Considering that not long ago he was being farmed out to Leyton Orient and Millwall, where he was used as a midfielder as often as a striker - I don't think he's done too bad!
Which they bloody well should. I find that in England, it's often underrated how incredibly important a great striker can be (despite the Prem's history of strikers carrying teams). For as long as Kane is in his prime and plays for Spurs, Tottenham are potential challengers. Period, c'est tout, that's it, and it's worth 250k a week. It doesn't necessarily mean that Tottenham aren't an accomplished side throughout (they are) or that Pochettino doesn't deserve credit for what he's done (he does), just that a good striker makes such a ridiculous difference. Whatever they have to pay him, pay it. Because for Tottenham and for their potential future success, the 10 players behind him can be replaced but he certainly can't.I think JimJams is right that Spurs will probably have to nuke their wage structure to keep hold of him.
To win the league or even be successful in a broad sense without a very good striker isn't impossible, there are a few examples of it. But you can choose any league at any time in the past 25 years and it'll be remarkable how rarely the winning team doesn't have a player in the top three in the scoring charts. It goes for the Swedish second division and it goes for the top leagues in the world. The correlation becomes almost depressing if you focus on it for too long. You can give Simeone all the credit in the world for 2013/14 but Costa scored 27 goals that season and they won the league. Today they're a more accomplished side in almost every position, but their top scorer Griezmann landed on 16 goals and they were nowhere near. Vardy got 24 when Leicester won the league, which is half the miracle. Literally.Does Klopp disagree, have misplaced trust in Sturridge/Firmino or did he fail to identify a suitable striker in recent windows?