striker that works harder and has more quality in all the other areas of the job and scoring is secondary or incidental for that player?

You've already stated that the fabled type of striker is rare, only exists at the very top, and that Harry is not that type of striker. I agree wholeheartedly on all of those points. But your critique of 'target men' is rooted in the old English #9 archetype. That is not the type of player to which I am referring. I'm talking about an actual footballer with the ability to do the other technical aspects of the position ie those skills that can be trained and honed.


Perhaps you misunderstood the qualities that I prefer in that player. In no way am I talking about a Vardy type player or a poor man's Suarez/Aguero. And the last two were made to work for the team later in their careers when paired with more dynamic players...like Kane was made to do by Mou and everyone was so blown away by such a simple idea and tactical wrinkle yet they argue with me about the same point I've been making for years and am making right now.


Sure, it may require a certain level of quality but those players are easier to find than the goals scoring striker that you have already acknowledged to be very rare indeed. What they also are is more dangerous than any lumbering striker so why continue to attack with one?


Lewandowski is levels above Harry in terms of athleticism. Perhaps you didn't notice him in his BVB days but he could run and would still outpace Harry in his advanced years now. Lewa is one hell of an athlete and team player.

And sure, there might be a few teams playing with a more traditional striker but does that mean we have to if it is to our advantage to seek a different direction? If we keep doing what we've done we will keep getting what we've always gotten. Just like FBs flying, GKs sweeping, and #10s going the way of the dodo, the thinking has to evolve in order for the play to evolve. Strikers can be something other than big-headed goal scorers. And my contention is that it will confer an advantage to the coach and team that chooses to implement it sooner rather than later. Or we can just stay focused on the shiny objects.
Click to expand...

Fair points. I think we essentially disagree on whether Kane's profile is optimal for a more progressive approach.

We could certainly improve in many areas with a different type of player (press better, faster attacks/movement etc) but we'd also lose a lot (playmaking, finishing, physicality). I don't believe Kane is anywhere near enough limited in his weak areas for them to not be made up for by his positives. Or made up for by surrounding him with players that complement him.

A lot would also be dependent on recruitment, if you sell Kane you need a quality replacement for striker and RWF (assuming we keep Son) to make up for the goals. That's 2 "hits" that must hit the ground running.

Although football can and will evolve I don't think we will see the end of Kane types just because of the nature of the game/sport.
 
sammyspurs said:
There are 8 teams below us.
Kane’s goals v top 8 this season = 4

2 v Utd when they were 16th
2 v West Ham when they were 8th

10 games and not a single goal against a team that was currently in the top 6 at the time of playing them
Click to expand...
Sammy- is it possible that this is not Kane's fault, and that our team is just really effing bad as a sum of it's parts right now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom