Were Tottenham right not to sign another striker?
Tottenham Hotspur accomplished their mission to qualify for the Champions League, but fell narrowly short in their efforts to finish above bitter rivals Arsenal.
Their third place finish was achieved thanks in part to the outstanding form of golden boot winner Harry Kane, who scored 25 goals, building on his superb campaign a year earlier.
One of the most controversial decisions leading into the season was Tottenham's choice not to add another striker to the mix to support Kane.
Heung-Min Son and Clinton N'Jie were bought to play in wide areas, but contributed four goals combined all year, with the latter hampered by injury, but neither were the strikers they needed.
Chairman Daniel Levy did not want to pay West Brom's asking price for Saido Berahino, but he did not put the money up for another striker either, leaving head coach Mauricio Pochettino dependent on Harry Kane.
Kane's performances were nothing short of heroic, but could their campaign have panned out differently if an extra striker had been brought into the squad, even in January?
Academy product Kane was always going to be first choice, but his one goal in their final four games showed even he could have done with a little more help.
If Spurs had signed the wrong forward then of course they could have upset Kane's superb individual season, but there is no getting away from the fact Levy and Pochettino gambled on the 22-year-old staying fit.
It is not an approach they would be wise to repeat next season, with more firepower essential if they are to build on this season.
Finishing as the league's second highest goalscorers behind Manchester City, with one more than Leicester shows Spurs got the balance of their team right, but with one more striker, may be they could have got a little closer to winning the league or finishing above Arsenal.