Spurs have six favourable fixtures in their first eight games, so we’d probably be seeing far more triple-ups on their assets if not for the concerns over their Wembley record.Fantasy Premier League managers are divided on how detrimental the move to the national stadium will prove to last season’s league runner-ups. The proof of the pudding is in the eating as they say, and will have a bearing on how successful our starts to the season are.
There is no doubt that home advantage was considerable for Tottenham last season.
Indeed, they were unbeaten in 23 games at White Hart Lane in all competitions, winning 21 of them. Although 39% of their overall stats were better away from home according to the Scout’s teams comparison tool, only 3 out of 24 key stats were better on the road. Namely, possession, total touches and percentage of goal attempts from open play.
So, with the move away from White Hart Lane in mind, I used Fantasy Football Scout’s comparison tool to assess how Kane, Alli, Eriksen and Son fared away from home last season. By doing so, I hoped to identify the player(s) who would be least inconvenienced by the move to Wembley. Obviously, there is more to performing well away from home than the size of the pitch, but nevertheless, I think the results are informative.
Results
What follows are simply the most relevant involvement, threat and distribution metrics, in which each player did better away from home last season, together with the away stats summary for each player in brackets:
KANE (25% overall, 0/9 key)
more dribbles
more crosses
more through balls
more assists
ALLI (56% overall, 3/8 key)
more touches, including in the final third
more passes, more successful, including in the final third
more passes received, including in the opponents’ half and final third
more dribbles, more successfully
more take-ons, more successfully
dispossessed less
tackled less
38.9% goal involvement (vs 25.6)
more goals in the box
more goal attempts, more of which in the box
more big chances created
more assists
ERIKSEN (41% overall, 2/9 key)
more goal attempts in the box
most shots on target
more shot accuracy
more passes, more successfully, including in the opponents’ half and final third
SON (51% overall, 4/9 key)
more touches, but not in the final third
more passes, but not in the final third
more passes received, but not in the final third
more dribbles, more successfully
more take-ons, more successfully
40.6% goal involvement (vs 28)
more shots on target
more big chances
Analysis
On the face of it then, Kane looks as though he might miss the home comforts of White Hart Lane the most, and the numbers suggest he is less of a poacher and more of a provider away from there. Even so, his goal threat and involvement metrics away from home were still superior to those of the other three in nearly every regard. The only exceptions were that Son had more penalty area touches, Alli more goal attempts inside the box, and Eriksen more goal attempts in total and the most shots on target. Furthermore, the dual Golden Boot winner did score successive hat tricks in Tottenham’s last 2 games of last season, both away from home, including on the biggest pitch in the league. Albeit that was against already relegated Hull.
Son deserves an honourable mention here, and based on his performances away from White Hart Lane, he is certainly worthy of consideration on his return from injury. At 8.0m, he could well represent the best value of all four players if recapturing his best form.
Apart from being good value, Alli could offer much more than mere cover for Kane. My findings support the notion that Kane’s points at a cost of 12.5m could be adequately offset by those of Alli at 9.5m. Certainly, his stats away from home seem to take the smallest hit.
Choosing between Alli and Eriksen remains decidedly difficult though. Eriksen actually comes out on top for averages per appearance (66% overall, 6/10 key) when going head to head with Alli in all away matches. That said, the latter’s key stats superiority includes goal involvement, mins per goal, and shot accuracy. What one gives in goals then, the other compensates for with assists and bonus points.
One way of dodging the question altogether might be to double up on Alli and Eriksen rather than go with Kane. Whilst risky because of the uncertainty around their effectiveness at Wembley, it should be noted that among all midfielders last season priced at 6.5m or under, only the oft-injured Stanislas could combine with Kane’s new price of 12.5m to produce a higher PPM average for 19m than the Alli and Eriksen combination.
Going with Kane remains the easiest way of ducking the issue, however, and probably affords greater flexibility with our squads going forwards. What would be gained in flexibility though, could be lost in balance unless we are willing to go without Lukaku that is.
And then, there’s Champions League football on the horizon too. And with no transfers in thus far, we’d be entitled to worry about the lack of depth in the Spurs squad.
During the course of this exercise, I’ve gone from being hell-bent on tripling up on Spurs (Trippier-Alli-Eriksen), to just doubling up (firstly Trippier-Alli, then Trippier-Eriksen), to finally thinking I should maybe avoid Tottenham assets altogether once the group stages of the Champions League get underway after Gameweek 5.
