Arsenal Transfer News: Santi Cazorla Would Make Robin Van Persie More Expendable
Arsene Wenger and the Arsenal brass are knee-deep in Robin van Persie's transfer saga. If you want more details regarding that, check out ESPN reporter's Gabriele Marcotti's overview of his possible destinations, but there are other things happening on the Gunners' front.
I know. That seems impossible, but The Independent reporter Iain Rogers says it isn't. He reports that Malaga winger Santi Carzola is on the move, and Arsenal appears to be the favorite:
Santi Cazorla has already been sold, according to Malaga teammate Enzo Maresca as Arsenal emerge as clear favourites to sign the Spanish playmaker.
This wouldn't soften the blow of losing Van Persie among Arsenal supporters. Some may be fed up with his transfer rumblings, but there's no doubting his ability. He's arguably the most talented striker in the English Premier League and you can't just replace someone like that.
Carzola would be a step in the right direction. As mentioned in The Telegraph, Arsenal already signed Olivier Giroud and Lukas Podolski. Both players add a definite punch to the Gunner attack and both players possess a sufficient amount of upside. They may not hold Van Persie's talent, but they could replace him collectively.
That looks even more promising with Cazorla in the mix. He scored nine goals in 38 games for Malaga this season and he scored 23 goals in 127 games with Villareal prior to that. He's 27 years old (two years younger than Van Persie) and has made 45 international appearances with Spain, scoring six goals.
Carzola can play on both sides of the field and he puts a ton of stress on a defense. His versatility forces other teams to account for him at all times and his speed keeps defenders on their heels.
The Gunners may have to get creative on offense next season. Carzola's ability to change pace and play both sides will help that.
Adding the Malaga winger, on top of the additions they've already made, would be a very smart idea for Arsenal at this point.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?