http://www.mlsnet.com/MLS/news/mls_news.jsp?ymd=20050119&content_id=21290&vkey=news_mls&fext=.jsp If I ever had any doubts that LA was nuts to let Sigi go, it was dispelled by this piece on the draft. This is very, very good and right on the money. (ok I never had any doubts they were nuts.) Of course I may feel that was as I agree with essentially everything he said. He must be reading my stuff. Serisouly, good piece.
One thing he says has a direct bearing on young Dallas players. He says this about Metro's pick - "How fast he comes on will depend on the playing time Bradley gives him". We have all argued about the playing time rookies have historically gotten in Dallas but here is a successful coaches take on it. Also good to here that he seems to think getting Glenn upgrades FCD.
He also offers the opinion that Moor was not the best defender available at our draft position, but was drafted because he was local. If true, the continuation of a very disturbing trend in our recent draft history.
I'm not sure what trend you're referring to - Ramon Nunez wasn't exactly a reach - but I have trouble being disturbed by this pick. What defenders could Sigi have been referring to - No Hunter Freeman - also from Dallas Troy Roberts - a reach Yes Michael Parkhurst Jack Stewart Tim Ward - maybe Kevin Goldthwaite - maybe I'm not qualified to compare these players, but Moor was a first-team All-American (none of the others were), is roster protected (unlike Stewart and Ward), was on the U-20 national team (Parkhurst and Freeman were young enough, but weren't), and can play multiple positions in defense, I don't see how you can criticize this pick. Sigi's article is probably the best draft summary I've read, but he doesn't know the future; Moor may end up only "an OK defender in this league", but he could definitely also be a star.
I'm not qualified to evaluate NCAA talent either. I'm simply working off of the original premise of this thread - that Schmidt's draft assessment indicates an advanced knowledge of pre-professional talent pool. As far as the disturbing trend mentioned, I was referring to: Moor - Local. Described by Schmidt in the article above as not the best defender available at our draft position. Nunez - Local. Received almost no playing time last season for whatever reason Stone - Local. Little impact as a player before giving up soccer. Thompson - Local. Never saw time with 1st team before being traded. Bussey - SMU grad, if not local. Little playing time, quickly cut. This is starting to look like a trend to me. Sure we didn't use high picks on all those guys, but were they all really the best player available at the position that we drafted them? I doubt it. Yet somehow their local status was part of a total package that ultimately led to them getting the nod over other players. That's the part that I find disturbing.
On the other hand, count the number of posts calling Colin Clarke and company damned fools because they didn't draft local boy Jamie Watson.
Erp, thanks, I meant Goldthwaite. Sigi may have advanced knowledge, but talent prediction is still a crapshoot - I thought his article was more interesting because he has intimate knowledge of the problems that exist in building a roster in MLS (cap space, Project-40, etc.). I'm not sure if it's fair to use two entirely different administrations' picks to establish a trend but, yes, overemphasizing locals looks to be something of a problem for the team.
I thought he was a fool because he didn't draft Clint Dempsey. Nothing wrong with localpicks but Dallas has a history of getting the wrong ones. How about Nick Garcia, Jose Burciaga Jr, Dempsey (off the top of my head). Broome (Lake Highlands)was also local as was Deering (Garland-Plano / not a draft pick but targeted).
He was talking about Jack Stewart. Most observers I talked to felt Moor and Stewart were the top two defenders. Moor was protected. Stewart is bigger and older and was rated just higher in pure game today. The roster protection is worth a lot in the MLS draft.
And in case anyone cares I happen to like Moor better. Stewart is bigger and stronger, Moor is a more tehcnical and tactically sound player... better head for the game, which I like. I did think he was the best defender in the draft, but Stewart was real, real close... and who knows how it will turn out. Only time will tell. I still think Sigi is very good and certainly way more qualified than me to say. and the process of his analysis of the draft is overall very good. Much better than Connelly's. I would have taken Watson too, I am not a huge fan of Glen. I get it and understand it, I just am not a fan. And I would have taken Chris Rolfe over Julian Nash. I just really liked Rolfe.
Our non-North Texas picks in recent years haven't exactly flourished for us either. Maybe it's not so much the picks but the development of those picks.
You say this, but of course, this is the same guy who gave Memo Gonzalez all that playing time to develop... I'm not saying that to criticize Schmid - I'm just saying that every situation surrounding young players is different, be it due to the players, the squad, how the table looks, etc. I don't disagree that I wish Nunez (and others) had gotten more time in '04 (especially given the state of the midfield), but it's a whole lot easier to write an article (or post in a message board) about giving the young guys PT to develop, and to be in the managers hot-seat where you're not sure if developing that guy gives your club the best chance for points on Saturday...
