Arsenal have been linked with Serge Aurier for so long that the newspapers have grown tired of writing the same article and have started to branch out, suggesting that Arsenal could be in for Seamus Coleman instead. But the question for me is how do both players compare to the guy they are replacing, Bacary Sagna?

The simple answer is that Sagna was a very well balanced player for Arsenal, going forward when needed and staying back when needed, making himself available on the touch line as a sort of 5th midfielder.

Aurier, on the other hand, is an attacking menace who was still able to get back and play defense. And Seamus Coleman is just all around a very efficient fullback.

Here, the three players are compared:

The first thing that pops out to me is how much of Aurier’s stats are about going forward. His passes are mostly forward, he scored 6 goals, he had 6 assists, and he took 58 shots, 47 of which were in the opposition 18 yard box. That shots stat is pretty ridiculous. As an example, Theo Walcott took 86 shots two seasons ago, 60 in the box. Aurier was third on Tolouse for shots per game and goals scored. He’s a fullback.

Aurier also had 6 of his team’s 32 assists, 19 % of their total. But he got those 6 assists with just 26 key passes, which was 8% of Toulouse’s total Key Passes. Despite his low number of key passes, he still connected on 19% of 191 crosses, that accounts for 21% of Toulouse’s total crosses attempted. To put that in context, Leighton Baines attempted 229 of Everton’s 836 (27%) crosses completing just 17% of those attempts.

Aurier tried more crosses than any of the three players and also connected on more crosses. But it’s Seamus Coleman who was more efficient, completing over 30% of his crosses. He took less than half of the total number of crosses that Aurier did but that’s completely understandable when you consider the stats above about Leighton Baines and the number of crosses he took.

Defensively, Aurier puts up impressive numbers as well, leading all three players in tackles, interceptions, and doing OK in aerial duels. Sagna’s aerial duels numbers are so high mostly because he was a favorite target for Szczesny to clear the ball to. Oh, and he is good in the air. Coleman is, erm, not.

It’s actually kind of eerie how similar Coleman’s numbers are to Sagna’s in terms of output. But while the numbers are similar Coleman is more efficient. He shoots the ball less than Aurier but still scored the same number of goals; took half as many crosses, still connected on almost the same number; took fewer dribbles but was a 60% dribbler and completed more dribbles than Aurier; fewer passes and yet created more chances; attempts fewer tackles but is successful 62% of the time; just all around a very efficient player.

So, who do you choose?

Serge Aurier is one of the hottest names in football right now and his name is only heating up with performances like the one against Japan 3 days ago. 2 assists off 2 crosses in 2 minutes will do that for a player. Meanwhile, Coleman is a much more efficient player all around. I can see arguments for both though I do understand why people would choose Aurier over Coleman, his stats are quite mouthwatering.

Can Wenger tame him? Keep him from camping out in the opposition box? Do we want Wenger to tame him? Can Aurier play with Walcott in front of him? Can Walcott play with Aurier in front of him? Coleman seems more like a safe bet, Aurier more the gamble. A gamble with potential for huge payout.

@7amkickoff

(All numbers via Opta)