I understand @Castiel, because without Giroud we have more attacking options to explore to score a goal, our action is much fluid and we can see a nice football like in the past. I'm with him and understand his point of view, but this guy is so important for Arsenal.
Today he didn't scored, but his obscure work has been excellent. His assist to Monreal has been superb, because of his body he needs to start a war with other defenders every week, is important for the corners (offensive and defensive), is good in the air but has a tecnique good enough to be very important with the ball on the pitch, he is capable to score goals and assist. He is a mix of an old number nine striker plus the qualities of a modern forward, despite his body is against him because at the moment the example of the modern striker is Luis Suarez (180 cm more or less) with exceptions like Olivier, Lewandowski and Diego Costa.
Concluding my post, is Arsenal more nice to watch without Giroud on attack? Yes. Have Arsenal more options to attack without Giroud? Yes. Can Arsenal change more tactic without Giroud? Yes. Is Giroud one of the most important players in the squad? Yes. Should Giroud be a perfect squad player for Arsenal, especially against teams like Burnley? Yes. Should Giroud be only a squad player for Arsenal to use ONLY for the final 20 minutes? Absolutely not.