Kun's performance at Spurs that season was one of the finest I have ever seen from any Striker.Kane has never — will never — be as good as Agüero was for about six years. Spurs of all people know it to their cost. (Just think of his two games against them in the 13-14 season. They simply couldn't deal with him). In the last ten years there is only one player who has equalled (and possibly surpassed) Sergio for sheer deadliness, and that was Suarez. And he only did it for one season, in England. But. But Kane is the best available as of now. Assuming — and there are good grounds for doing so — that Haaland is not available.
I really want to see him in a blue shirt, but I'm inclined to agree with those who feel that anything north of 100m is severely subject to the law of diminishing returns. We won't get him for less, and that seems reasonable to me when you look at his figures over the past three seasons or so. Much more than that, and Levy is taking the piss. Out of us, and above all out of Kane, who clearly wants to leave, and appears to have a particular destination in east Manchester in mind.
Of course, these things are subjective, and it's just my evaluation of his worth. Please don't bother to tell me that it's not my money. I'm aware that my account will not be debited, funnily enough. I care very much about the way MCFC spend their money, as I care about every single aspect of the club, right down to the quality of the pies on the concourse. (Acceptable, but service is kind of slow…)
I can't wait to see what magical formations and flows Pep will create with Kane at number 9. We will be insanely powerful..
Im saying he is either good enough or he isn't as a counter argument to those saying they would be comfortable at £70m but not £100m.And?
Well that's one of the things that this forum is for is it not? For fans to discuss the value of players and their worth to the club amongst other things.
Its what fans have done and will continue to do as long as football exists.
Are you suggesting we all sit in silence and just wait for the club to make a signing and then nod approvingly?
This forum and the world would be a very dull place if we just did that.
He was utterly unplayable, magnificent, sadly did he get injured shortly after?
Mate no. I would not want him. Stop telling me what I think!If Kane wasn't from Spurs but was doing what he does at Bayern, for example, would you want him then? I do get the impression many Blues aren't excited about him because he's just a player in the PL who we all see week in, week out. Almost feel like is isn't a coup. If he was at Bayern the last 5 years and had this record, I think many would see it as a coup and be more upbeat about it.
No doubt Kane will play at left back and Grealish as sweeper in the CL final.
Funny it's not when other clubs sign someone, it has to work both ways.Im saying he is either good enough or he isn't as a counter argument to those saying they would be comfortable at £70m but not £100m.
No matter the cost, he is still the same player so, cost is irrelevant.
I haven't knocked any other clubs signings. It just comes over on here that if Kane costs north of £100M, he won't be as good if he cost say, £70M.Funny it's not when other clubs sign someone, it has to work both ways.
Kane over 100m is expensive in this market, Grealish at 80m plus is crazy
And that was a fair comment.I haven't knocked any other clubs signings. It just comes over on here that if Kane costs north of £100M, he won't be as good if he cost say, £70M.
You have just highlighted why I commented. Grealish would be good value for X but not Y. Do his performance levels drop as the cost gets higher?And that was a fair comment.
Grealish at 50-60m would be good value at 80 plus in my humble it's crazy money.
We are potentially moving on Jesus for 50m, a proven Prem and International player and younger.
Leeds have just signed Harrison for 11m, not saying he is as good as Grealish but is Jack worth 8 times as much?
He got injured in that game. HamstringKun's performance at Spurs that season was one of the finest I have ever seen from any Striker.
He was utterly unplayable, magnificent, sadly did he get injured shortly after?
Kane is a great goal scorer but he simply never will excite like Kun.
Unfortunately there is no one like Kun out there, and Kane seems the best and probably only option.
What have bean counters and the value put on a footballer got to do with anything?You have just highlighted why I commented. Grealish would be good value for X but not Y. Do his performance levels drop as the cost gets higher?
I guess you and a few others are obsessed with cost, where I am concerned with, will they improve us.
Far more informed and qualified bean counters worry about the cost and we will pay what the club is reasonable.
I haven't knocked any other clubs signings. It just comes over on here that if Kane costs north of £100M, he won't be as good if he cost say, £70M.
We obviously look at things quite differently so will never agree on this matter.What have bean counters and the value put on a footballer got to do with anything?
And you forget a vital part of any transfer , WAGES.
Grealish at 80m plus and big wages on top , make it a huge deal.
The rags have just about to sign a class CB for 40m but what are his wages? Huge I would say, so what looks like a bargain transfer deal, is not in reality because of his huge contract.
It's relevant to the club I'm unsure why it should be relevant to me or any supporter.Nobody claimed that though, and you know it fine well. You are playing twist the arguement, but really, cost IS very relevant to whether he is a worthwhile addition. Both as a concept, and in reality.
Im sorry, that is not what I am reading.Nobody claimed that though, and you know it fine well. You are playing twist the arguement, but really, cost IS very relevant to whether he is a worthwhile addition. Both as a concept, and in reality.
He's 27 until he is 28, mate. That's how it works ;)Valid take on it in all fairness.
But Kun would still be Kun (and thus worth it in the hypothetical) , and Kane would still be Kane. The whole point he was making was it is the player not the stats he was looking at.
Also, he's 28 tomorrow is he not.
To the club, yesNobody claimed that though, and you know it fine well. You are playing twist the arguement, but really, cost IS very relevant to whether he is a worthwhile addition. Both as a concept, and in reality.
If 60 mill is good value how can 80 mill be crazy? We want him so we’re not going to get him at good value, 80 feels about right to me.And that was a fair comment.
Grealish at 50-60m would be good value at 80 plus in my humble it's crazy money.
We are potentially moving on Jesus for 50m, a proven Prem and International player and younger.
Leeds have just signed Harrison for 11m, not saying he is as good as Grealish but is Jack worth 8 times as much?
Yeah, around that time he was at his absolute peak. Unfortunately that season the injuries started to pile up and that explosive burst of pace started to leave him that long ago. Was still brilliant after many times but not the explosive unplayable Kun very often after that.He got injured in that game. Hamstring