Here's my issue with Mkhitaryan so far: he doesn't kills teams, he beats them when they're already dead. The rest of the time, his influence on our play is too peripheral for a player in his position. He has the potential to improve in both scenarios, but there's not enough evidence up till now to conclude that he will.
Against Everton he had the second goal? Are you claiming he should be scoring more goals? But his role is more as a playmaker? Also, if stats are meaningless, couldn't you extend same argument to all players in the history of football? When do stats matter and when do they not? Can you provide an exact rule when you can leverage stats to claim and when can you not? If Antion Greizmann had a bad season would he be shit in your eyes?
This opens up an interesting Segway (mods please move my post to another place where you think it fits). So, suppose HM has better stars than Antione Greizmann at season end (or January), would you still pay $200 mil release clause for AG? Also, do you think HM would stay as a super sub? I bet you if AG is bought he will leave MU (probably to Juve as Riola has strong connections there).
I think most are anticipating an AG move and are comparing every attacker in the team to an unproven EPL player (AG). That is my opinion. I just say unproven as it is not clear how successful an unproven EPL player will be as past history has indicated that a top player in non-EPL could struggle (e.g. Angel Dimarie). So, it's going to be a good season this year possibly but MU may have to gamble if they go with AG for HM (supposing he keeps form) or any other attacker on team.
No time is being for any MU team to coalesce. They speak of a MU "core", but no core is being allowed to develop.
Yes, AG release clause was supposedly raised since Barca made a move for $125 mil. It will be back down in January.