Sweeping the Floor: Why We Hate Harry Kane

Okay, the title may be a bit dramatic, but there may not be a more polarizing player in DraftKings daily fantasy soccer cash games than Harry Kane. Any time Tottenham are a big favorite on a slate that's lacking a few or all of the other top six teams, the roster construction conversation begins with whether having Kane in cash is optimal.

We've spoken multiple times at length on the RotoWire Fantasy Soccer Podcast about Kane's floor, which generally comes from how many shots he takes, and how many he gets on target, but I mentioned just last week that I no longer think it's even worth considering Kane's floor when you roster him in cash games because it's simply not high enough to justify his price, even if his floor is really high. Getting 12.00 floor points (fantasy points without goals and assists) is excellent, even for an $11,000 salary, but using that much cap space on a player who barely returns 1x value can really hinder a lineup because you're possibly relying on at least one $4K-level player scoring eight to 10 points.

As I mentioned on the latest podcast, when you're thinking about rostering Kane in cash, there should be zero consideration to his floor; instead, you're making the choice to roster him because you want exposure to his immense upside and you want to block against everyone else having him on their teams. Whether he takes three shots, five shots or 10 shots, when he's the most popular player in cash games you pretty much have to roster him.

But let's not confuse that with playing him because he has a great floor.

Plenty of fantasy players rostered Kane this past weekend because he was home against Burnley. The floor potential was strong, as he came in with one of the highest shot totals in the league and was facing a Burnley defense that had conceded the second-most goals, most shots and second-most shots on goal this season. It also didn't hurt that Spurs were huge favorites while oddsmakers gave Kane a 71.4 percent chance to score and 41.7 percent chance to score at least twice. His $10,900 salary was the highest on the slate by $1,400, but it was also a slate that didn't include Manchester City, Liverpool, Chelsea, Arsenal and Everton, who generally have at least one high-priced option who can be considered in cash games (to be honest, including Arsenal is probably a stretch). So, seriously, who else were you going to pay up for? Not that you have to pay up for someone, but Kane's solid floor and very high upside led to 80.3 percent of teams in the 229-person $5 single entry double up rostering Kane.

So how did he do? Um, not that well. Plenty of people cashed with Kane (I was one of them), but his 7.75 fantasy points were a huge disappointment, especially since 6.00 came from an assist, leaving him with only 1.75 floor points. His ridiculous ownership was what made his bust not a bust, but it gave people who love to fade Kane plenty of ammunition for future slates.

The weird thing about Kane is that it feels like he's constantly a bust when we play him in cash, but he still has the stats to make us strongly consider rostering him. So when he is accumulating all these shots and goals? Put simply: whenever we aren't playing him.

Kane has scored nine goals on 53 shots this season but only one goal was scored on a classic slate that either didn't include Manchester City and/or Liverpool, and that came Aug. 18 at home against Fulham when he scored 16.75 fantasy points on an $11,000 salary. Also on the slate was Gylfi Sigurdsson ($6,400) at Wolves, as well as $8,900 Willian at home against Arsenal with Eden Hazard on the bench. Otherwise, here's a breakdown of Kane's goals this season, including which other teams were on the slate:

(For reference, the yellow indicates a showdown slate or the one match he didn't start, red is when Manchester City and/or Liverpool played, and green is when he was likeliest to be rostered in cash games.)

So, Kane's goals have come on classic slates that included (sometimes among others):

• Manchester City at Cardiff City and Liverpool v. Southampton
• Manchester City v. Brighton, Arsenal v. Watford and Everton v. Fulham
• Everton v. Crystal Palace, Manchester City at West Ham and Liverpool at Watford
• Liverpool v. Everton on a two-game slate
• Liverpool at Burnley and Everton v. Newcastle

Are you really going to roster a $9,500+ Kane in cash games on a slate when you can have Sergio Aguero against Cardiff City, Gylfi Sigurdsson against Fulham or Mohamed Salah against Burnley? Of course not! But that's when Kane racks up all those shots and goals (obviously he was a great GPP play on those slates).

Kane's past performance on classic slates that didn't include the other top clubs is hardly an indicator of his future success in similar situations, but if you are sitting there after this past weekend and wondering why it feels like Kane is always ruining your cash lineup when you roster him it's because he has.