Giroud's arsenal stats

When all is said and done, Giroud has performed well beyond the level ‘expected’ for a £12m striker.

He certainly offers options that no other player in the team can, and noting his shortcomings it is impossible to ignore his stats.

When all is said and done, Giroud has performed well beyond the level ‘expected’ for a £12m striker.
----------------------------

Thats irrelevant. The new TV deal is £5.1 Bn. Which means Arsenal and in in fact anyone finihsing in the top half could go and buy a £50m player without blinking.

Jenius99

I think you have missed the point.

Giroud was purchased for £12m. Can you name a forward acquired of similar value that has made a greater contribution at PL level? Not many around.

comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by BO$$™ (U6401)
posted 39 seconds ago
Just like Harry Kane is for Spurs. The difference between the two is Kane's movement off the ball is very good. That still makes him an attacking outlet in counter attacks.

----------
Lets not be silly and compare players to Harry Kane, he could well be another Micheal Ricketts ect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Could well be. But at the moment he is doing very well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which means that Harry Kane scoring at the moment. His overall contribution and play is not anywhere near of the quality that OG provides.

comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? (U3126)
posted 55 minutes ago
Jenius99

I think you have missed the point.

Giroud was purchased for £12m. Can you name a forward acquired of similar value that has made a greater contribution at PL level? Not many around.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The fact is Giroud has been our main striker (when fit) since he joined so it doesn't really matter what we paid for him. When he we play to his strengths he delivers. However when we ask him to do what he can't he looks terrible. (as do most most developed players). We only paid £10.5m for Henry but £42.5m for Ozil.

Wenger is a master at buying value. No one can doubt that. But would we have done better if Wenger had managed to buy a better all round striker for more money? There should be no doubt of that either because you need a 20 premier league goals striker to challenge for major trophies unless you develop a counter attack style that is as defensive as Mourinho's Chelsea in the early years or Atlectico these days.

comment by Gunnerthru (U6675)
posted 55 minutes ago
comment by Jenius99 (U4918)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by BO$$™ (U6401)
posted 39 seconds ago
Just like Harry Kane is for Spurs. The difference between the two is Kane's movement off the ball is very good. That still makes him an attacking outlet in counter attacks.

----------
Lets not be silly and compare players to Harry Kane, he could well be another Micheal Ricketts ect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Could well be. But at the moment he is doing very well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which means that Harry Kane scoring at the moment. His overall contribution and play is not anywhere near of the quality that OG provides.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Gt it is pointless discussing Giroud with you because you cannot see his faults. All players have strengths and weaknesses.

Jenius99

Regardless of club budget the article was in relation to Giroud’s Arsenal stats.

Of course we should/could have acquired a superior forward with the resource the club had but that is a completely different argument.

Giroud has turned a corner this season but I'd still say we need a better striker to compete with the top clubs in Europe.

As for his stats, this season they are pretty good, but last season it was 16 in 36 in the league which is at best Europa league level

Bony and Sturridge.

GT like