Harry Kane

[todd1882]

So from his prem goals last season

20% penalties
20%headers
20% tap ins(a few he still done some good work either good 1st touch or won the ball initially)
20% good finishes
20% shots outside box

That looks like a good all round striker to me.

Ok, sure, if that's what my 'takes' add up to. I'd never really summarized them like that but thanks! It might need to be a little more granular to account for 'quality' though. Just saying 20% headers sounds a shitload better than pointing out that many of them were both open goal and within 6yds.

The problem is that you accused KaneDomBadBoy of this:

Ab

Absolute BS look at some of the angles he scored from last season. Only very good finishers put them away

because he said this:

Todd, I know you’ve been saying this for a while now but for the most part, Kane is essentially scoring goals that any striker would be scoring by way of just playing striker for Spurs. Like you said before, there is no marginal benefit of having Kane as most of his goals are goals that most strikers would be scoring. And stats back your thesis up.

When you add up his low conversion rate (don't know what it was last year but I'm sure it was low because it's always low) and few goals that can be ascribed to his singular brilliance (as you can see in the summary of the goals) then there seems to be less value in having Kane (academy/emotion notwithstanding) over any other striker. In fact, a faster player more capable of helping elsewhere might benefit us even more.

Point: harsh to say Ndom is talking "absolute BS".

 

[Deuterz]

Just some observations and questions:

So Lewa's goals are a function of the team dynamic then?

And we see that Kane's biggest year scoring was 16-17 I believe which is the year we created and scored the most as a team. So from what you say then it's fair to conclude that Kane benefited from the service and efforts of those around him.

So are we to conclude that a striker's production is most dependent on factors outside of their immediate control?

They're a function of him working well as part of that team. The creative players know they can provide service, he knows how to move off the ball and how to hold the ball up. He provides another role, you can argue its no more or less important than another, but it's not one most players could do. You couldn't just throw anybody in Lewa's role and they'd score that many goals. Consistently scoring the chances you on paper should score may sound easy, but it isn't.

Benefited? Of course. Every player benefits from what happens around them. But Kane in 16/17 was 9 above what he was expected to get by service, and he has never only provided goals. Others benefit from the work of a striker as well, unless they're purely a poacher type, which Kane has never been at all. He's always had some hold up play and passing range.

It's heavily reliant on that, yes. But that's the case for many positions, it's a team game. Try being a playmaker in a team where you might see the ball a handful of times a game. Lots of modern inside forward/wide players are equally reliant on the right kind of service.

I'm not totally against the idea a traditional striker is overrated, City are showing you can make it work, a collective effort where goals come from multiple positions and you have a more fluid attacking shape can be fucking deadly, Chelsea nailed it at times last season too. But it requires a lot of technical quality and very intelligent footballers, and even then will still have draw backs (City are the most wasteful team in the world, Chelsea without a proper CF dropped a lot of points to a low-block last season).

 

[Team Tanguy]

The main problem with xG is that it can paint inaccurate pictures. Conversion rate too.

For example with xG consider that Team A dominate Team B, they control possession, do nearly all the probing and have 5x as many shots. Team A tear Team B apart time and time again but then mess up the final pass (some of which were easy passes) that would have set up a sure goal.
However, if Team B have parked the bus and then miss a 1v1 with the keeper on their only attack which is a counter then they will quite possibly have the greater xG.
The xG will look rightfully look stupid as the sole metric for describing the game.

With conversion rate it favours a style of play. A fast striker (Vardy) will have more 1v1s with the goalie. A player who can beat players sets himself up in a much better position to convert a chance than a player who can't. So conversion rate doesn't tell us much with regards to finishing quality particularly as it's dependent on the player's style and team style.

Both stats have their uses- they're a bit of fun like horoscopes.

 

[todd1882]

They're a function of him working well as part of that team. The creative players know they can provide service, he knows how to move off the ball and how to hold the ball up. He provides another role, you can argue its no more or less important than another, but it's not one most players could do. You couldn't just throw anybody in Lewa's role and they'd score that many goals. Consistently scoring the chances you on paper should score may sound easy, but it isn't.

OK, now put him in Everton, presumably he'd be the same player you take pains to describe here, right? Would he score all those goals? And how about if we placed DCL in Bayern would his goals go up? DCL knows how to move and he'd have more space in Bayern because defenders would be concerned about all the other talent, right?

So what's so special about Lewa then?

Benefited? Of course. Every player benefits from what happens around them. But Kane in 16/17 was 9 above what he was expected to get by service, and he has never only provided goals. Others benefit from the work of a striker as well, unless they're purely a poacher type, which Kane has never been at all. He's always had some hold up play and passing range.

Yes, but we are trying to tease out the benefit solely due to singular brilliance of a player. Did we benefit more from Kane or did he benefit more from the other players? And remember, you always have to consider the misses, the greed, and the space being opened where he couldn't derive any himself. Some of that can be teased out by the stats and the rest from viewing. In 16-17 it was probably shading Kane's way but since it has been one-sided. We are working for his goals which is the tail wagging the dog.

It's heavily reliant on that, yes. But that's the case for many positions, it's a team game. Try being a playmaker in a team where you might see the ball a handful of times a game. Lots of modern inside forward/wide players are equally reliant on the right kind of service.

No it isn't, not in the modern game. There are few playmakers/10s left.

I'm not totally against the idea a traditional striker is overrated, City are showing you can make it work, a collective effort where goals come from multiple positions and you have a more fluid attacking shape can be fucking deadly, Chelsea nailed it at times last season too. But it requires a lot of technical quality and very intelligent footballers, and even then will still have draw backs (City are the most wasteful team in the world, Chelsea without a proper CF dropped a lot of points to a low-block last season).

I prefer arguing topics like this in the abstract. whether or not a particular team is able to do it shouldn't detract from the value of the point.

And you didn't answer this:
So are we to conclude that a striker's production is most dependent on factors outside of their immediate control?

 

[todd1882]

The main problem with xG is that it can paint inaccurate pictures. Conversion rate too.

For example with xG consider that Team A dominate Team B, they control possession, do nearly all the probing and have 5x as many shots. Team A tear Team B apart time and time again but then mess up the final pass (some of which were easy passes) that would have set up a sure goal.
However, if Team B have parked the bus and then miss a 1v1 with the keeper on their only attack which is a counter then they will quite possibly have the greater xG.
The xG will look rightfully look stupid as the sole metric for describing the game.

With conversion rate it favours a style of play. A fast striker (Vardy) will have more 1v1s with the goalie. A player who can beat players sets himself up in a much better position to convert a chance than a player who can't. So conversion rate doesn't tell us much with regards to finishing quality particularly as it's dependent on the player's style and team style.

Both stats have their uses- they're a bit of fun like horoscopes.

And this is the problem for all those that are not familiar with statistics and their utilization. No stat, anywhere, describing anything paints the complete picture and they are not intended to. If you accept that and understand it then the example you paint means nothing. You have to look at a range of stats to get a fuller picture of what went on. but to get the fullest picture you need to watch the game. Stats help understand and conceptualize that.

for instance: in your example if I look at xG I owuld see team A 0.0 - Team B 1.0. then you look at time of possession to see Team A dominated. then look at Average field position to see Team A was camped out in Team B's end.

But it's the anti-intellectualism from the crowd that don't or can't understand stats that irritates.

 

[Deuterz]

OK, now put him in Everton, presumably he'd be the same player you take pains to describe here, right? Would he score all those goals? And how about if we placed DCL in Bayern would his goals go up? DCL knows how to move and he'd have more space in Bayern because defenders would be concerned about all the other talent, right?

So what's so special about Lewa then?


Yes, but we are trying to tease out the benefit solely due to singular brilliance of a player. Did we benefit more from Kane or did he benefit more from the other players? And remember, you always have to consider the misses, the greed, and the space being opened where he couldn't derive any himself. Some of that can be teased out by the stats and the rest from viewing. In 16-17 it was probably shading Kane's way but since it has been one-sided. We are working for his goals which is the tail wagging the dog.


No it isn't, not in the modern game. There are few playmakers/10s left.


I prefer arguing topics like this in the abstract. whether or not a particular team is able to do it shouldn't detract from the value of the point.

And you didn't answer this:
So are we to conclude that a striker's production is most dependent on factors outside of their immediate control?

He'd still score plenty of goals, yeah. DCL's goals would go up but not to the same extent as Lewandowski's, because he isn't as accomplished a finisher, and his off the ball isn't as good. Getting in the right positions at the right time is a gift, top strikers have it.

Lots of things - he's a complete CF. He benefits from what is around him but in isolation he's a world class striker and player. Bayern can trust that if they get him the ball in and around the box, he scores goals, consistently.

We benefitted more from Kane. Having that presence up top, having a player the others know score, that's beneficial to the team. Every player (no matter their role) will miss chances and have greedy moments, that's football. And there are multiple seasons he's scored more than expected, and no full season where he's scored less than expected. Most top players in other positions under-achieve consistently on xG - they aren't as clinical.

Even in the modern game, yes. And Kane is as much a part of the 11 as other players, he contributes more than just goals anyhow. His defensive stats are pretty solid for a CF, he drops deep, he sprays passes out wide that nobody else on our team could play. But EVERY player is always reliant on whether the way the team plays benefits them, or if their teammates are on the same wavelength.

No. Great strikers score pretty much everywhere. They score MORE when they arrive at top sides with machine like chance creation, but they will still guarantee goals wherever they go. And truly great strikers offer more than goals to a side. It's an extremely important, difficult position to play, and there's a reason most top sides pay top dollar for a world class striker. Gold dust.

 

[Team Tanguy]

And this is the problem for all those that are not familiar with statistics and their utilization. No stat, anywhere, describing anything paints the complete picture and they are not intended to. If you accept that and understand it then the example you paint means nothing. You have to look at a range of stats to get a fuller picture of what went on. but to get the fullest picture you need to watch the game. Stats help understand and conceptualize that.

for instance: in your example if I look at xG I owuld see team A 0.0 - Team B 1.0. then you look at time of possession to see Team A dominated. then look at Average field position to see Team A was camped out in Team B's end.

But it's the anti-intellectualism from the crowd that don't or can't understand stats that irritates.

We can agree that stats with context and used as supplementation are fine and helpful.

There is an anti-intellectualism from some naysayers but it's just as fair to say there is some blind faith from the people overly in favour of those stats who post them as concrete proof in arguments.

I don't doubt that you'd be willing to discuss the details of full matches (and then the stats alongside) but let's be real the bulk of the anti Kane rhetoric is from people who do shit like use pre season stats to suit an agenda.

 

[Beech]

I think he was good and now he isn’t very good
Simple as that

Well everyone knows that. But I was quoting your post about people in random countries apparently not rating him at all, which is nonsense. I think anyone that's sane and not a fan of a rival club, regardless of where they are from, can't say anything else other than he's been an excellent player. He wouldn't have the record he does for us if he wasn't, simple as that. Or for his country.

 

[Beech]

So from his prem goals last season

20% penalties
20%headers
20% tap ins(a few he still done some good work either good 1st touch or won the ball initially)
20% good finishes
20% shots outside box

That looks like a good all round striker to me.

And 5% percent pleasure, 50% percent pain
And a 100% reason to remember the name.

 

[Skippa18]

Ok, sure, if that's what my 'takes' add up to. I'd never really summarized them like that but thanks! It might need to be a little more granular to account for 'quality' though. Just saying 20% headers sounds a shitload better than pointing out that many of them were both open goal and within 6yds.

The problem is that you accused KaneDomBadBoy of this:

because he said this:


When you add up his low conversion rate (don't know what it was last year but I'm sure it was low because it's always low) and few goals that can be ascribed to his singular brilliance (as you can see in the summary of the goals) then there seems to be less value in having Kane (academy/emotion notwithstanding) over any other striker. In fact, a faster player more capable of helping elsewhere might benefit us even more.

Point: harsh to say Ndom is talking "absolute BS".

Fair enough I was more talking about the use of the under xg stat rather than his opinion of Kane, my bad.

But I think that it's a bullshit stat.

If we put every striker under the same microscope probably find the same result. All strikers miss chances. But very few consistently score the amount he usually does

 

[Skippa18]

Now add the level of opponent:
80% bottom 10/Stoke
10% EL/EL qualifiers
10 % teams 6-10
0% v a team that sat top 4 at the time of playing them


Sounds like a well rounded average striker

Who do you want in to replace kane

 

[todd1882]

He'd still score plenty of goals, yeah. DCL's goals would go up but not to the same extent as Lewandowski's, because he isn't as accomplished a finisher, and his off the ball isn't as good. Getting in the right positions at the right time is a gift, top strikers have it.

Yeah, this is an answer based on the narrative you have already put out and not objective, I say. Let me make sure I have this right, Lewa's goals would go up more in Everton than DCL's would in Bayern? Aren't you just the man that talked about chances being the main driver of Lewa scoring? It would seem that you have now flip-flopped to it being about his singular brilliance now. Can't have it both ways? You can't go all Switzerland on me..pick a side!?!?!?!?!

And movement isn't some mystical gift as you suggest. It is to English fans because y'all rank and filed it so long in your 442. Most footballers understand moving to space and beyond that it's a numbers game. Pippo Inzaghi wouldn't have scored his poachers goals in most Serie A clubs not named Milan.

Lots of things - he's a complete CF. He benefits from what is around him but in isolation he's a world class striker and player. Bayern can trust that if they get him the ball in and around the box, he scores goals, consistently.

I'm being Socratic here, of course.

And they'd learn to trust DCL when he was banging them in too. Remember now my friend that Lewa was almost in Blackburn or Birmingham FFS. You know what I'm saying?

We benefitted more from Kane. Having that presence up top, having a player the others know score, that's beneficial to the team. Every player (no matter their role) will miss chances and have greedy moments, that's football. And there are multiple seasons he's scored more than expected, and no full season where he's scored less than expected. Most top players in other positions under-achieve consistently on xG - they aren't as clinical.

I've already stated that but I'm sure by not as much as you think. For the second bolded part, not as much as Kane for either. Yeah, scoring more than expected is meaningless unless it looks something like the +9 from 2016...that's added value over a season. Being +1 or some minuscule shit is meaningless on a practical scale. Plus 9 is not.

And I don't really care about what otehr player do. I care about what the 100M striker that I think is a lumbering liability to us does. And if he's not >3 or so goals above xG then we have to ask ourselves what really is the big deal. Striker tap in the goals they are provided on a plate. If they don't add prectical value above xG then what's the fuss? Exchange them for someone else if they profile brings in big money and buy someone else with qualities better suited to where you are now.

Even in the modern game, yes. And Kane is as much a part of the 11 as other players, he contributes more than just goals anyhow. His defensive stats are pretty solid for a CF, he drops deep, he sprays passes out wide that nobody else on our team could play. But EVERY player is always reliant on whether the way the team plays benefits them, or if their teammates are on the same wavelength.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you ought to do it...or that you do it well or a specialist can't do it better. Conte is curing this thanfully.

No. Great strikers score pretty much everywhere. They score MORE when they arrive at top sides with machine like chance creation, but they will still guarantee goals wherever they go. And truly great strikers offer more than goals to a side. It's an extremely important, difficult position to play, and there's a reason most top sides pay top dollar for a world class striker. Gold dust.

This is magical football thinking...and nonsense. Soldado! And every other striker that's bombed on transfer. And don't pull a 'no true Scotsman' on me to get out of the bind you've now found yourself in. And offering more than goals for a great striker will wipe many historical strikers from the records.










*hey KaneDomBadBoy is this +9 above xG from all the games of 2016 or just the league?

 

[Deuterz]

Yeah, this is an answer based on the narrative you have already put out and not objective, I say. Let me make sure I have this right, Lewa's goals would go up more in Everton than DCL's would in Bayern? Aren't you just the man that talked about chances being the main driver of Lewa scoring? It would seem that you have now flip-flopped to it being about his singular brilliance now. Can't have it both ways? You can't go all Switzerland on me..pick a side!?!?!?!?!

And movement isn't some mystical gift as you suggest. It is to English fans because y'all rank and filed it so long in your 442. Most footballers understand moving to space and beyond that it's a numbers game. Pippo Inzaghi wouldn't have scored his poachers goals in most Serie A clubs not named Milan.


I'm being Socratic here, of course.

And they'd learn to trust DCL when he was banging them in too. Remember now my friend that Lewa was almost in Blackburn or Birmingham FFS. You know what I'm saying?


I've already stated that but I'm sure by not as much as you think. For the second bolded part, not as much as Kane for either. Yeah, scoring more than expected is meaningless unless it looks something like the +9 from 2016...that's added value over a season. Being +1 or some minuscule shit is meaningless on a practical scale. Plus 9 is not.

And I don't really care about what otehr player do. I care about what the 100M striker that I think is a lumbering liability to us does. And if he's not >3 or so goals above xG then we have to ask ourselves what really is the big deal. Striker tap in the goals they are provided on a plate. If they don't add prectical value above xG then what's the fuss? Exchange them for someone else if they profile brings in big money and buy someone else with qualities better suited to where you are now.


Just because you can do something doesn't mean you ought to do it...or that you do it well or a specialist can't do it better. Conte is curing this thanfully.


This is magical football thinking...and nonsense. Soldado! And every other striker that's bombed on transfer. And don't pull a 'no true Scotsman' on me to get out of the bind you've now found yourself in. And offering more than goals for a great striker will wipe many historical strikers from the records.










*hey KaneDomBadBoy is this +9 above xG from all the games of 2016 or just the league?

Well yeah .. it's an opinion, we've never seen DCL play for Bayern. The 'Lewa scores because service' argument was made to point out a fallacy where Lewa doesn't get criticised despite being below xG whereas Kane does. My view is he's a brilliant striker, offers a hell of a lot to Bayern, and they'd be much worse off without him. As they were in the CL last season vs PSG.

Strikers with good movement are valued across the world, not just in England. A top CF occupies defenders in a way other plays don't, as defenders know they're the focal point of the attack and will be drawn to them. That opens space up for others, and allows teams to play in a certain fashion. Seen plenty of times when a team doesn't have a focal point that they look lost, uncreative and have no idea about how to progress in to the opposition's box.

Lots of players bloom late or are discovered late. He could've played for Blackburn, but instead managers like Klopp and Guardiola saw value in him and picked him up. Now he's on Ballon d' or shortlists.

Regularly just matching xG adds value. Look at players who play elsewhere, they're often below it most seasons. A player who can do what is expected season in season out (and sometimes add on top of that) whilst adding other elements as a CF, is extremely valuable.

Conte loves Kane and has praised him in the past heavily, so what's he doing exactly?

Soldado struggled in a different league, which can happen to players in every position. Top La Liga striker, not a good Premier League one. For every striker you can name, I can point out a winger or attacking midfielder who failed. And I don't view myself as 'in a bind' at all, but if all the top coaches seem to value great centre forwards (even Tuchel/Pep sanction big money bids for them) then it would appear to me that the greatest minds in football think there's intrinsic value to the CF role and guys like Lukaku or Kane.

And it was all league games from 16/17.

 

[Murphy]

Just wondering, who exactly are the "unconvinceable trolls" in this dilemma? I've seen some compelling arguments but mostly only going in one direction. Sure, two very great polemicists are dishing it out but it's hard to fault their argumentation. And since no one has refuted their points then I can't imagine why someone would consider them "unconvinceable"...it's like claiming a GK is great when they've never been tested. We can only conclude they are intransigent when credible arguments have been put forward.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and infer that you agree with Sammy and NDom. The crux of the "discussion" seems to constantly be that Kane is overrated and/or past it. For like forever.

Kane's stats prior to this season are irrefutable. That's the proof. I would wager had he gone to moneybags, he's also be scoring. It seems to have escaped many posters' attention that we are quite shit, and devoid of creativity with our key players struggling. And that Kane should be making it happen all on his own.

I don't see Ronaldo tearing it up. Or Messi, for that matter. Are they suddenly shit too?

 

[todd1882]

We can agree that stats with context and used as supplementation are fine and helpful.

Agreed.

There is an anti-intellectualism from some naysayers but it's just as fair to say there is some blind faith from the people overly in favour of those stats who post them as concrete proof in arguments.

Probably some of that but I'd probably ascribe most of it to ignorance...a similar statistical ignorance that leads some to believe stats provide a full picture and/or criticize them for not. So in this bolded, yes, some post stats and think they sum up proceedings but they don't of course. Yes, it does a disservice to those of us that appreciate stats for what they actually do help us to understand. And it has the secondary effect of reinforcing folk's resistance to them. A double whammy!

I don't doubt that you'd be willing to discuss the details of full matches (and then the stats alongside) but let's be real the bulk of the anti Kane rhetoric is from people who do shit like use pre season stats to suit an agenda.

Look, it's become a food fight in here, an entertaining food fight but a food fight nonetheless. I happen to be sympathetic to sammyspurs and KaneDomBadBoy argument. As an aside, I also happen to be greatly entertained by them. And fair fucks to Deuterz for holding his own and also bringing the entertainment even though I disagree with his take on the matter. The point I'm trying to make is I don't think we should be judging the use of stats from this back and forth...at this point lol. At this point, in this thread, stats are weapons in the waging.

 

[todd1882]

Well yeah .. it's an opinion, we've never seen DCL play for Bayern. The 'Lewa scores because service' argument was made to point out a fallacy where Lewa doesn't get criticised despite being below xG whereas Kane does. My view is he's a brilliant striker, offers a hell of a lot to Bayern, and they'd be much worse off without him. As they were in the CL last season vs PSG.

Strikers with good movement are valued across the world, not just in England. A top CF occupies defenders in a way other plays don't, as defenders know they're the focal point of the attack and will be drawn to them. That opens space up for others, and allows teams to play in a certain fashion. Seen plenty of times when a team doesn't have a focal point that they look lost, uncreative and have no idea about how to progress in to the opposition's box.

Lots of players bloom late or are discovered late. He could've played for Blackburn, but instead managers like Klopp and Guardiola saw value in him and picked him up. Now he's on Ballon d' or shortlists.

Regularly just matching xG adds value. Look at players who play elsewhere, they're often below it most seasons. A player who can do what is expected season in season out (and sometimes add on top of that) whilst adding other elements as a CF, is extremely valuable.

Conte loves Kane and has praised him in the past heavily, so what's he doing exactly?

Soldado struggled in a different league, which can happen to players in every position. Top La Liga striker, not a good Premier League one. For every striker you can name, I can point out a winger or attacking midfielder who failed. And I don't view myself as 'in a bind' at all, but if all the top coaches seem to value great centre forwards (even Tuchel/Pep sanction big money bids for them) then it would appear to me that the greatest minds in football think there's intrinsic value to the CF role and guys like Lukaku or Kane.

And it was all league games from 16/17.

I have to get you acquainted with the +Quote function my man. It's hard to keep up with context in this.

 

[Deuterz]

I have to get you acquainted with the +Quote function my man. It's hard to keep up with context in this.

Fair point , been meaning to use it lately but have kept forgetting.

 

[todd1882]

Fair point , been meaning to use it lately but have kept forgetting.

Not a problem...actually it is. See, I've got to read your whole post and I'm losing all my great replies as I consider the next point. gotta warn you though you've opened yourself up to some pretty strong arguments coming your way...if I can remember them lol.

Conte loves Kane and has praised him in the past heavily, so what's he doing exactly?

who wouldn't? He's a "value player" I think I've read. Which KaneDomBadBoy or sammyspurs can remind me if that was one of Conte's 3 traits.*


*just adding to the food fight cheap shot.

 

[todd1882]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and infer that you agree with Sammy and NDom. The crux of the "discussion" seems to constantly be that Kane is overrated and/or past it. For like forever.

Yes, I am sympathetic to their perspective.

Kane's stats prior to this season are irrefutable. That's the proof. I would wager had he gone to moneybags, he's also be scoring. It seems to have escaped many posters' attention that we are quite shit, and devoid of creativity with our key players struggling. And that Kane should be making it happen all on his own.

And by 'stats' in this statement I'm assuming you are talking about his production numbers i.e. goals scored? Yes, the are but I don't really think that is what is in dispute though. I think the argument is more that the club would have benefited more from moving Kane on and here are the statistical reasons/justifications/arguments as to why.

I don't see Ronaldo tearing it up. Or Messi, for that matter. Are they suddenly shit too?

Yes, somewhat...or at least relative to what they were 10 years ago...or even 5. Which kinda brings us back to Kane and whether or not he is the same striker that he was 5 years ago during his 2016-17 high-water mark season.

 

[KaneDomBadBoy]

Since the Start of the 20/21 Season

Son
20 non penalty goals
Shots: 94
Goals Above xG: +6.6

Kane
20 non penalty goals
Shots: 162
Goals Under xG: -1

So... Kane took 68 more shots to score the same amount of goals as Son.

Same team. Same manager.

Son is not world class/elite (which I agree he's not). But Kane is...?

Peak Kane Cult!