Earthquakes Stood Pat - Good or Bad?

Discussion in 'San Jose Earthquakes' started by QuakeAttack, Jan 23, 2013.

  1. SJTillIDie

    SJTillIDie Member+

    Aug 23, 2009
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Mark I don't get your mehdi love. He is experienced but even at his peak form he is not going to run by anyone, he isn't going to play the killer final pass in the attacking third, and he isn't going to score from range like khari.

    He is going to maintain possession like baca and put in an honest defensive shift.

    But we don't know where he will be at form-wise b/c this is a serious long term injury. I wouldn't count on him for much.
     
    DotMPP repped this.
  2. alexiskool1991

    alexiskool1991 Member+

    May 9, 2011
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
  3. lurking

    lurking Member+

    Feb 9, 2002
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    How will we ever catch the mighty Crew now? :confused:
     
    Neuwerld repped this.
  4. JazzyJ

    JazzyJ BigSoccer Supporter

    Jun 25, 2003
    Well, there's standing pat, and there's "stud pat". If we are going to "stud pat", then I think we are good :--).
     
    markmcf8 repped this.
  5. Goodsport

    Goodsport Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 18, 1999
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    [​IMG]



    GO SAN JOSE EARTHQUAKES!!! :cool:


    -G
     
  6. Albany58

    Albany58 Member+

    Sep 14, 1999
    Concord, CA USA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Pat was a stud!
     
  7. markmcf8

    markmcf8 Member+

    Oct 18, 1999
    Vancouver, WA, USA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Mehdi is a better player coming off the bench than most MLS sides can boast. That's all.

    And as for standing pat, how does that look now that we have Bostock and Attakora in camp?

    Also, this club has been on a youth movement since late '11. Baca is a starter. We have Beta and Morrow starting. We've been focusing on the draft. We brought in Chavez, who's still youngish. We brought in some young guys to trial this year.

    It looks like a youth movement. Know what I'm saying?

    GO QUAKES!!

    - Mark
     
  8. SJTillIDie

    SJTillIDie Member+

    Aug 23, 2009
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I don't get the Attakora acquisition. He and Harden are kind of redundant... do we really need to carry 5 CB's on the roster?
     
  9. markmcf8

    markmcf8 Member+

    Oct 18, 1999
    Vancouver, WA, USA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Competition in training camp is good. No we don't need to carry 5, but this means that all 5 will fight for a spot, well, maybe not Muma.

    Maybe we keep Attakora, maybe we don't. But bringing him in for a trial is good. Maybe we decide that we like Nana better than Harden? We'll see. It's OK.

    GO QUAKES!!

    - Mark
     
  10. JazzyJ

    JazzyJ BigSoccer Supporter

    Jun 25, 2003
    I would say yes. More games, one injury prone guy (Hernandez) and one who will miss some games due to national team duty (Bernardez). Besides, I think Attakora would be the 2nd best defender in that group.
     
  11. sportsfan-quakes

    Mar 19, 2005
    San Jose
    Mark - not sure where you got this information from, based on my check the MLS summer window opens up June 27. At that point, the Quakes would have played exactly half of the MLS season. Also, at that point, the team would just be getting ready to get into the CCL play (which will be during Aug/Sept/Oct, based on the past couple of years). It's not ideal, but it's far from too late to bring in a player at the end of June and expect for him to make an impact. This is particularly true with the way the playoffs work, as mentioned several times, a team needs to be playing its best at the end of the year to win MLS Cup.

    As for the "standing pat" and those who are comparing this year to the 2010 offseason, I just don't get it. The 2010 Quakes team barely made the playoffs and was barely an average MLS offensive team, and didn't do well during the year against the top teams in MLS. The 2012 Quakes team had the best record in MLS, scored the most goals in MLS, and generally competed well against every team in the league, and dominated the top Western Conference teams during the year.

    "Standing pat" after being the best team in the league is very, very different from "Standing pat" after barely making the playoffs. I'm thrilled that the team was able to keep pretty much all of the core intact - I'm sad to see Dawkins go, but the Quakes did all they could to retain him, it was not their intent to let him go. I think the Quakes have brought in quite a bit of solid, experienced depth to the team this year, as compared to the 2010 offseason when they did not. And the Quakes have a lot of young guys as part of their core who should only be better this year (Baca, Garza, Morrow, Beitashour). I would have liked to see one more strong central defender get signed, along with an experienced central midfielder to backup/challenge Baca, but otherwise I like what the team has done. Ballouchy and Tracy, assuming they get healthy early in the year, are basically like new signings, based on the limited time they played last year.

    Reading this forum is amusing - if the team doesn't make changes, they get accused of "standing pat" and not caring. If they make a lot of changes, people complain that you can't rebuild the team every year and there needs to be continuity.
     
    DotMPP repped this.
  12. SJTillIDie

    SJTillIDie Member+

    Aug 23, 2009
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    or they could be gjertsen/ward and never get healthy and just eat up cap space all season
     
  13. sportsfan-quakes

    Mar 19, 2005
    San Jose
    Fair enough - except unlike Gjertsen and Ward (who both played a lot of minutes prior to 2012 when they were out all year), neither Ballouchy or Tracy have played much for the Quakes. So it's only upside with them - if they play and contribute, it's a net add compared to 2012. And if they don't play, it's not a loss compared to what they did in 2012. My point was that even though they were on the roster last year, it's almost like they are new adds to the team this year.
     
  14. JazzyJ

    JazzyJ BigSoccer Supporter

    Jun 25, 2003
    I think you don't get it because you don't really understand the point. The point is not that they there are "standing pat" like they did in 2011 after a relatively good 2010 season, and so they are going to go back to 2011 form. The point is that when you "stand pat", you are probably not going to get better results. Other teams are making more changes - some will get better, some will get worse, but some of the "get better" ones will pass you by. And the league gets more competitive every year. Teams like Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver are very motivated and willing to spend for DP's, etc.

    So yes, they were very good in 2012. Everyone gets that. And good enough in 2012 that if they slipped a bit, they'd still be good. But I think that they will not be better, and they will get passed in the standings. I don't think the goal should be "be good". It should be "be the best".

    I haven't read too many posts complaining that they are rebuilding the team every year. Last year was the most "rebuilding" they did, I think, since coming back in 2008 (besides of course 2008) and seems like those changes were met with nearly universal approval. Somehow I don't recall a lot of hand-wringing over the loss of players like Sealy, Convey, and RJ, and the additions of Chavez, Bernardez, Salinas, etc.
     
    QuietType repped this.
  15. sportsfan-quakes

    Mar 19, 2005
    San Jose
    Sorry, I disagree. In a salary-capped league, staying "as good" year over year when you were the best team in the league is a fine result, and one most teams don't accomplish. Look at most of the teams that have had really good years, they end up losing several of their top players who either go overseas or end up getting traded because of salary cap constraints. This year, many teams had just that happen - Seattle, Dallas, RSL, LA, SKC to name a few. Also, as I noted, the Quakes have several core players who are very young and still improving, so it's reasonable to expect that they could be better in 2013 while keeping the same players. Guys like Baca, Morrow, Beitashour, Garza and even Lenhart are still very young in their careers in terms of playing time. Add in a guy like Salinas who played very well last year but then was hurt for much of the year, and it's easy to see the team improve. They could also be worse, that's true, but "standing pat" with a young lineup is very different from standing pat with a much older lineup.

    There was a LOT of handwringing by people in the offseasons after 2008 and 2009 about too many changes, and again in the midseason of 2009 and 2010 when there were quite a few roster changes.
     
  16. JazzyJ

    JazzyJ BigSoccer Supporter

    Jun 25, 2003
    In any competitive landscape, whether it's sports or business or even (on a much wider scale) "living in an ecosystem", if you aren't continually changing and getting better, you are going to fall behind. There should be no debate on this; it is essentially "the laws of nature".

    The "young guys are going to get better" argument seems like a valid point on the surface, but there are young guys all over the league who are getting better, and I don't know that the Quakes are really all that much younger than other teams. Maybe they are on the younger side, but probably not by much.

    Again, I'm not thinking in terms of a "fine result", I'm thinking in terms of what does the team need to do in order to stay on top. Finishing 3rd is not good enough from that perspective. It's good, but not good enough, and represents a "falling behind" relative to last year. Why would we not want the Quakes to continue to be the best? Let me put it this way - there is no way in heck that the Quakes are going to be 8-0-1 again against the top 3 teams in the west. Teams like LA had already caught up with the Quakes by the end of the year. If the Quakes had made some changes to try to get significantly better, and those changes worked out, they'd have a chance. But "standing pat", I think it's very unlikely.

    Who is making up the mass exodus of "top players" among Seattle, Dallas, RSL, KC, and LA? And please, I don't want to see Fredy Montero in that list. That is probably a net positive for Seattle.

    Midseason? That's a different story. You don't want too much change midseason for obvious reasons. I thought we were talking about off-season. Certainly last year, after a lousy year, the sentiment was that the team needed to make significant changes to be more competitive, and that came all the way down from the FO. And I doubt people were all that upset about changes to the 2009 team, which was quite bad. The Quakes have had a pattern of up-down-up-down-up since returning; good even years, and bad odd years, the odd years being the years in which they tended to "stand pat" more due to the relatively positive results of the previous year.

    BTW, I'm considering 2008 to be a relatively positive year in that they came close to making the playoffs as an expansion team and had a nice surge towards the end after the addition of Hucks, etc. But "surge after the addition of Hucks" is an example of what can go wrong when you stand pat on the relatively positive results of the previous year. They thought, yeah, when Hucks came we got a lot better, and now that we have him for all of 2009, we should continue to be a lot better! But of course, it was fool's gold as he had some serious injuries and wasn't able to contribute much in 2009. And because they stood relatively "pat" that offseason they really didn't have a good backup plan. This year they are already being tested a bit in this way as they thought that Dawkins would be back but he isn't, and they don't really have a backup plan for that type of creative player (and I have my doubts that Bostock will be the guy).
     
    don gagliardi repped this.
  17. sportsfan-quakes

    Mar 19, 2005
    San Jose
    Seattle: Jeff Parke (probably their best defender), and Montero
    --- you may not like Montero, but he has scored more goals in the past 3 years than anyone not named Wondo. Over 4 years he's had 47 goals and 34 assists, that's a huge loss.

    RSL: Espindola, Olave, Johnson, Steele (4 of the 13 guys who played 1000 or more minutes for RSL)

    Dallas: Shea, Hartman, Hernandez, DeGuzman, Pertuz (4 of their top 10 players in minutes played)

    KC: Kamara, Espinoza, Cesar, Harrington (3 of their top 10 players in minutes played, their top goalscorer in Kamara, and realistically their two best players in Kamara and Espinoza)

    LA: Beckham, Wilhelmsson, Buddle and Donovan for at least part of the season (and highly likely they'll lose Omar Gonzalez in the summer to a transfer, unless they want to keep him for the year and let him go for free after the season when his contract is up)

    Meanwhile, the only player on the Quakes who was in the top 14 for minutes played that they are losing is Dawkins.
     
    markmcf8 repped this.
  18. sportsfan-quakes

    Mar 19, 2005
    San Jose
    Huh? The Quakes were tied with LA for the WORST RECORD in MLS in 2008, how was that "close to making the playoffs"?
     
  19. Earthshaker

    Earthshaker BigSoccer Supporter

    Sep 12, 2005
    The hills above town
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    It was "grenade" close.
     
  20. don gagliardi

    don gagliardi Member+

    San Jose Earthquakes
    Feb 28, 2004
    san jose
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    The Quakes were still in the playoff hunt into October '08, as I recall. The expansion team had a great stretch run which just petered out at the finish line, and everyone was fairly giddy about the team by the offseason. Indeed, because of Hucks, preseason prognosticators picked the Quakes to represent the Western Conference in the 2009 MLS Cup final. (Did anyone have eventual champ RSL even qualifying for the playoffs?) There was a good deal of over-confidence which characterized the Quakes offseason between '08 and '09, just as there was between '10 and '11, and there may also be this offseason. Hopefully, the Quakes learned some lessons from the past, but it far from obvious that they have.
     
  21. fadedtoblack

    fadedtoblack Member+

    Nov 6, 2007
    San Jose
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I still remember that Dallas game away when we were screwed by a phantom handball call in the box on Francisco Lima. Until then we were still in the race.
     
  22. JazzyJ

    JazzyJ BigSoccer Supporter

    Jun 25, 2003
    Exactly. I think they were in the playoff hunt until the last game or two, and as fadedtoblack says, if it wasn't for the phantom handball in Dallas they might have made it. 2008 was trumpeted as a "relative" triumph, and as the Quakes website says, the team "had more wins (8), points (33) and goals (32) and allowed fewer goals (38) than any expansion team since 1998". A spin perhaps, but I would consider it to be a relative success, especially after getting a late start on building the team.

    Looking at PPG for the Quakes since rebirth, you can see the pattern. After good even years, the team tends to "stand pat" and regresses. After bad odd years, the team has a fire lit under them, does some retooling, and delivers drastically improved results. I think it would be extremely difficult for the team to repeat the results of 2012. But let's hope that the drop is not like the 2010 to 2011 drop (.4 PPG).

    2008: 1.1 -> 2009: 1.0 -> 2010: 1.53 -> 2011: 1.12 -> 2012: 1.94
     
  23. markmcf8

    markmcf8 Member+

    Oct 18, 1999
    Vancouver, WA, USA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That's a change from the last several years. Foolishly, I didn't bother to look up the date for this year, figuring it couldn't be off by much. So that certainly makes me feel better.

    Also, I don't think we had Bostock or Attakora in camp when I wrote that post, so I'm feeling better about that too. We've brought on some good young guys, which means that we could be a very good team into the far future.

    Yeah, this is so, and in my post, I said that I expect us to be good, even if we do "stand pat," which actually, we aren't. My concern was waiting for the summer transfer window to make any big moves. However, we now have Bostock and Attakora in camp, and we have signed Fucito. So I'm good with that. Bostock can play outside mid (or inside), and that's our biggest area of concern. Oh, that and we need another central defender ... and we now have Attakora in camp. Whether he makes the team or not, he certainly increases competition for those roster spots.

    I have to agree with this. I'm not one for tearing the roster apart, and indeed, part of my criticism of the new regime, post '08, is that we have had entirely too much roster churn. And secondly, that we've kept players I'd have ditched, and lost players I'd have kept.

    But it's hard to argue with '12's results! :D So like a good boy, I'll shut up about my complaints.

    We do have a lot of young players who will only get better, and some good young guys that we just brought in: McGlynn, Muller, and Tommy, Delgado is supposed to be really good too. And we brought in Harden and Gargan provide us the depth we'll need for the long season, CCL, and Open Cup matches. (I really hope that we make a strong effort in CCL and Open Cup play this year.)

    I think those are two different sets of people. We're aren't quite that deranged. :alien:

    GO QUAKES!!

    - Mark
     
  24. JazzyJ

    JazzyJ BigSoccer Supporter

    Jun 25, 2003
    Montero has been productive, but why did they loan him out then? I think they are looking for him, especially as a DP, to take his game to the next level. He faded completely in the playoffs, and next to a strong defender like Bernardez he looks like a boy to a man.

    See, these changes are mostly about "not standing pat". It's not like these teams are losing starters and not replacing them. For example, KC has signed Bieler, Feilhaber, among others, though they have had a couple significant losses. RSL OTOH was starting to fade with their core that they have had for a few years. I think all of their player losses in the off-season have been due to trade or release. IOW they are losing these players of their own accord. This is a sign of a team that is retooling / "not standing pat". I haven't seen a lot of influx there yet, but seems that they have some allocation money and room under the cap for restocking.
     
  25. markmcf8

    markmcf8 Member+

    Oct 18, 1999
    Vancouver, WA, USA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think you're taking that metaphor a little too far.
    [​IMG]

    You are basically arguing that none of our existing guys will get any better, and that last year's rookies - Garza and Hustedt - aren't worth much. I'm excited to see Garza get some playing time. I think he has what it takes to be a very good MLSer.

    I see your argument here. On the other hand, Beta played hurt pretty much the second half of the season. So hopefully, he's back and at his regular level of MLS Best 11. Shea started in front of Dawkins until Shea got hurt. He should be back at his regular terrorize opposing defense level. (I know, some here are not much impressed by Shea, but he gives opposing teams the willies. Works for me.) Last season was Morrow's first as a starter. And we've added Fucito, and probably Bostock to our roster. We've added some depth among the defenders, and not just warm bodies, but guys who can play.

    We ditched our deadweight from last season (apologies to Gjoey and Ward) and replaced them with guys who are at least serviceable. The Bostock for Dawkins swap might not be a down grade at all.

    In the same way that I expect to get older every year, and slow down a little <sigh>, I very rationally expect that our team will not be the Supporters' Shield winners again this season. Looking at the records, I see that the Shield winners have repeated three times: DCU '06 & '07, Crewless '08 & '09, and the filth '10 & '11. So it's admirable to want to repeat, but the odds are long against it. We certainly haven't slipped that much, on paper anyway. The key thing will be playing with fire for the whole season.

    GO QUAKES!!

    - Mark
     

Share This Page