Please ....... explain to us exactly what Plan B is, then, if there is one.
I have an issue with the idea of plan a, b etc with football. I think the approach and tactical complexities of competing team games don't really allow for plans and more a variety of approaches and tactics etc. I'm not claiming we have a plan b or to know what that plan b is. I'm providing a possible explanation for why we'd sign someone who isn't as good as Murray at playing the game the way Murray plays it. Why we might sign someone for whom heading is not a particular strength.
My point is people criticise a lack of plan B. It should go without saying that a plan B should be different to plan A. It also helps to have a plan C as well. A whole alphabet of them if possible. But alternative plans can often need alternative personnel. Couple that with a manager and recruitment team who will talk about signing players who 'give us something different' (often so that they can provide the options of alternate plans). With those aims in mind, we're going to look at strikers who offer alternatives to Murray. Signing a striker who, as Mo G was suggesting, was just like Murray would be counter productive to those aims. It also can mean signing a player who, while having strengths Murray doesn't have, will have weaknesses Murray doesn't. (e.g. heading a ball admittedly not being a strength).
I would also point back to where I mention that I'm not saying Locadia is a the right man to provide what the above is looking for. It may have been the intention when signing him, but it hasn't worked out (...yet?).