Every Arsenal fan will have their own opinion about this subject, and the geeks among us will bring out an array of stats to prove that this one is better than that one, etc, etc.
First of all we look at actual goals scored. In the League Giroud comes out on top (like every season) but this year he’s only got 13 goals so far. Alexis Sanchez is second with 9 and Walcott a woeful 5 (which is 1 less than Mesut Ozil on 6).
Now let’s look at average minutes on pitch needed between goals, which seems a bit fairer as I am sure that Giroud has played a lot more games than Walcott. So this season the Frenchman again comes out on top with a goal every 165 minutes, while poor Theo is way out on 263. Alexis Sanchez is sitting in the middle with a goal every 213 minutes. Ozil, with a LOT more games under his belt comes in at 465 minutes per goal, but massacres all the others in assists of course.
Now the latest figures to come out are showing how much money it costs the club for each goal scored by our strikers, which obviously varies according to the weekly wage each player is on at the moment.
Unsurprisingly our great French striker Olivier Giroud yet again comes out on top with a cost of only (lol) £275,000 per goal, while Walcott is three times that price at £726,000. Sanchez is in the middle again at £467,000 per goal despite earning much more than Theo. (Just for info as he is not really classed as a striker, Ozil’s figure is £1,045,000 per goal)
So, although Giroud is much maligned as donkey or a lamppost or other such names, he is still far and away Arsenal’s best value striker. But is that because he is good? Or because the others are even worse?