This is the most reductionist thread ever.
Simply valuing players by goal points doesn't necessarily mean a lot.
Rashford scored 30 goals last season. That was abnormally good from him, not denying that. Well done, pat on the back.
But if he hadn't played, it doesn't mean we would have scored less goals. It means we would play differently, leading to different types of goals from different goal scorers.
Without Rashford, we would keep more possession. Because...
1) We'd have to play less high risk on the counter.
2) Rashford gives the ball away quite a lot.
3) Rashford doesn't press.
Increase in possession most often leads to less chances conceded, and more chances created.
And hard evidence also backs this up. When Rashford doesn't play, we don't score any less than when he does play.
Here's another example:
Spurs scored 70 PL goals last season.
Using the logic of this thread, they wouldn't have unless it was for Harry Kane.
Well, they have currently scored 62 goals, and have 8 more games to play. Meaning, they will likely outscore their previous tally, even without Kane.
You can do the same for various other players and scenarios:
United before and after Ronaldo's comeback.
Ronaldo was our biggest goal threat in his comeback season.
Yet it didn't really affect our goal tally. It's still pretty much close to the same it was both before he came, and after.
Ronaldo left, and other players scored.
Same goes for Bayern before and after Lewandowski.
Juventus before and after Ronaldo.
Not to mention, City before and after Haaland. It's pretty much the same. They've just shifted more goal contributions from many players onto a single player.
And so on, and so on, and so on.
A good striker or winger certainly doesn't hurt. But what's really important is the playing style and amount of possession. That dictates numbers of goals scored more than individual goal scorers.
Any team with a decent enough striker, will score a lot of goals if they also manage to dominate possession and control the games. Darwin Nunez is a prime example of that. Neither Nunez or Salah has blown the world away with their amount of goals this season. They've scored a decent amount, but nowhere near as much many would expect. But even still, Liverpool have no problems scoring a lot of goals. Nunez isn't the world's best striker, not by a long shot. But what he is, is one of the best team players. He will constantly press, be in the right position, make sure Liverpool either retain possession or wreak havoc on his opponents. He makes Liverpool a better team. Not mainly through his goals, but through his playing style.
So yeah... This thread is just reducing everything down to outcome bias, by simply focusing on who scores the goals.
Whenever someone says: "Oh no, who will score our goals or create our assists if players like Rashford or Bruno don't play" ... The answer is; someone else will, and our total goals tally won't be much different. The most important thing that would change our goals tally is improving our control and possession. Then sure, add a decent or pretty good striker (like Nunez or maybe even Højlund some day can be), and we would be off to the races.
As long as we keep playing this chaotic brand of sh*tty counterattacking football, our goal difference won't change much regardless of who scores or plays. There will only be negligible differences. At best it will put us in the top four/five. At worst it will put is right outside the top four/five.