Depends on how good Gana end up being.
Presently, no. I'll take the player with the potential to be one of the best of his generation rather than a group of solid, dependable performers, even if I think the business improves us in the short term (it does).
It's a good deal today, and if we spend loads more next season on the back of finishing 4th-6th, it's good business overall. But if this gamble doesn't pay off and we're watching John Stones lift trophies for the next decade while we plug away finishing between 6th and 10th for that time? Bad deal, and an entirely possible future.
That said, I'd probably take the risk too, we need this season to be a statement, not another year of tantalizing potential and that requires players that are currently in their prime...but we'll probably still bemoan losing John Stones in 5 years time. Unless Gana keeps being the real deal, that would soften the blow.