Erik Lamela is polarizing. Opinions of him dichotomous; conversations, polemic. Play? Always better or worse than expected. He either is or isn’t: on his game, on the team sheet, on the rise… He is extremism embodied, a confluence of conflicting attributes. He is at once the personification of an exceptional yet inadequate talent, immense yet unrealized potential – a Gordian knot tied with figments of what could have been and what could still be.

Much of the talk surrounding him focuses on his price versus his payoff. This article will too. Only, it will try and approach the situation differently: with balance, not opposing extremes. Basically, his opposite.

Jumping in: Lamela’s performances don’t add up to his transfer price, but they DO reflect it.

Has it been fair to judge Lamela more harshly? Absolutely. What do I mean? No one can argue that he hasn’t been disappointing. There hasn’t been a stretch of solid performances, rather glimmers of it that too often lead to nowhere. The only consistency has been in underwhelming play. It’s almost like he has a God-awful twin he lets play half his matches. It is almost reflective of the Spurs’ season as a whole. The most beautiful piece of shit you’ve ever seen. Soldado’s missed goal seems a fitting analogy: a beautiful pass sets up a perfect scoring opportunity, that turns only into an exercise in futility. Everything’s got good and bad in it. Chelsea, for example: they won everything, but still have to be Chelsea. You have to take both in stride. Some will say the bad makes the good better. But here’s the important bit – we remember the miss more than the pass.

AND there’s been a hell of a lot to be positive about. We didn’t get to the Champions League, but we finished one spot above last year. We found out nearly half our squad was unusable and wasted space/money, but learned we could rely on a only a few youngsters to prop the entire squad up. Harry Kane. We beat the shit out of the scum and Chelsea. We got to the Capital One Cup Final. More than that, we learned that players thought barely worth a substitute appearance at the beginning of the season could provide the home-grown backbone to our squad for years to come. Truly, it is hard to fathom a better and more exciting time to be a Spurs supporter.

However, the mire has masked our perception and turned the world shit: the tangible and bright hope that would’ve otherwise illuminated our season in optimism has been swallowed whole and hidden. Why? Are we expecting too much? Overly-confident, then too broken-hearted and proud to admit it? Whatever it is, it’s caused many Spurs fans to forget – or at least overlook- the good for the bad.

Let’s look at Eric Dier: another young player, new to the team, who – like Lamela – has also produced admirably on occasion and abhorrently on others. Both have shined in unexpected areas, showing talent transcending their given position (Dier’s crosses and Lamela’s defensive tenacity). Both are in similar places in their career, with somewhat similar excitement surrounding their futures, but both need to make large strides, and commit lots of work before realizing their potential.

He has shown glimpses of worldly class and substantial growth. He’s working harder, and more creatively. He’s adapting to a league that probably isn’t the best fit for him, a Director he didn’t sign for, and a system he wasn’t chosen for.

But there are also a lot of differences – obviously. Whether the price, the age, the apparent maturity, or the level of play’s relation to our expectations: there’s no question that the two players are different. Though despite their differences, there is one glaring and significant distinction: one had a record transfer fee. Does this mean they should have different expectations? Yes. Does this mean we should evaluate their progress differently? Certainly. Has it been fair to judge Lamela more harshly? Absolutely.

However, something is less clear: to what extent should Lamela be succeeding? Should we expect 20 goals/20 assists? More? Less? More time on the pitch? More rabonas? People can’t seem agree on the quantification of our investment’s return, but they seem to agree it hasn’t been a profitable one. Why? Is this fair? What does £30m look like? How does it play? Does it guarantee success now? Can it be in the future? Does it have to mean both? How do we know he’s not progressing as he ought? For how long should we wait to find out?

Overall, references to Dier are laced with general, albeit cautious, optimism. No one has been decrying the SHOCK of his FLOP signing (Metro: Sunday, 23 May). Yet those focusing on Lamela are filled with depictions of a depreciating talent and failed career (or at least one in need of revival). I don’t believe these have been fair to him. I don’t believe we’ve been fair to him, either.

Yet lets re-assess: are these critical conclusions unreasonable, given his potential, considering his price, and seeing his output?

Let’s get one thing out of the way: there’s no question of whether he was worth paying £30m. He was. There are a solid list of teams who would’ve gladly lined up to shell out the cash, and there’s still a list who think he’s still got serious potential. Ignoring the number attached, he’s got a future somewhere.

Lamela’s performances don’t add up to his transfer price, but they DO reflect it Regardless of what could be or has been, the introduction of Poch is encouraging. Any underachiever will tell you (I count myself chief among them) that the best motivation is external, and persistent. What more can you hope for, other than a manager who will push him to achieve while speaking his language (in this case, both literally and figuratively). In his system, Lamela has been asked to work harder for longer, up and down the pitch. A chance to prove your worth mentally and physically, in performance and approach – to meet and exceed the expectations of both yourself and others – is all you can ask. Given the current situation, Lamela still has the time, the environment, and the support to succeed.

He has shown glimpses of worldly class and substantial growth. He’s working harder, and more creatively. He’s adapting to a league that probably isn’t the best fit for him, a Director he didn’t sign for, and a system he wasn’t chosen for. He has the second most assists on our team. (The same amount in the EPL as Raheem Sterling, David Silva, and James Milner… and one more than both Yannick Bolaisie and Aaron Ramsey, both of whom can fuck off.) He has shown he’s willing to work beyond his skillset and adapt to the system. Moreover, he’s succeeding at it. If this doesn’t look like the beginnings of a renaissance, I don’t know what would. Plus, he’s received 10 caps as a first-team Argentinan forward at 23, so you know he’s pretty good.

We all love our club and want what’s best for it. We will all do our best to dare it to become the best. We all will defend it from attacks within and without. After years of hardship and failure and losing to the scum, the glimpse of greatness pushed us to demand the best. To make no mistakes because now is our time. My fear is that in this, we will cause some failure ourselves; we will be too critical or too judgemental too early and too often, and ultimately cost players their careers .

Erik Lamela has the chance to become the newest and clearest iteration of this: given everything – talent, competition, leadership – he fails despite. Let’s not cause this by giving up on a new 23 year old. The best is ahead of him, like our beloved club. We did not give up hope for the future despite this season’s trials and failings. We should not start with a player who’s made this team his home. It’s a new system and a new season: give him the chance to push himself, show his worth, succeed under pressure. Patience and support are what’s called for; Poch put his faith in him and so should we… Until next year.