Arsenal: Would Jack Wilshere actually need replacing?

The future of Jack Wilshere is becoming increasingly uncertain. So, let me ask you this question: If Wilshere were to leave, would Arsenal actually need to replace him?

It is never a good thing to sell your best players. They are kind of your best players for a reason and you need them. So seeing them leave, even if you intend to replace them, is never a nice thing, or a wise thing. Arsenal haven’t, ostensibly, learned that lesson.

Catch the latest episode of the Pain in the Arsenal podcast right here

However, there are times when selling players, even established and important ones, helps further the progression of the squad. It might be that they are destabilising the dressing room. It might be that they are clogging up the progression of younger players. It might be that there is simply the need for a refreshing air of change in the squad.

More from Pain in the Arsenal

• 3 standout players from 1-0 victory over Everton
• 3 positives & negatives from Goodison Park victory
• Arsenal vs PSV preview: Prediction, team news & lineups
• 3 talking points from Arsenal’s victory at Goodison Park
• Mikel Arteta provides Gabriel Martinelli injury update after Everton win

When stars leave, there is no question of replacement. But when these, still significant but not quite so vital contributors leave, the need to replace is not quite so insatiable. Sometimes, as it has been with the Gunners and their ‘heavy’ squad, as Arsene Wenger described it, in recent years, selling is only the transaction that is required.

It is in this context that we come to Jack Wilshere. His contract expires at the end of the year. Arsenal are reportedly demanding he takes a pay cut. Wilshere is rumouredly disrupted by Mesut Ozil’s rather substantial wage. Contract talks have reached a crunch point. I still believe that Wilshere will stay, but there is a growing chance that he could exit. So, in that light, would Wilshere, if he were to depart, need replacing?

In terms of quality, I would perhaps argue no. Although I believe Wilshere to be an extremely talented player who should be kept as a low-risk asset on the off-chance that he rediscovers his world-class best, currently — a player’s current quality and not there potential is what I believe the need for a replacement should be evaluated on –, he is little more than a solid, reliable, but unspectacular midfielder.

Similarly, in terms of depth, the same argument could be made. With Aaron Ramsey (assuming he is not sold) and Granit Xhaka everpresent at the heart of the team, and Mohamed Elneny supporting, numbers are not a huge issue if the return of Santi Cazorla and development of Ainsley Maitland-Niles is factored in.

The problem with that is that neither of those factors are especially likely. In fact, they are thoroughly improbable. Cazorla has not stepped on a football pitch in earnest in nearly two years, while Maitland-Niles is only 20 and has looked a little short of the necessary awareness and experience to play central midfield in the Premier League.

Next: Arsenal: 3 players auditioning during remainder of season

Nevertheless, depending on your perspective of the current players in the squad and their prospects for next season, there could be an argument made that Arsenal do not need to replace Wilshere if he were to leave. That makes his standing at the negotiating table somewhat vulnerable.