I think Sterling suffers from the City tag: any success at City is entirely due to the system which magically bumps you up a level, compared to at other clubs where systems are purposely built to work against attacking players. Sounds all good but I'm still trying to reconcile this theory with the "Pep Guardiola is my idol" theory so I'll get back to you when I've done this
That said, I think Rashford has had a good enough season, and is great at international level so the comparison isn't ludicrous. Kane's the clear cut best player.
Great post. That's a really good point: a lot of people hold, simultaneously, the views that Pep is a fraud and that playing for his team automatically makes you a better player, thus devaluing your individual achievements.
I wouldn't go as far as saying those beliefs are mutually exclusive but they are in the ways that some people express them. You can quite fairly argue that merely being in a Man City team with that much quality
should elevate your level (or at least your statistical output, making you look better). And I 100% subscribe to that idea. But then I also don't believe that Pep's a fraud. Somewhat overrated and undertested, maybe, but certainly not a fraud.
Put Kane in City's team and even in his current state (rusty, coming back from a bad injury and a career record period away from football), he's a 25 goal striker in the league alone (30+ when fit). He's done those numbers for Spurs more than once (29, 30), when they were very good but never close to dominant in the way City have been.