That's cool.

Point is, that level of striker is in that bracket at the moment; hence no striker movement anywhere. But you already knew that, so moving on...

[vine][/vine]

Captain wrote:

Claudius wrote:

Captain, which team would've paid 60m pounds for Giroud this summer if he was on the market. Please name some viable options

Dunno, I don't work in football.

However, in a climate where people are quoting those figures for a bloke like lukaku, giroud is definitely at that level.

You clearly missed the age gap between both.

Yeah, I thought they were the same age. Silly me.

Ornstein saying we wanted Manolas in the summer ...

Were we ever linked with him? They kept that one quiet.

Manolas is a long term target of Wenger/AFC. I honestly think Manolas was our first choice, even though i am more than happy with Mustafi. 

I think we wanted an aggressive tackler and shift Kos to sweeper role.

There were houseboat rumours at the start of the summer.

Not just some, I think most don't and rightly so. I actually thought Benteke was better than a player Liverpool would let go after just one season.

Ivansen wrote:

Gunner89 wrote:

Giroud's probably a 20m striker in this market. 30m if he was younger like 26.

I think he's probably more like a 30m striker. I agree age does impact his price significantly, but he's a much better striker than some of you give him credit for. Just look at the prices some inferior forwards have been going for this summer. 

Benteke: 32m
Bolasie: 28m
Mane: 36m
Janssen: 19m
Ayew: 21m

A 24 year old Giroud would be a 40-50m player in this market. And he's never been about pace, so he'll be good for another few years, I'm sure. 

Looking at the prices, a 24 year old Giroud might cost 30-40m.

The current Giroud will be about 20-30m.

I think Sturridge could be a sneaky buy.

He's a consistent goal scorer who can finish confidently an array of chances - could see him working really well with Ozil. Despite his injuries he's been able to come back in and generally contribute goals right from the go, and that's the type of striker we should have coming off our bench instead of Walcott / Welbeck (neither of whom I trust to score as a sub).

Why would Sturridge move to come off our bench? May as well stay put and come off the bench at Liverpool.

Being told you'll not feature and may struggle to make the bench is different than what he would (may) be told about his opportunities here.

If we're interested we're not going to sell him on his bench role, even if Wenger knows that's what he has in mind.

Why would he be coming off the bench? He's good enough to start assuming no injury setbacks.

Has he lost pace or is he just still rusty? I'd be happy to have him here if it's the latter.

He's lost pace and some mobility. Which to some degree may not be bad as he was often playing far too wide when he should have been between the channels.