Agreed. However, a few things to keep an eye on: 1) At least one of O'Neill, Klute, Brown, Irwin and/or Powers is going to have a sophomore slump. It's almost inevitable, given they all drastically over-performed this season. 2) As COMtnGuy said above, even with their over-performing, we still only made the playoffs on a tiebreaker, and did not advance into the "actual" playoffs 3) Sanchez was fantastic in his short time here...but he'll also be 34 next year. While I'm sure none of us would say no to another year of Klute with 5+ assists, we need another source for creativity amongst our midfield and can't rationally expect Sanchez to perform at the same high clip, nor to shoulder all the creative burden. 4) It has to be said that some level of our success this year is owed to having a pretty large number of MLS unknowns in the lineup (the 5 rookies/pseudo-rookies listed above, Sanchez, Torres, etc.) With more game tape on us, people are going to learn our tricks this offseason and be more prepared next year. No one's obviously thinking about getting complacent (and I know you weren't in any way implying it). But a good foundation alone only keeps you clear of the groundwater.
I'm sorry but that is the playoffs. Why so dense about this? The only place I've seen this suggested is the Rapids board. At any rate it's untrue.
The Knockout round is a one-off for the right to be seeded as the 4th seed in the more traditional home-and-away set up MLS has embraced as its playoffs over time. The nomenclature may have been deliberately adjusted by the MLSHQ marketing gurus to allow for more teams to claim the right of making the playoffs, and more power to them. But in this format, I see the Knockout games no different than the games known colloquially as the "Play-In" games in the NCAA tournament. The games are a deliberately different format than the later rounds of the playoffs and bare little resemblance to the games that follow them in the tournament. The broadcasters treat them as play-in games (using Seattle's and Houston's regular play-by-play as the feeds). MLS treats it as somewhat separate from the playoffs, calling the games themselves a "knockout round" instead of calling them part of each conference's own playoff. I have no problem with the format (I find it quite entertaining, really), and would have made the same comment had we won against Seattle. The format is what it is, and I prefer people call the play-in games what they are, too. It all comes down to that age-old political question of finding a way to call something by a name which isn't its actual name. The NCAA has also gone to great lengths to change the name of its play-in games twice (now going with the First 4) to avoid any similar stigma. I just personally don't ascribe any stigma to being in a play-in game, unlike apparently a lot of other people here. I ascribe more stigma to the team itself for not getting the results it needed down the stretch to avoid that fate, which is the point I was making in the first place.
Lol it's a playoff. What's next a lengthy birther link? You supposedly have a problem with people not calling it what it is and you yourself do it here and now with this playoff game.
... Anyway, carry on RapidStorm. I appreciate 99% of your input. I can disagree with you on this, understand your larger point, and enjoy your takes all at the same time.
RapidStorm brings up a point, I am not sure rules on, when OP got brought on we were told later that he was stuck with Smith's guys because of "Veteran contracts had Guaranteed" in offseason. Does this apply to all players after first season? Is it actually in their contract or MLS/ PLayers union rule. I tried looking it up with no success. Does anyone know the rules around this? If Harris or Wallace are not released by whatever post MLS Cup date, does that mean we are stuck with them in 2014 unless we can trade them? I remember in past offseasons, guys "released" but still invited to camp, maybe even Smith last year (I thought his contract was up) got invited and eventually earned a place on roster.
Just saw Bianchi calling Serna dark horse for RB next year, man I hope that is personal opinion and not a Rapids idea. He is fast and quick enough but size wise I think he would get destroyed trying to defend. Also, Serna I thought is Left footed- playing RB? FWIW he has several remarks on offseason: Doesn't see Wynne or Pickens returning Thinks Calderon could be moved so O'Neil can play at CB Thinks Cascio could be traded Castrillon will not return Sturgis faded and Powers could move back
Contracts are pretty much guaranteed for a season once the season starts (within a couple weeks of the season opening date). A few players can be put on semi-guaranteed contracts that don't fully kick to guaranteed until later in the season, but those are mostly for developmental players (think Kohei Yamada last year) or the occasional veteran that has to prove himself (Terry Cooke in his final year with the Rapids, though the CBA around this was different then). Very few players have guaranteed contracts over multiple years, its something MLS has shied away from. Generation Adidas contracts (Brown) are multi-year, as are homegrown contracts (Armstrong. O'Neill, Serna, though Armstrong's ends this year IIRC). I've always assumed Pablo got a multi-year guaranteed deal when he re-signed. I would bet Torres got one too as a DP. Casey's might have been guaranteed until it ended last offseason. Other than that the only other players that might be on that type of contract would be our top MLS Cup players, i.e. Pickens, Moor, Wynne, but I would be surprised if they were. Now a couple of those veteran guys signed new contracts between the start of the 2011 and the 2012 season (when Pareja took over) and the contract might have been guaranteed through 2012. If a player is signing a new contract, especially in the offseason, he probably wants assurances that thy're not going to tear it up in 2 months. But I doubt those veterans were on any sort of multi-year deal, Pareja was just stuck with them because they were guaranteed for the first season after signing.
I put the Rapids primary needs this way. Centerback While I said keep Moor , Calderon & O'Neill, I think the Rapids need to retool the central defense. They need at least one physically imposing and athletic CB, with composure. Right Back Ideally someone with experience, quickness, ball skills and composure. Offensive Mid Charles may help out, and Rivero may reach his potential but the team needs someone who can step in and contribute offensive creativity and composure. A 20 something Sanchez would be nice, thank you Forward Someone to challenge and push Brown.
We were also remarkably lucky to have seen all of 45 minutes and 35 minutes of Javier Morales and exactly zero of Landon Donovan and Robbie Keane.
I know there is little love for Edson Buddle from many posters who want Buddle gone, but the Buddle bashers need to come to grips with the fact that Buddle was essential to the Rapids’ success this year. The Rapids record with Buddle as a starter was by my count 10-4-4; the team was terrible in the beginning of the year when Buddle was injured, and it had a 3wins/3losses record (OMG) when Torres started. Why did the team so well with Buddle as a starter and as a major contributor off the bench in at least 2-3 games? It’s not luck or a statistical trick. The Rapids succeeded because they built their offense around Buddle, at least until Torres arrived, and Buddle delivered even though he wasn’t scoring. Don’t take my word for it. Here is what Conor Doyle had to say to the Denver Post when he was working with the team: “I’ve watched Edson (Buddle) play. You can see the role he plays, how he connects things and how defenses play against him, then how Deshorn (Brown) and Atiba (Harris) play around him. I’ve learned some things to get a grip on how I’d like to play in that system.” To OP’s credit, he developed a system that used Buddle technical talent and tactical sense as a target forward to maximize the team’s success. This was lost when Torres came on as the lead forward. Why? Obviously, not because Torres is a lesser talent than Buddle. Soccer is a team game. The problem with Torres is that because he arrived late and had international duties, the team did not have enough time to build a winning system around Torres. Hopefully, OP will fix that problem next year. So what’s Buddle’s future with the Rapids? It should depend on whether OP believes that Buddle can play a key role on a team where Torres is the main man. Buddle may be too old and too well paid to play a supporting role to Torres, but the Rapids will need someone like him to play target and “connect things.”
Torres is not a target player in my opinion. I don't think it is a choice between Buddle and Torres. I'd prefer Torres outside and the Rapids to acquire another target forward that is more effective and less costly than Buddle.
Right you are! For Panama, either Blas Perez or Luis Tejada played as a target player with Torres either wide or behind these players running at the defense. Torres is most effective with the ball at his feet running at defenders. Brown is similar. Each is greatly enhanced playing off a target forward or receiving the ball in space. Neither is maximized with his back to the goal. At this time, Buddle or similar is necessary to the Rapids style of attack.
Agree that Torres is not a target forward. The attack will be built around Torres and I agree that the team needs a target forward to maximize Torres's effectiveness. But who would you pick as a more effective and less costly target forward than Buddle? I don't think that player exists in MLS. I think what the Rapids will have to consider is : Do we need a true target forward, who can we get to do the target job, can we afford Buddle if he is playing a subordinate role to Torres. Not easy questions, and I'm not sure that the Rapids will conclude that they need a target forward. If they conclude that they need a target player, Buddle is their best bet.
I can buy the argument that Buddle was not totally useless. Looking out of shape for so long did not help his cause, and plenty of people though Casey was useless because he wasn't running around all the time. However, I think I'd have to see a more in-depth analysis of Buddle's games than just the record of him in the starting lineup (I get 10-5-4 [W-L-T], still excellent). At one point the Rapids were undefeated with O'Neill as a starter and the stat got mentioned on the broadcasts a lot. While O'Neill wasn't playing poorly, it was also hard to see how that record was especially was his doing. Same with Buddle. He had some good games but he also seemed to have a lot of mediocre games where he didn't do much. He did have some nice switches in some games which helped the wing on the other end gain a lot of ground, but overall he seemed to have less of an effect as a target man as Casey would in the Smith days. Not that such vague memories make for an in-depth analysis, either. But I believe citing Buddle as a key to the season would come to the surprise as most observers. The "record w/player X in starting lineup" is really helped out if the player didn't appear in the disastrous 1st four games. Labrocca's another player who didn't start the 1st 4 games. His record is just as good as Buddle's: 9-5-2 (1.81 pts/g to 1.79 pts/G for Buddle).
Buddle is a hack, and just crappy version of Conor Casey. He gets paid twice a much to perform the same role and only puts up half the numbers. But yeah...lets build our offense around an old guy who doesn't want to be here and couldn't be bothered to get in shape until after the season was well underway. Thanks for that, I needed a good laugh today.
When we traded for Buddle I thought it was acknowledged that this is final year of his current contract, so we could get him back for less. It is true that without Buddles couple of goals we would of been outside looking in on playoffs, we just made it in with him and others. There are ways to play this game without a target forward too, what Torres benefits from (like most forwards) is having another person there to occupy defenders rather than letting them all concentrate on a loan forward.
You could probably say that for any Rapid that scored a winning goal or two this season. (Not directed specifically at COMtGuy) I also find it hard to swallow the "such and such a player has been playing for so many games and the Rapid's record during these games was x-x-x" argument for a players worth unless that player has been scoring numerous winning goals or stopping goals (i.e. the 'keeper). There are too many variables in an entire game, over the course of numerous games, to use that specific statistic as a as a good measure of a single players worth on the team. Specific impact via passing accuracy, saves, shots on target, goals, etc. (i.e. traditional statistics) need to be taken account much more, imo. So regardless of Buddle's alleged contributions to the team in a "big picture" way, his individual statistics don't speak very loudly. Though I don't have anybody in mind, I think a similarly impactful (or better) target forward can be found for less money.
On a mildly related note, my work week has sucked majorly...but I'll make an attempt to put that spreadsheet I made of the roster up on Google Docs tonight.
If Bianchi's correct I'd be alright with all of that. I'd just have to trust OP on Serna though, not having seen him play much. Yeah, I'm not sure I buy into it either. The GWG is a stat I'm not too on board with. The goal is valuable, but I doubt the stat's value. Does it mean the player worked harder to get the goal, was smarter, etc..? Or, does it mean the player was a late sub who scored the last goal? If I were to make an argument for Buddle, I'd lean towards his assists and setup play (missed shots by others), which often demonstrated his skills. Even with making such an argument, I have to wonder what the right price is for Buddle. At his age, with his knees, you have to wonder how much money the team should allocate to him.
Since I was mistaken on the meteoric rise and quality improvement of both Klute & O'Neill in 2013, my assessment of Serna may be short as well but I do not think so. He played poorly at FB for USA U-20, he was simply too small to defend appropriately. IMO, he will become a target at FB for the Rapids.
This is really the dilemma for bringing him back. I have no names to throw out there since I am not a FIFA 14 "game" scout like Dismemberment was . But for me with our young team at best you offer Buddle a reduced single year contract maybe with option and go find a young guy to grow up with rest of team in that role. I thought for a Second maybe Harris but he doesn't seem to me to have necessary touch/ trapping ability for the role. Maybe Marx has idea Luis Tejada is currently on loan to Liga MX, but is 31 so not that young.
Granted, I've not seen a lot of Serna. But from what I have seen, he seems a more attack-minded than D-minded player. So more of a wide midfield prospect than fullback prospect. Given his size and inexperience, it seems like you'd want to farm him out to a USL side willing to play him in the midfield or at a wide forward spot in a 4-3-3 to give him extended minutes worth of experience fighting against (physically) mature defenders.