Did Arsenal dodge a bullet by missing out on Mykhaylo Mudryk?

This writer went as far as saying Mykhaylo Mudryk’s move to Arsenal was inevitable in January. Oh, how naive he was!

The Gunners prioritised a move for the blossoming Ukrainian winger in the winter only to come unstuck at the negotiating table. Mudryk himself, with all his interviews and social media activity, was seemingly desperate to join Mikel Arteta’s project, but striking a deal with Shakhtar Donetsk was no easy task.

The club dithered as Shakhtar remained stubborn, but Arsenal were borderline desperate for greater attacking depth. Arteta required alternatives to Bukayo Saka and Gabriel Martinelli out wide, but it’d be Brighton’s Leandro Trossard and not Mudryk who’d end up arriving in north London.

Did Arsenal dodge a bullet by missing out on Mykhaylo Mudryk?

Arsenal’s Mudryk hesitation allowed their Todd Boehly-led London rivals to pounce. Chelsea, as they so often are, were ruthless in the market and quickly wrapped up a deal within 24 hours of meeting Shakhtar’s representatives in Turkey.

The young Ukrainian winger was just one of eight players signed by the Blues in January and he made up a mere £88.5m of the £323m (approx.) accumulated by Boehly’s scattergun during the mid-season transfer window. The Blues were able to offload Jorginho to the Gunners for £10m, as the Premier League leaders spent a rather modest £57m on three players in a bid to aid their title assault.

At £27m, Trossard was the priciest of the bunch but his fee still paled in comparison to what Arsenal would’ve paid to bring Mudryk to the Emirates. So far, it appears the Gunners were fortunate to avoid spending such a large sum on the largely unproven winger.

Now, there’s no denying Mudryk’s talent and potential, but his start to life in west London has many questioning why exactly it cost such an obscene amount of money to sign him. There are mitigating factors to his slow start, but several of Chelsea’s recent new arrivals, including Benoit Badiashile, Joao Felix and Enzo Fernandez have at least offered glimpses as to why they were acquired. Mudryk has shown nothing as of yet.

In his incredibly short sample size of 174 Premier League minutes, Mudryk is yet to register a goal contribution and has accumulated 0.7 combined expected goals and assists. Trossard, in comparison, grabbed his first Arsenal goal in the 1-1 draw with Brentford and has generally had a positive influence since making his debut in the 3-2 victory over Man Utd in January.

The Belgian, who’s played just 152 minutes in the Premier League for his new club, has notched more progressive carries (14 to four), passes (13 to seven) and receptions (34 to nine) than Mudryk. Trossard’s also recorded more shot-creating actions than the Chelsea winger (seven to five).

The former Brighton star has hardly set the world alight, but he’s already proven to be a rather astute addition given his price tag, while some Chelsea fans are already lamenting the fee their club paid for Mudryk.

Now, this isn’t to say the Ukrainian won’t come good. That’d be silly. Context is important. Mudryk’s sample size at the highest level was small before his arrival, and it was bound to take time for him to settle. Chelsea are also in a horrible situation on the field, with Graham Potter struggling to find anything close to an optimal formula, and it wouldn’t be easy for any player to step up and take responsibility – especially one with huge expectations that were thrust upon him due to the size of his fee.

Nobody should be writing the Ukrainian off despite his difficult start, but Trossard’s bright opening to life as a Gooner means the vast majority of Arsenal supporters have already forgotten about the whole Mudryk saga.