I agree with most of that but that's not really the same. Of course we need to keep bringing on young players whether that's through our academy or going down the leagues and getting other young players with potential but that's just the cycle of any team sport. As an individual though Lookman doesn't need replaced as there's nothing there to replace.
Yeah, we might be arguing about replacing from two different sides here. It's certainly not a Lukaku situation, where we've suddenly got to find 25 goals+assists a season.
I do firmly belive that his potential needs to be replaced though. We don't really have anyone in the academy with that kind of buzz around them right now either, so it's going to involve spending £20m+ (e.g. the Maddison and Torreira fees) on someone who's played plenty of games at a decent level.
If we've ultimately ended up spending money to swap Richarlison (whom I'm very happy with, don't get me wrong) for Lookman, the summer ends up looking worse and less intelligent for me. That's why I'm arguing for us holding out for more money because it's the market that we, as a Premier League club, have to operate in that should be important to us.