I saw this question on Twitter the other day and thought I would get the opinion from readers on here.
If you had a direct choice, what would you prefer to do? Let Lacazette leave as a free agent (at which point you have to spend money for a replacement) or extend Laca’s contract but cash in on Aubameyang?
You sense it’s because of cost cutting why Laca isn’t being offered a new deal and not based on his ability. Yet financially it would make more sense to get a fee for Auba.
The irony being that it’s his best friend Auba who is the reason his employers are content for him to run down his deal (something we were promised would never happen again after the Aaron Ramsey saga).
Arsenal are reluctant to carry on paying over the odds for talent over the age of 30, having had their hands burnt on the likes of Ozil.
Whether they regret the terms they gave to their captain is debatable.
It’s easy with hindsight to judge giving a huge salary to someone with zero re-sale value.
Essentially you trap yourself, because you can’t sell the player due to very few clubs willing to match that kind of wage.
However, it would have been a PR disaster had we allowed yet again our best player to join a rival.
In the same manner, most gooners were content when we paid over the odds for Ozil to remain in North London.
Purely a business decision, you would keep Laca and cash in on Auba, meaning you reduce your wage bill while bringing in millions to put towards a younger striker.
Laca’s exit only reduces the wage bill.
You then have to find the cash to purchase a new centre forward, because I’m sure you can’t purely rely on our skipper for firepower.
Where once you would say the first option simply based on Auba being the better player, I’m not sure you can say that anymore.
He’s the better finisher without question, but Arsenal make so few chances per game we need more than that from a lone striker.
He can be quiet for most of a game but suddenly convert an opportunity. Which Is a great quality to have but not in a conservative system.
Arteta’s ethos needs your striker to defend from the front, to press at all times, to come deep and link up with the midfield.
In other words, everything Laca does.
Laca isn’t as prolific, but you would never question his work rate.
Even last weekend you sense that it was reputation that meant Laca was subbed off and not his buddy.
It looked like Auba had improved his work rate when Arteta first arrived but, if we are honest, since his contract extension how many great games as our captain had?
Tell me what you would do in the comments?