Who Should The Fire Draft?

[swedcrip34]

If Ring [and not Thornton] is gone, [IMO, the better move] are there any rumors as to what can be gotten for him? I think Ring is definitely an upgrade for a few clubs in MLS, and should be worth something in trade... Does anyone have any rumors about the status of the GK?

Speaking of Ring being out of contract, are there any other players that are Fire property but unsigned?

ALSO


If indeed the wide right midfielder need is addressed in Thorrington, where would Sanneh play if he will be traded for Razov? [I also thought Sanneh wanted to play on Columbus with his buddy Lagos...]

there were 2 others IIRC - Whitfield (now gone), and CJ Brown

I doubt Ring would command as much trade value being out of contract. He'll no longer be as cheap against the cap. He can always find a job in Scandanavia.

[creative_destruction]

According to this http://www.section8chicago.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=380 Razov is also out of contract.

[swedcrip34]

According to this http://www.section8chicago.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=380 Razov is also out of contract.

you're right, I forget Ante
http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3629520&postcount=118

[Khan]

I doubt Ring would command as much trade value being out of contract. He'll no longer be as cheap against the cap. He can always find a job in Scandanavia.


Given that he's not signed yet, no one can predict how cheap he'll be against the cap. But I also think that your valuation of Ring may be faulty:

The question of what Ring is worth shouldn't be measured against what an average MLS GK commands. Compare Ring to other All-Star Game starters, at a like age, with similar citizenship.

I think Ring may be worth a serviceable, established MLS utility player, a mid level draft pick, a prospect, or some combination thereof.

[swedcrip34]

Given that he's not signed yet, no one can predict how cheap he'll be against the cap. But I also think that your valuation of Ring may be faulty:

The question of what Ring is worth shouldn't be measured against what an average MLS GK commands. Compare Ring to other All-Star Game starters, at a like age, with similar citizenship.

I think Ring may be worth a serviceable, established MLS utility player, a mid level draft pick, a prospect, or some combination thereof.

It all depends on what he'll accept in a new contract (will he trial in Sweden, Rochester, etc). He made about 30k last year and will command a raise. But he had a tough 2nd part of the season and I'm not sure many teams will be willing to pay him starters money (100k+). So he's in a bind. Teams try to avoid keeping mid-level MLS players (Whitfield, Selolwane, Corrales, Adin Brown, etc). Nick Garcia will likely make more if he finds a job in Scandavia. So these guys aren't the best trade targets. Most teams are fairly set at GK and I haven't heard much rumblings of interest in Ring yet, thus I give his trade valuation a low prediction (not that some team won't decide to send over a top pick). 2004 was his year to establish himself as a MLS starter and earn a new contract and I'm not sure he did.

but anyway, who should the fire draft?

[Khan]

but anyway, who should the fire draft?

A forward more capable than Sir Nate the Tall, or Alex Yi.

[Greddy]

Forget about Ring, he's gone. Also, I wouldn't expect to get much for him at all. I believe the quote from Wilt was "we'll do our best to help him get with another team", meaning that we'll get him some trials at places we have friends, work out a trade for basically nothing, or point him in the direction of scandinavia.

If he plays for another MLS team next season, we'll probably get a 4th round pick out of it. I'm guessing that he ends up in the A-league, or some lower european division.

[foosball]

There is a fairly well-done Mock Draft of the first round on the Galaxy Board under the topic"Who should the G's draft?"(sorry no link).The author has the Fire taking Moor and then Kirk.Nothing new there,but I thought his rationale for each pick was well thought out.

[Zman Gunner]

There is a fairly well-done Mock Draft of the first round on the Galaxy Board under the topic"Who should the G's draft?"(sorry no link).The author has the Fire taking Moor and then Kirk.Nothing new there,but I thought his rationale for each pick was well thought out.

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3856366&postcount=13

Here is the original link in the MLS-General section with the 1st round mock that I wrote - the Galaxy folks then posted it in their thread. There is some good draft discussion on this thread as to how the 1st round draft will unfold. When I looked at the Fire's draft needs, they seem like they would want to go with the "best P40 player available" mentality since the obvious holes (i.e. right midfielder, defender) look to be filled with the Thorrington and Caballero signings.

[foosball]

Zman,nice effort.I would be happy, as a Fire fan, if the draft unfolded as you speculate.But I don't like the Galaxy,and it would kill me to see another IU guy go there especially when the Fire could(should) have gotten Grabavoy last year{ insert sound of dead horse being beaten}.

[Zman Gunner]

Zman,nice effort.I would be happy, as a Fire fan, if the draft unfolded as you speculate.But I don't like the Galaxy,and it would kill me to see another IU guy go there especially when the Fire could(should) have gotten Grabavoy last year{ insert sound of dead horse being beaten}.

As a DCU fan, the selection of Griffin at pick #11 by the Fire and then trading of pick #13 in which you could have selected Grabavoy was a bit confusing and adds to your dead horse beating.

Many folks are speculating that O'Rourke goes #1 overall but I think that the only way that a senior like him goes ahead of a P40 at the #1 overall pick is if he is a vastly superior difference maker (i.e. striker, midfield playmaker), not a defensive midfielder like O'Rourke. The Fire could clearly then get him at pick #3 but I am guessing that your team may want some younger, P40 blood elsewhere (i.e. Moor) since you already have Armas and Buete as defensive midfielders - is that correct in terms of draft priorities?

[foosball]

As a DCU fan, the selection of Griffin at pick #11 by the Fire and then trading of pick #13 in which you could have selected Grabavoy was a bit confusing and adds to your dead horse beating.

Many folks are speculating that O'Rourke goes #1 overall but I think that the only way that a senior like him goes ahead of a P40 at the #1 overall pick is if he is a vastly superior difference maker (i.e. striker, midfield playmaker), not a defensive midfielder like O'Rourke. The Fire could clearly then get him at pick #3 but I am guessing that your team may want some younger, P40 blood elsewhere (i.e. Moor) since you already have Armas and Buete as defensive midfielders - is that correct in terms of draft priorities?

As far as I know you have nailed it from the Fire's perspective.We not only have Armas and Buete but Marsch and Pause who can/do play DMid.So O'Rourke makes no sense,but Moor does.A lot will depend on the rumored signings of Caballero and Thorrington as well as the plans for the allocations.
Since we know that Williams,Perez ,Dipsy and Whitfield are gone,The Moor & Kirk first round looks very appropriate.

[bing1985]

...Many folks are speculating that O'Rourke goes #1 overall but I think that the only way that a senior like him goes ahead of a P40 at the #1 overall pick is if he is a vastly superior difference maker (i.e. striker, midfield playmaker), not a defensive midfielder like O'Rourke...
I agree with your assessment here - I think O'Rourke impressed enough people to go higher than #7, but I can't see RSL using the #1 for a destroyer. With Mathis being such a flake, I'd take the P-40 forward. You don't think Dallas will take him ahead of Freeman?

[Zman Gunner]

I agree with your assessment here - I think O'Rourke impressed enough people to go higher than #7, but I can't see RSL using the #1 for a destroyer. With Mathis being such a flake, I'd take the P-40 forward. You don't think Dallas will take him ahead of Freeman?

I would think that Dallas needs outside defensive/midfield players more than central ones. If Dallas gets Mulrooney from San Jose as some folks suspect, then the central midfield has its starters with Valakari and him. It seems that its revolving doors were at RB (Salyer, Reyes), LB (Talley, Gbandi), and LM (Davis, Quill). With Freeman able to play all of those positions plus being a Texas native, he would seem to make sense at pick #4 for Dallas - assuming that he goes P40. That same versatility could make him the #3 pick for Chicago - if that is the case, Moor would likely go to Dallas at #4.

[willydonc]

Thought I'd bump up this thread a notch. In what is a historically weak draft class according to most pundits, the strongest position happens to be defense. It appears to be a very good year for fullbacks on both sides of the field, positions of glaring need here. With the likelihood of holding 5 of the first 25 picks in this year's draft, we should be able to pick up both flavors of fullback, a P-40 or two, and a center attacking mid to apprentice with the reserve team.

The latest buzz has RSL taking 16 yo Nick Besagno with the first pick and the the stinking goats following up with Hermann Award finalist, Costa Rican defender Gonzalo Segares of VCU. That leaves everyone else for us at #3. Danny O'Rourke is a long time favorite of mine. Sure he's one dimensional, but that dimension was good enough to win this year's Hermann Trophy. Wherever he ends up, he will probably end the year as opposing supporter's most hated rookie. But is he the best pick for the Fire here with the current glut of bodies in the central midfield? O'Rourke's Indiana teammate Drew Moor, or UVa's Hunter Freeman are probably the best marriage of need (RB/RMF), roster exempt status, and quality. As much as it breaks my heart to pass on O'Rourke, Moor or Freeman should be our pick at #3 and I will have a love/hate relationship with O'Rourke for the next 10 years because he will be long gone by our next pick at #10.

Speaking of #10, local U-17 starlet Quavas Kirk will be there, but he will likely be available at #18 (and #19?) as well. I want another wide defender, preferably a LB. The top two left backs are Kevin Goldthwaite (ND) and Kiwi Tony Lockhead (Cal. SB). One of them should be available at #10. At #18 pick Kirk and if we acquire #19 another P-40, F/M Will John (SL), ex-CFR South African M Boyzz Khumalo, or strong pacy fullback Ugo Ihemelu (Nigeria & SMU) should all merit serious consideration.

[Bob Morocco]

While pundits are saying that this draft is weak I believe that having the #3 pick this year isn't as big as in previous years having #10, #18, and anything else up to the early third round could produce a few quality players how have good MLS careers. Freeman is p-40 and led the nation in assists with 21!, he can play either wide back position and I think he can fill-in in the midfield. Moor is a winner who, while I've only seen play twice, is very solid and generaly mistake free, this is something we could have used last year. CJ Klass or O'Rourke would be great at #10. Lockhead I've seen and he looks very comfortable on the ball and passes well, but his TI status may hurt him hopefully he can get a greencard before becoming a SI. For Kirk:

http://www.matchnight.com/scouting/player.cfm?&RosterID=2225

as the 18th pick he could be the steal of the draft and maybe followed by Will John would be great. I see 3 players from this draft making our top 16 for 2005 and that would be a great draft.

[lammygeek]

That leaves everyone else for us at #3. Danny O'Rourke is a long time favorite of mine. Sure he's one dimensional, but that dimension was good enough to win this year's Hermann Trophy. Wherever he ends up, he will probably end the year as opposing supporter's most hated rookie. But is he the best pick for the Fire here with the current glut of bodies in the central midfield?

Anyone else suspect we might trade down the 3rd pick if O'Rourke is still there at 3? Like so many have pointed out, we have a relative glut at his position, and it sounds like some of the defenders we'd be after might still be available later in the 1st round.

[Saeyddthe]

Quavas Kirk sure would look good on the right side... Although he may be more suited to forward... Considering our current roster, there's not much in the way of quality on the right side...
I don't think he'd step right in and impress... May be a 2-3 year project player, but he's got all the tools... More than just 'size and speed' (which he has in abundance)... "Big kid at little league" in his U-17 squad, which makes it hard to assess youth prospects sometimes, but he has some very nice foot skills if you look for it...
Like I said though, he's probably more suited for the forward position...
If he's miraculously still available in the second round, he'll be the best player left by far... I'd take him then. He'd make a nice replacement for whichever forward leaves first, and his developmental time frame would fit that nicely...

[bing1985]

Anyone else suspect we might trade down the 3rd pick if O'Rourke is still there at 3? Like so many have pointed out, we have a relative glut at his position, and it sounds like some of the defenders we'd be after might still be available later in the 1st round.
I'd be disappointed to see that happen. I like O'Rourke, but we are glut at d-mid and need both left and right backs more.

People keep saying this draft is weak, but I disagree. There is a shortage of marquee names but I think there is solid quality extending through the first rounds - and good quality (or at least potential) through rounds 2 and 3. Only time will tell, of course, but I think five years from now we'll be talking about how so-and-so stole their superstar in round 3 of 2005.

P.S. - I just re-read your post lammygeek - I think I got you wrong the first time. I think you're suggesting we give up the #3 for a pair of later picks. I still would prefer not to. We don't really need quantity, IMHO - let's lock down a good defender and move on. Did I get it right this time? :D

[jjayg]

Quavas Kirk sure would look good on the right side... Although he may be more suited to forward... Considering our current roster, there's not much in the way of quality on the right side...
I don't think he'd step right in and impress... May be a 2-3 year project player, but he's got all the tools... More than just 'size and speed' (which he has in abundance)... "Big kid at little league" in his U-17 squad, which makes it hard to assess youth prospects sometimes, but he has some very nice foot skills if you look for it...
Like I said though, he's probably more suited for the forward position...
If he's miraculously still available in the second round, he'll be the best player left by far... I'd take him then. He'd make a nice replacement for whichever forward leaves first, and his developmental time frame would fit that nicely...
This is why I'm hesitant on Quavis as well. At least as a 1st or 2nd round pick. You just can't tell how good a player is when they are physically overwhelming to most of the players they play against. I've seen him play 3 or 4 times and he looked good but didn't amaze me at all. I'm sure he will develop into a solid player but he is several years from becoming that (see Capano, Craig). I wouldn't want to waiste a high pick on him. And he IS suited as a forward more then anything else.