I really don’t understand this deal.

Havertz’s best position seems to be second striker – a position that no club really uses anymore, especially not Arsenal. He’s definitely a forward, and that’s the area where Arsenal has so many players that truly talented ones like ESR and Reiss Nelson rarely play. And they were just signed to new deals / told they won’t be leaving.

At £65m, he’d have to be a starter. So, who’s going to be benched? Gabriel Jesus? Martinelli? Saka?

The only forward that Arsenal could really use is a “plan B” striker. Someone who can interpret the role differently than Gabriel Jesus / Martinelli / Nketiah / Balogun. Say, a target man. Havertz definitely isn’t a target man, and he plays very similarly to those other forwards when he’s in as a striker.

At least when Arsenal spent £70m on Pepe, there was a clear need for a wide forward. Pepe might not have worked out, but the logic of paying a premium price to fill a real need was sound. This seems like paying a premium price (to a potential rival club) to get a player who doesn’t fill a need.

More important than bringing in an unneeded player is the opportunity cost of not having that £65m to spend elsewhere. Central midfield needs not just one player, but probably 2, or even 3 if Xhaka leaves. The back line could also do with some strengthening. Assuming Saliba stays, the starters are in good shape, but as we saw at the end of the season, 2 injuries or absences and things start looking very thin.

Now, maybe Havertz is a transformational talent. Maybe he is the kind of player who’s so good that if he ever becomes available you get him no matter what. In that case, it doesn’t matter if you have pressing needs elsewhere, or if you already have an excellent player in that position. But, is there any evidence of that? He’s definitely very good, but even if you ignore his time at Chelsea, is there any evidence he’s “Dennis Bergkamp” good? Or even “Mesut Ozil” good?