Grant Holt was one of the Premier League's surprise packages last season, scoring 15 goals in the division plus 1 in the FA Cup.
So it is no wonder he is attracting interest from clubs, especially after stating his desire to leave Norwich City and hand in a transfer request.
Yet at 31, his age presents a dilemma when coupled with a big price tag.
If Holt's breakthrough season had come five or six years earlier, there surely would be no qualms about a £6 million fee, but if West Ham supporters are sceptical we can hardly blame them.
Here are two opposing views:
Yes he is worth £6 million
The Hammers have been linked with a number of strikers over the summer, many of who ply their trade abroad in Serie A or La Liga.
It is though important to remember that Holt has proven he has done it in the Premier League - 15 goals is an excellent return, even in his heyday for Liverpool Michael Owen never topped 18.
Holt may be getting on in his career, but it should be remembered he is a late developer. He can still have two or three years at the top level.
For West Ham next season is about consolidation, retaining their Premier League status and leaving a stable platform on which to build. Holt, a proven performer, can help West Ham show they belong at the level, and provide experience for the club's talented youngsters to feed off.
It should not be forgotten that he is the ideal target man for Sam Allardyce's preferred 'route one' style of football. Similar to Kevin Davies at Bolton, Holt could thrive, and if the Hammers can get two good years out of him with 10 plus goal returns, the investment will be worth it.
No he is not worth £6 million
Signing Holt for £6 million could be a gamble Allardyce lives to regret. He has been primarily a football league player his whole career, judged not to be good enough for the top flight.
There is a danger his season with Norwich last year will prove to be a flash in the pan, similar to players like Michael Ricketts at Bolton, once capped by England.
If that is the case, West Ham will have paid an over-inflated price for a player who simply isn't that good, and could be stuck with his wages too. Surely that's the reason for handing in a transfer request? He wants to capitalise on his year of success and take on one big pay day.
Signing Holt would be a short-term fix only, and would indicate Allardyce is going back to his old ways.
The manager was keen to stress he wanted to play a more attractive brand of football, and the signings of Ricardo Vaz Te and Ravel Morrison - yet to be seen - indicate that. Signing Holt would deviate from that plan and be a backwards step.
It would show that West Ham are putting the development of youngsters on the back-burner, if they are going to sign a striker, they should look for a younger model, 25-year-old PSV striker Ola Toivonen scored 28 goals last season and is reported to be available for around £7 million - surely that is better value?
Which side do you stand on? Should the Hammers go for Holt?
image: © imatthews