Jesus has been linked with a summer move away from City, but Jones has suggested the Premier League champions could look to sell his teammate instead.
What’s the latest news involving Jesus and Mahrez?
Jesus has had some quite periods this season, and has only started 17 of City’s 33 league games in 2021/22.
Meanwhile, Pep Guardiola’s side are the frontrunners to sign Erling Haaland in the next transfer window, which could be bad news for Jesus in terms of game time.
As a result, it has been reported that he could potentially leave City, with Arsenal showing interest in the forward.
Meanwhile, Mahrez has spent the last four seasons at the Etihad, but his contract is set to expire in 2023.
Liverpool 2-0 Everton! Full reaction to Merseyside derby on The Football Terrace…
What has Jones said about City’s transfer plans?
Based on recent reports, it has seemed that Jesus could be moved on, but Jones has claimed City may be happier to part ways with Mahrez.
Speaking to GIVEMESPORT, Jones said: “If someone from the front line was to move on, I’m told that Mahrez is the one they might be more open to losing.”
Should City sell Jesus or Mahrez?
Both players are out of contract next year, so City may consider this summer as their final opportunity to get a reasonable transfer fee for them.
Over the last couple of seasons, Mahrez has arguably been a little more consistent than Jesus, and his tally of 108 goal contributions since he arrived in 2018 is mightily impressive.
The likes of Kevin De Bruyne, Bernardo Silva and Phil Foden often get the plaudits at City, but Mahrez’s work deserves to be recognised.
Furthermore, with Haaland edging close to a move to the blue side of Manchester, Jesus may be deemed surplus to requirements shortly.
However, Jesus has scored five goals in his last two matches, demonstrating that he is a major talent. He is six years Mahrez’s junior, and City may feel he has more room for improvement, which could tip the scales in his favour in terms of staying put, leading to Mahrez potentially being sold instead.