Griezmann vs Lukaku: If we could get one, who would you splash the cash on?

Who would you rather?

  • Griezmann

  • Lukaku

Results are only viewable after voting.


Nice little comparison video of PL strikers showing how good Lukaku has been this season.

Lukaku is not only top scorer but none of his 24 goals have come from penalties and he has 6 asssists for an Everton side who aren't the best.

He's proving this season that he is both potent and creative far more able than just a physical player which some would try and argue.

He's actually very intelligent with his body positioning and thinks about locking in his opposing centre back into a position where he can roll them and score.

I am not arguing that I would rather Lukaku but I think many on here are underselling the immediate impact he could have for us especially in the PL.

The way I see it is that Lukaku would be the striker you'd want against your run of the mill PL team but that Griezmann would be the one to elevate us internationally.
 
There's no doubt that Griezmann is the superior player. It's not even a debate. He should be our number one attacking target this summer. He's truly world class and would have a transformative impact on our team. I dare say, if he had been in our team this season we'd be fighting for the title right now. Many of those draws would have been wins.

I do agree, however, that many are under rating Lukaku. He would be a very welcomed addition to our team. Yes, there are better options, but there are more worse ones. He's young, quick, strong and mobile. He holds the ball up well, can play on the counter and clearly has an eye for goal. I'm not suggesting he would be my first choice option for a new striker, but I'd still be very pleased if we got him (although he's Chelsea-bound, in my opinion).
 
Oaencha said:
I would prefer Griezmann by a distance but Lukaku is being seriously underrated in this thread. Sure he isn't a complete striker but he scores a lot of goals for a decent-ish Everton side. Despite Zlatan's goals we've missed so, so many easy chances this season. Lukaku would have finished a large percentage of them.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Lukaku may not have helped much in games where we were second best or simply weren't creating anything. But in the majority of those games that we've drawn this season we were by far the better side, creating chances left right and centre but just unable to put the ball in the damn net. Those are the games where Lukaku would have smacked them in.

I honestly don't know if I want him or someone else, but I certainly wouldn't be unhappy if he's the one Mourinho goes for.
 
cheeky_backheel said:
The risk involved is because of the price tag. At 20m, Lukaku would be like winning the jackpot but at 100m? Unless
you are Madrid) You shouldnt pay that kind of money for an unproven player
Click to expand...

I think your original point about him being high risk was because he hasn't done it at the very highest level. Which as I've pointed out is true of almost every striker we've ever signed.

If your concern is money I wouldn't worry too much. We've got a few quid. If he only does the business domestically it still won't be a financial disaster. Cole, Rudd and Berba were record British fees, Yorke wasn't far off either. None of them were proven in Europe.

Lukaku is a slight risk in my mind. I think at the very least he guarantees you enough goals to win leagues.
 
I think Lukaku's link up play would frustrate fans in tight games, but he'd score plenty of goals over the course of a season. It's comparing apples and oranges in terms of play style, but personally I think that we'd get more out of Lukaku than Greizmann, even though I prefer the Frenchman as a player.
 
Dobbs said:
I think your original point about him being high risk was because he hasn't done it at the very highest level. Which as I've pointed out is true of almost every striker we've ever signed.

If your concern is money I wouldn't worry too much. We've got a few quid. If he only does the business domestically it still won't be a financial disaster. Cole, Rudd and Berba were record British fees, Yorke wasn't far off either. None of them were proven in Europe.

Lukaku is a slight risk in my mind. I think at the very least he guarantees you enough goals to win leagues.
Click to expand...
You cannot separate the money from the risk because you have to consider the alternative.

Example, for 100m eachdo you get Lukaku or Griezzman - most would say Griezmann. But it is a different scenario if you are considering a 40m Lukaku vs a 100m Griezmann, in which case I expect most to go for Lukaku. The fact that you can afford the 100m has little or no relevance. A lower priced Lukaku is just a different proposition altogether - the lower the price the lower the risk.

He will, by all indications (including postponing renewing his sponsorship with Nike), leave Everton this summer and would be quite interesting to where and for how much.
 
Wumminator said:
There are a lot of United fans who weren't happy with Zlatan's performances. If we'd have got Lukaku instead of him i think we'd have had a title challenge on our hands this year.
Click to expand...

I don't see how Lukakku instead of Ibra in the team would have led to the other forwards upping their goal scoring, which has been our major problem this year.
 
cheeky_backheel said:
You cannot separate the money from the risk because you have to consider the alternative.

Example, for 100m eachdo you get Lukaku or Griezzman - most would say Griezmann. But it is a different scenario if you are considering a 40m Lukaku vs a 100m Griezmann, in which case I expect most to go for Lukaku. The fact that you can afford the 100m has little or no relevance. A lower priced Lukaku is just a different proposition altogether - the lower the price the lower the risk.

He will, by all indications (including postponing renewing his sponsorship with Nike), leave Everton this summer and would be quite interesting to where and for how much.
Click to expand...

I can't conceive that it'll be £100 million.
 
Lukaku is very good but there are very few players in the world of football that I'd take over Griezmann this summer.
 
Why is OP being laughed at for this? Griezmann doesn't even score as many goals as Lukaku does when Griez is in a stronger team in a weaker league ffs. Lukaku bags more in an average team, in a tougher league. Lukaku is settled in England, whereas Griez has already made it clear he doesn't fancy the English weather/lifestyle. Lukaku is 3 years younger too. Honestly, I'd take Lukaku over Griezmann.
 
Raoul said:
Griezmann and Bernardo Silva this summer. Next summer if Mbappe is on the table and if either Rashford or Martial are not delivering then we go for him.
Click to expand...

Now you're talking. However would you take Silva over Fabinho? Seems we are more in need of a Carrick successor
 
I am a bit wary of spending too much money on one player next season. Of course 'too much' is a very subjective term but I some how don't want to see us turn into a Real Madrid. The three other teams apart from Real in the Champions League Semi Final this season, show us that you don't need to spend 90 million on a player to be world class (but you can actually sell one for that fee and remain world class).

Why not focus on spreading the money a bit more to build a more compact, disciplined and ruthless attacking team? This brings me to the price tag of Lukaku in answering the question. If Lukaku costs a penny less than 65 million, I'll rather buy him and spend the extra 35 million as part of the money to buy a Bernardo Silva rather than buy Griezmann for a hundred million bucks. Lukaku can definitely take us to the level of fighting for the EPL title. Within that time, we can see how he fares in Europe. If he proves to be equally as good in Europe as he is domestically, then we would have hit a jackpot. If he proves otherwise, then we'll upgrade the squad again.

Griezmann on the other hand as good as he is, provides no guarantee that he'll succeed in the EPL.

The price difference will be the key for me.
 
MichaelRed said:
Why is OP being laughed at for this? Griezmann doesn't even score as many goals as Lukaku does when Griez is in a stronger team in a weaker league ffs. Lukaku bags more in an average team, in a tougher league. Lukaku is settled in England, whereas Griez has already made it clear he doesn't fancy the English weather/lifestyle. Lukaku is 3 years younger too. Honestly, I'd take Lukaku over Griezmann.
Click to expand...
:nono:
 
GM K said:
I am a bit wary of spending too much money on one player next season. Of course 'too much' is a very subjective term but I some how don't want to see us turn into a Real Madrid. The three other teams apart from Real in the Champions League Semi Final this season, show us that you don't need to spend 90 million on a player to be world class (but you can actually sell one for that fee and remain world class).

Why not focus on spreading the money a bit more to build a more compact, disciplined and ruthless attacking team? This brings me to the price tag of Lukaku in answering the question. If Lukaku costs a penny less than 65 million, I'll rather buy him and spend the extra 35 million as part of the money to buy a Bernardo Silva rather than buy Griezmann for a hundred million bucks. Lukaku can definitely take us to the level of fighting for the EPL title. Within that time, we can see how he fares in Europe. If he proves to be equally as good in Europe as he is domestically, then we would have hit a jackpot. If he proves otherwise, then we'll upgrade the squad again.

Griezmann on the other hand as good as he is, provides no guarantee that he'll succeed in the EPL.

The price difference will be the key for me.
Click to expand...
Real Madrid spend the most, have won 2 of the last 3 CL, and are 80% into the next final. They are proof that big money well spent can build a great team.

Juve bought Pipita for €90m which is the record buy for Serie A. More importantly, Juventus (and Bayern ), enjoy the luxury of being able to poach the best talents from other clubs in their leagues which gets you a bargain particularly on young talent who are less interested in moving abroad. United also enjoyed this privilege in ancient times.

Atletico is unique in their style of play and pereniel under dog position, but then, in 6 seasons under Simeone, their best achievement was a league title, supplemented with a Copa del Rey and a Europa cup. Neither the style of play, the mentality nor the Silverware is what a club like United aspire for.

Monaco is an interesting case and I feel their success is premised by being fortunate to have so many youngsters bloom in the same squad. They play in a less competitive league and as shown against Juve (their first top tier test), they are not at the level to challenge for honors in europe yet. More so, a number of those players will likely be sold this season, and even if they are not, they are are unlikely to be as successful next season, as more teams will be better prepared and they will not be underestimated.

For a team like united, the starting XI, we should have at least 3 great players, about 5-8 very good players, and only 1-3 good players that need to be replaced cos they are past their prime or failed to live up to expectation. Unfortunately the current squad is far from this. Lukaku, at best, is a very good player, and given that we dont have enough great players, I dont see why we should spend so much money on him.
 
Last edited:
This is a very convincing argument.

Very good points.

I guess, in the real world, the biggest organisations pay astronomical fees to hire the best hands to get them the best results.

You've almost made me a convert.
 
MichaelRed said:
What's that for? He doesn't. Lukaku has 24 goals & 6 assists in 33 games compared to Griezmann's 16 goals 7 assists in 33 games.
Click to expand...
Now check over the past 3 seasons
 
Cassidy said:
Now check over the past 3 seasons
Click to expand...
How about we check the most relevant one? This season. By your logic I could say 'look at Heinze's goalscoring record in comparison to Lukaku's in 2003'. Lukaku was 20 years old 3 seasons ago.
 
MichaelRed said:
How about we check the most relevant one? This season. By your logic I could say 'look at Heinze's goalscoring record in comparison to Lukaku's in 2003'. Lukaku was 20 years old 3 seasons ago.
Click to expand...

So you pick the only season Lukaku has ever scored more than 20 league goals and say he "scores more goals than x player?"

Im not saying it is but this season could be an anomoly. Its the only seaaon he has outscored him for one. So its a bit silly to say he scores more goals.

Its like saying Lukaku score more goals than Aguero
 
Griezmann without a shadow of a doubt. Lukaku scores most of his goals against teams that aren't in the top 4. He barely caused any problems to us and neither did he do to Chelsea recently. He's a good striker but for the crazy amount of money Everton are demanding, he can go back to Chelsea instead. Every time I see Lingard missing a chance, I feel Griezmann would have put that away by now.
 
Lukaku from a strategic point of view because there are very few classical centre forwards available and to get one who qualifies as home grown is huge because we need to replace some of our homegrown players. Also he has improved every season for the last 4 season so he can and probably will still get better.

Griezmann is more for the shorter term. He is close to his peak, mobile, dynamic and great finisher. Needs the right kind of team to do well though but with our pace up front that shouldnt be a problem. Hes a dream from the marketing (revenue generating) point of view. Hes huge in france and among french girls especially, woodward will get our moneys worth.

The problem is if we get both. Can lukaku and griezmann combine well together? Im not sure about that. Lukaku curently lacks the quick comination ability to bring out the best from griezmann.
 
Griezmann will make all the young guns around him play better. Great at finding and creating space, deadly on the counter, defensively sound. In that absolute top bracket alongside Suarez and Lewandowski. Reminds me a lot of Muller in the way he plays the game. A nightmare for opposition teams playing a high defensive line.
 
Libano said:
Griezmann will make all the young guns around him play better. Great at finding and creating space, deadly on the counter, defensively sound. In that absolute top bracket alongside Suarez and Lewandowski. Reminds me a lot of Muller in the way he plays the game. A nightmare for opposition teams playing a high defensive line.
Click to expand...
He is not the type of player to make others play better. I cant think of a singe player in Atletico that plays better cos of Griezmann.

It is the creative players who can make the killer pass, the playmaker who can dictate the tempo of the game, and the dribblers who can attract 2 or more defenders to create space for team mates, those are the types of players that make other players play better. Unfortunately that is not Griezmann.

What you will get is a clinical finisher who will convert clear chances, most half chances, and score some that were not even a chance. That is invaluable in its own way as it can be difference between 1pts and 3pts, or difference between silverware and empty cupboard.
 
This thread is obviously not worth of 4 pages. Griezmann vs Lukaku, who would you splash the cash on? I think 90% people will pick Griezmann for sure given with our current situation and the players that we got at the moment. A better comparison should be Griezmann vs Sanchez, who would you splash the cash on.
 
Donovan_red7 said:
He's only 3 years older than Lukakku
Click to expand...
March '91 compared to May '93, so it's only two years actually.

There's only one answer to this question and it's Griezmann. I think I'd only take Dybala over him if we're talking about forwards, but he's not moving anywhere anytime soon except for Barcelona imo.
 
Whoever we pick, the strategy should be adjusted.

Griezman, will offer no aerial threat, no physical domination. However, he will offer more fluidity, creativity and hard work which is rare for attacker player.
Lukaku, will offer aerial threat, physical domination. However, we cant not expect a fluid style of football and creativity. And based on performance away, sometimes he could be a donkey CF a la Caroll.

So it will be depend on how the strategy to be applied in the next season. Are we ready to play more Continental, rely on movement and short passing....Or we would like to play more conservatism approach....Big, Strong, Prolific, Tall, CF as poacher/finisher/wall...

However, in EPL only, the necessity of the Big Man upfront is higher than technical CF/SS. Mostly because the game style is more physical and most of EPL defenders rely on this aspect...

Looking at our current team, if, we want to put a trust to Rahsford/Martial, CF could be second priority. What we lack now are the midfield who can play a higher tempo (Wingers, and Pure DM) and the backs who injury-free (CB, LB, and RB).

So, in my stupid opinion :

1. GK - assuming we stupid enough to stick on Romero, while selling DDG - Romero, Pereira, Johstone - get 40 mio + James from Madrid, cheaky bid for Heaton for 10 mio, or Grant for similar amount...
2. RB - need to find a back up and successors of Valencia - I don't have any name to write on- sell Darmian for 15 mio, buy 20-25 mio experienced back...
3. LB - Shaw and Darmian are shit. But Mou prefer experiences -sell Shaw for 10-15 mio, buy 20-25 mio experienced back
4. CB - 2 Injury prones, 1 will be donwgrade due to ACL, so only Bally Left, Blind as the versatile back up - sell Jones, Smalling, Rojo for 50-60 mio, promote one CB from reserve, buy good CB for 30-40 mio, buy good back up CB for 15-20 mio.
5. CM - Carrick retired, Herera stay, Pogba stay - sell Fellaini for 15-20 mio, buy pure DM for similar price...may be Kante MKII a.k.a Dingdi (forget the name), or perhaps we could persuade Guaye to leave Everton (swap with the Afro), bring back Perreira as back up
6. Winger/AM - Mkhi, Young, Lingard - don't like all of them, but Young is aging but still need as the back up, and perhaps Mkhi will get another season chance - if James is in, sold Mata for 15-20 mio or throw him to China League for 30-40, break the bank for ISCO for 40 mio.
7. Attackers - Ibra will retired, Marshal and Rashford are the only pure attackers we have - sell Rooney for 20 million, or even terminate his contract, or lump him to China League for 30 mio, buy an established striker as the back up, or if we are going nut, buy one of Lukaku/Griezman/Mbappe for 60 mio top...

However, to make everything click, sometimes, we don't need the biggest star to make the sky shines, just a bunch of regular ones may also make that happen.

Just my 2 cents.
 
Cassidy said:
So you pick the only season Lukaku has ever scored more than 20 league goals and say he "scores more goals than x player?"

Im not saying it is but this season could be an anomoly. Its the only seaaon he has outscored him for one. So its a bit silly to say he scores more goals.

Its like saying Lukaku score more goals than Aguero
Click to expand...
It's also unfair to compare him in earlier seasons where Lukaku was less experienced and in a weaker side. Neither argument is water-tight but I do believe that in this case the most recent season is the most relevant.
 
MichaelRed said:
It's also unfair to compare him in earlier seasons where Lukaku was less experienced and in a weaker side. Neither argument is water-tight but I do believe that in this case the most recent season is the most relevant.
Click to expand...
No but its a fact that ones goal tally is lower than usual and ones is higher.
 
Why not both. :angel:

Just a hunch, I bet Mourinho would go for both of them this summer.

Griezmann would for sure depends on us qualifying for CL or not (or if otherwise, who knows he might just want to join us and be our hero). We need him mainly to dominate European games, he still have to adapt to the EPL. Plus, may struggle leading the line.

Lukaku. EPL provened, consistently scoring. He's planning to leave Everton for top team. May also want to prove Jose wrong. He can lead the line and is physically strong. Not sure about his attitude. We need him if we're planning to dominate the EPL back. Won't be popular choice for many fans here though, since he's not fast enough.

Can be a good-easy solution to our goal scoring problems especially against the lower tier teams where we're embarrassingly struggling. He's not the type who'll complain being dropped or not playing too regularly I think, so we could rotate him with Rashford as sole striker, or playing them both together upfront since Rash often roam to the wings anyway. Hope he's interested.

:cool:Splash the Cash~
 
We need them both as our attacking play and scoring is really not up to much, Lukaku would give us power and strength and Griezmann would be a great signing giving us a really smart footballer that can play across the front line. If you look at the midfield and attack and take Ibra out of the picture as he´s gone it seems, how many would you put in a future team? For sure Pogba,Herrera and Rashford but the other ones really are facing a struggle to prove they are good enough for United. For me Mata,Lingard,Miki,Martial have a lot to prove after this season. Mata for me is not a winger, Lingard seems to be at a similar level to Cleverley,Miki has just shone glimpses of what he can do and Martial has had a dreadful season 2 at best but hopefully he will kick on as he clearly has massive talent. Rooney is just done and Young/Fellaini are nowhere near United class for me. So I think we are facing a massive rebuild in the summer if we are to have a chance of the title next year.
 
I honestly wouldn't want Lukaku here at any price. He lacks technical ability and has a playstyle which wouldn't sort the type of team we're trying to become.

What would be the point of finally getting rid of Fellaini only to replace him with another big lump to hoof the ball to?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.