Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community

Come on you Spurs!


JimCT
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 8/22/2021 at 11:55 AM, JimCT said:

Spurs: 2 games, 2 goals, 2 clean sheets, 2 wins. #NotSpursy

And yet if the season ended today, still playing in the Europa League :P (mattering if West Ham can hold on to it's 1-0 lead to a 10 man Leicester. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Jimmy James said:

And yet if the season ended today, still playing in the Europa League :P (mattering if West Ham can hold on to it's 1-0 lead to a 10 man Leicester. 

While mid-table Citeh would not have to make any European travel reservations at all :D :D :D 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JimCT said:

While mid-table Citeh would not have to make any European travel reservations at all :D :D :D 

Like I said somewhere, after 8 matches last year City was in 14th place. I'm not going to bring up what happened after that. :P

Major factor this year is all the full stadiums, like what we seen in the first match v Spurs. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Jimmy James said:

Spurs just got a lot more dangerous! 

They are better without the slack-jawed waste of space.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, JimCT said:

 

Would they be the same spurs fans who were chanting "are you watching Harry Kane?" the week before when he didn't play?

I guess "I'll be staying this summer" translates as I want to go but Levy won't let me even though City have offered him a stupid amount of money so I'll just have to stay here & waste another season of my career not winning anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, High As Hope said:

Would they be the same spurs fans who were chanting "are you watching Harry Kane?" the week before when he didn't play?

I guess "I'll be staying this summer" translates as I want to go but Levy won't let me even though City have offered him a stupid amount of money so I'll just have to stay here & waste another season of my career not winning anything.

The fundamental problem with your assertion is that we do not actually know what Citeh have offered. Was it £100mm? Was it £75mm + add-ons that get to £100mm? Did they ever raise it past that? All of this is speculation. No one has ever reliably reported a number north of that.

If Grealish was worth £100mm, for a player not even nailed on to start, then Kane, the England Captain and acknowledged by most to be one of the best strikers in the world, was worth more, and certainly the rumored £150mm valuation Levy allegedly holds seems reasonable. I said earlier that if the offer was actually £125-130 plus Bernardo (that one article suggested) then Levy should absolutely take it - but there is no actual evidence that an offer that big was actually on the table. 

If Levy indeed put a £150mm valuation on him, then all Citeh had to do was meet it, and early enough in the window for Spurs to use the proceeds to refresh the team. That seems pretty straightforward. No transfer like that could get done at this point, IMO, as Spurs would not have time to replace him.

Charlie Kane seems to have floated the story that Spurs hung Harry out to dry. Actually, Citeh did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, JimCT said:

The fundamental problem with your assertion is that we do not actually know what Citeh have offered. Was it £100mm? Was it £75mm + add-ons that get to £100mm? Did they ever raise it past that? All of this is speculation. No one has ever reliably reported a number north of that.

If Grealish was worth £100mm, for a player not even nailed on to start, then Kane, the England Captain and acknowledged by most to be one of the best strikers in the world, was worth more, and certainly the rumored £150mm valuation Levy allegedly holds seems reasonable. I said earlier that if the offer was actually £125-130 plus Bernardo (that one article suggested) then Levy should absolutely take it - but there is no actual evidence that an offer that big was actually on the table. 

If Levy indeed put a £150mm valuation on him, then all Citeh had to do was meet it, and early enough in the window for Spurs to use the proceeds to refresh the team. That seems pretty straightforward. No transfer like that could get done at this point, IMO, as Spurs would not have time to replace him.

Charlie Kane seems to have floated the story that Spurs hung Harry out to dry. Actually, Citeh did.

Hmmm... I really don't think City has any obligation to bail Kane out of a dumb contract nor do they have any obligation to send a boat load of cash to a league rival.  So no, City didn't hang Sir Harry out to dry.  

I've been pretty clear that, IMO, 150M for an aging, injury prone striker who hasn't won anything was too much.  And so I'm pleased MC didn't meet the price.  What MC's interest did do was 1) "freeze" the market for Kane when Daniel Levy slapped that price tag on him so he didn't end up at a team like Leicester City, 2) it left Levy sitting on a rapidly depreciating asset, 3) probably made Kane a bit sour (imagine Levy reneging on a gentleman's agreement! I'm shocked I tell you!!") and 4) perhaps stirred up a bit of discontent in Spur's locker room.  

From my perspective this hasn't been a bad bit of business. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Patched Tube said:

Hmmm... I really don't think City has any obligation to bail Kane out of a dumb contract nor do they have any obligation to send a boat load of cash to a league rival.  So no, City didn't hang Sir Harry out to dry.  

I've been pretty clear that, IMO, 150M for an aging, injury prone striker who hasn't won anything was too much.  And so I'm pleased MC didn't meet the price.  What MC's interest did do was 1) "freeze" the market for Kane when Daniel Levy slapped that price tag on him so he didn't end up at a team like Leicester City, 2) it left Levy sitting on a rapidly depreciating asset, 3) probably made Kane a bit sour (imagine Levy reneging on a gentleman's agreement! I'm shocked I tell you!!") and 4) perhaps stirred up a bit of discontent in Spur's locker room.  

From my perspective this hasn't been a bad bit of business. 

 

Correct, Citeh is only responsible for its own interest. Apparently they misled Kane. That he believed them is on him. 

He was never going anywhere but Citeh, or United, or maybe Madrid. His only reason was silverware, and Spurs fans would have forgiven that based on what I read. But the price was never right. Your assessment of his value is your own, but much of the world disagrees with you. That’s what makes markets. I’m sure Citeh would have been thrilled to get him at the price below, but that was never happening.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, JimCT said:

Correct, Citeh is only responsible for its own interest. Apparently they misled Kane. That he believed them is on him. 

He was never going anywhere but Citeh, or United, or maybe Madrid. His only reason was silverware, and Spurs fans would have forgiven that based on what I read. But the price was never right. Your assessment of his value is your own, but much of the world disagrees with you. That’s what makes markets. I’m sure Citeh would have been thrilled to get him at the price below, but that was never happening.

 

I've seen a lot of takes that suggest that if MC would pay 100M for Grealish then 150M for Kane was reasonable.  Which seems understandable at first glance but... given that both players have an "expected career length" and Grealish is apx. two years younger I wonder how that fits into the equation?  I genuinely don't know; I expect some labor economist has analyzed career length and valuation.  The first challenge being what would be expected for any given player and the second is assigning a annual value to any given player.  

I'd actually be tempted to wade through a paper on the subject.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Patched Tube said:

I've seen a lot of takes that suggest that if MC would pay 100M for Grealish then 150M for Kane was reasonable.  Which seems understandable at first glance but... given that both players have an "expected career length" and Grealish is apx. two years younger I wonder how that fits into the equation?  I genuinely don't know; I expect some labor economist has analyzed career length and valuation.  The first challenge being what would be expected for any given player and the second is assigning a annual value to any given player.  

I'd actually be tempted to wade through a paper on the subject.  

But you only have them for the length of the contract. As for Kane's age, other top-flight strikers have shown he could easily have many top years in front of him (Messi, Ronaldo, Levendowski). Lukaku is a few months younger - how much more is Kane worth than him? He's been consistent for many years DESPITE his injuries. He trains well, takes care of himself, and has every solid positive personal characteristic you might want. His teammates, both Spurs and England, think the world of him as a player and as a teammate. I think their judgment, from close-in and over time, carries far more weight than the keyboard commandos that like to pop up and disparage him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, JimCT said:

But you only have them for the length of the contract. As for Kane's age, other top-flight strikers have shown he could easily have many top years in front of him (Messi, Ronaldo, Levendowski). Lukaku is a few months younger - how much more is Kane worth than him? He's been consistent for many years DESPITE his injuries. He trains well, takes care of himself, and has every solid positive personal characteristic you might want. His teammates, both Spurs and England, think the world of him as a player and as a teammate. I think their judgment, from close-in and over time, carries far more weight than the keyboard commandos that like to pop up and disparage him.

As you say Kane passes the All Blacks "no dickheads rule" which is yet another "intangible".  But I wasn't speaking of Kane in particular here - I was puzzling a bit over how one values any particular player through the prism of age.  I mean everybody talks generally about a "young" player vs an "older player".  With respect to Kane, on the one hand he is a bit injury prone but OTOH (as you say) he does seem to take care of himself.  Now you could do some sort of crude analysis based on "talent quotient" (talented players have longer careers obviously) vs "injury history" and toss in a coefficient for age but no way is it that simple.  If nothing that "talent quotient" would have to be derived from another piece of complex analysis.  

Now the fact that this would be a very complicated piece of work and have errors bars the size of an I-beam does not mean somebody hasn't tried to do it.  And I'd at least mildly interested in taking a look at the results.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that this is not a statistical analysis with a large sample size. It's a single elite athlete, a missing puzzle piece for Citeh that would, I believe, get them their elusive Champion's League win. What's that worth? More than what Citeh offered, for sure.

And Kane is worth at least that to Spurs, in fan loyalty, sponsorship revenues, etc. Heck, they are reportedly near to a stadium naming rights deal (I think they're waiting for the window to close so they can be pressured to spend it immediately ;)). Now, if Citeh had bid £150mm early, like they did with Grealish, I fully expect Levy would have "hit the bid", making the assessment that the money could be redeployed and the fans could be managed, with some language that it's reluctant but out of respect for Kane's wishes but with due regard for the club's future as well.

IIRC Citeh's goal scoring went down 19 goals last year, and Gundogan was top with 13 in the league, 17 overall. Pep knows what he needs, and that's a reliable 25+ goal guy in the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, JimCT said:

The problem is that this is not a statistical analysis with a large sample size. It's a single elite athlete, a missing puzzle piece for Citeh that would, I believe, get them their elusive Champion's League win. What's that worth? More than what Citeh offered, for sure.

And Kane is worth at least that to Spurs, in fan loyalty, sponsorship revenues, etc. Heck, they are reportedly near to a stadium naming rights deal (I think they're waiting for the window to close so they can be pressured to spend it immediately ;)). Now, if Citeh had bid £150mm early, like they did with Grealish, I fully expect Levy would have "hit the bid", making the assessment that the money could be redeployed and the fans could be managed, with some language that it's reluctant but out of respect for Kane's wishes but with due regard for the club's future as well.

IIRC Citeh's goal scoring went down 19 goals last year, and Gundogan was top with 13 in the league, 17 overall. Pep knows what he needs, and that's a reliable 25+ goal guy in the middle.

Totally agree with the small sample size problem here.  RE: the Champion's League - there are some who might argue the missing piece is between Pep's ears not in the players he doesn't have ;).  But that is an entirely different conversation.  

If as your report has it that MC offered 75M with an upside of another 25M and didn't budge from that I find that interesting.  Now clearly Spurs could assign some value to Kane and that's fine if its in the ball park.  What I would find intriguing however is if MC offered so much less.  Now perhaps they don't think he would be as economically valuable to them as he is to Tottenham and perhaps that's true; its certainly plausible.  In which case the bid was doomed from the outset.  Or perhaps MC had a "hard" budget cap for this window and 100M was what was left - in which case. etc., etc..  

Now I see reports this morning linking Ronaldo to MC.   Well I suppose from the perspective of morbid curiosity stuffing a player who doesn't track back much and doesn't press into a  Guardiola team would be... interesting, I'm having trouble seeing how it would be edifying.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Patched Tube said:

Totally agree with the small sample size problem here.  RE: the Champion's League - there are some who might argue the missing piece is between Pep's ears not in the players he doesn't have ;).  But that is an entirely different conversation.  

If as your report has it that MC offered 75M with an upside of another 25M and didn't budge from that I find that interesting.  Now clearly Spurs could assign some value to Kane and that's fine if its in the ball park.  What I would find intriguing however is if MC offered so much less.  Now perhaps they don't think he would be as economically valuable to them as he is to Tottenham and perhaps that's true; its certainly plausible.  In which case the bid was doomed from the outset.  Or perhaps MC had a "hard" budget cap for this window and 100M was what was left - in which case. etc., etc..  

Now I see reports this morning linking Ronaldo to MC.   Well I suppose from the perspective of morbid curiosity stuffing a player who doesn't track back much and doesn't press into a  Guardiola team would be... interesting, I'm having trouble seeing how it would be edifying.  

 

I'm new to European football. But one thing I've picked up on is that stories "linking" a player to a team as a prospective transfer are NOT subject to journalistic integrity or vetting thru multiple sources. I view them as little more than the liquor-infused musings of the journalist involved until proven otherwise.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...