Sanchez was the player that we aimed to replace Suarez with. If we had managed to sign him, then it would have been at the expense of Balotelli, not Lallana. I think Balotelli is the closest you could come to calling any of our signings a "Suarez replacement", but even then, I think the idea was that the responsibility would be spread around the team. We needed additional attacking players whether Suarez stayed or left.
Yes, the responsibility has been spread around the team, and Lallana was signed to take up
some of that responsibility, which is exactly what I said. Balotelli was also signed to take on
some of that responsibility, as were Lambert and Markovic to a lesser extent.
You may have needed additional attacking players, but I'm not sure you'd have necessarily managed to sign them. Had you not sold Suarez, I reckon you'd have had a transfer budget of about £30 million. There is no way Adam Lallana would have been joining if that was the case, and I think your window would have looked something more like Can, Lambert, Moreno and Manquillo, with the possible addition of a different winger for ~£10 million.
I'm not convinced Liverpool have that much left to spend on transfers anymore, and if you don't make CL football this season you're going to really struggle to invest for next season. Rodgers has been given a fair wedge to spend on the squad since his arrival, and a lot of his signings have been okay at best, no matter how you want to dress it up.
I don't think there was ever any real interest in Sanchez, which is why he signed for Arsenal fairly quickly. I've seen it argued that it would have been a wage issue, but even then I don't buy that as an excuse to be honest. Suarez must have been earning a pretty decent amount, having signed a new contract during the season, and Balotelli, Lallana, Toure and Lovren must be earning a fair amount between them. I fail to see how a club that had just shifted one of their top earners for £75 million can claim that they couldn't spend ~£40 million on a top class player and pay him the going rate, when they spent £117 million on 9 players, and presumably pay them to play football, such is the tradition. That said, had you signed a Sanchez-type player, I don't think you'd have been seeing Lallana as well because your financial structure wouldn't have allowed for it.
I think Liverpool are
still in need of a decent central defender (join the queue), as well as another decent full-back, central midfielder, striker, and possibly a goalkeeper too. Rodgers won't be afforded another £100 million+ summer, and frankly he's wasted a great deal of the funds that have been made available to him.
Back on track though, United fans consider Blind a success because he does the job he was signed to do very well. I don't think the same can be argued for Lallana. I also don't think taking the Balotelli gamble was a bad idea, given the needs of the squad at the time, but Rodgers' management of him as been awful.