View Full Version : Who Should The Fire Draft?
jjayg
13 Jan 2005, 01:28 AM
I don't know why it's sad at all. If you believe Razov still has a lot to offer and you don't believe that his attitude negatively affects the team then obviously it would be upsetting. But if you believe the opposite on either of those counts then it's really not unsettling at all.
If you talking about team loyality, only playing for the Fire and all that crap then your being naive. Not that theres anything wrong with that.
murtaugh29
13 Jan 2005, 01:33 AM
Maybe it's naivete. Razov has a good history here. He's our all-time leading scorer, we picked him up off the scrap heap and he was a big time player for us.
He has an attitude, he is petulant. His skill has dropped off. He does not deserve the pay he pulls down nowadays. But (and not that trading/dumping Razov would negate this) I like to think of this club as a club where honor holds high regard and loyalty to players is part of that.
If Razov is to go he's already burnt a lot of his bridges, it's true. Fan support for him is low. But he's still an important player in fire history. Maybe what I mean is it would be more of a shame and upsetting if he landed with a rival or another eastern conference club. That wouldn't be good.
kebzach
13 Jan 2005, 01:37 AM
I'm just not yet to the point where I can say that Razov has "fallen off" skill-wise. Not yet at least. I still see him playing well in 2003 and I'm thinking that, if he truly is healthy this year, he'd be back in that form in 2005.
Am I naieve for thinking this way?
jjayg
13 Jan 2005, 01:38 AM
It certainly would be better to put him in the Western Conference. But as for everything else, the team needs to do what it needs to do to make it a better team. Honoring players is great but as soon as it negatively affects the team it's not so great. IMO.
murtaugh29
13 Jan 2005, 01:40 AM
You make a valid point. This is a reason (among many others) why I probably would suck as a GM.
Razov still has good skill for MLS. But i'm not sure we can honestly say we wouldn't be better served using that salary on other players.
kebzach
13 Jan 2005, 01:44 AM
Liam's got a good point too. If Razov wasn't in the $ 275K salary bracket, it's quite possible that the trade talks wouldn't happen. Aside from the whole "I hate you I want out I miss Bob Bradley" stuff.
kebzach
13 Jan 2005, 01:45 AM
Back to the draft in this thread-- so I take it there's no chance that we'll get Danny O'Rourke?
jjayg
13 Jan 2005, 01:45 AM
How much does Sanneh make? Like I said earlier today, I thought getting him in the league was difficult because he wanted a lot of money.
kebzach
13 Jan 2005, 01:49 AM
How much does Sanneh make? Like I said earlier today, I thought getting him in the league was difficult because he wanted a lot of money.
He's got to be $ 200K, almost definately closer to $ 250 or more. That's my guess. Yet another good point.
So basically the only reason to get rid of Razov then is the addition by subtraction theory?
murtaugh29
13 Jan 2005, 01:57 AM
Back to the draft in this thread-- so I take it there's no chance that we'll get Danny O'Rourke?I've heard him still mentioned, so I don't think it's out of the question.
But it's not likely I think, we want a junior roster player at #3. We are due another 1st round pick from LA though.
Razov is out of contract, so someone is going to have to agree to pay him for us to trade him. If razov takes a substantial cut I think we should go back to him staying put and playing 3-4-3. I don;t see that though.
jjayg
13 Jan 2005, 01:59 AM
That and (it may be related) he may not get much playing time with Herron and Ralph starting. He wont like that. And if they draft Kirk that would be another forward in the mix.
murtaugh29
13 Jan 2005, 02:10 AM
If we draf tKirk it'll be low. I've heard Will John mentioned more.
bing1985
13 Jan 2005, 08:02 AM
That and (it may be related) he may not get much playing time with Herron and Ralph starting. He wont like that. And if they draft Kirk that would be another forward in the mix.
I don't think Kirk would be a candidate for a starting forward for quite some time. - I thought we were looking at him for the future. Either play him daily on a reserve squad or have him fill the Dispy reserve role. I think we could pick him up without confusing things too much.
My concern with Kirk - from what I hear Will John is better. Given the choice I hope we don't pick Kirk solely on the basis of him being a local boy. If we take him, I hope its because the coaches see more upside to him than, say, Will.
P.S. - just had more coffee and read the post to which jjayg replies - I think the "he" in the reply is Ratso not Kirk - my bad. I agree, if ratso wants out, its be doesn't want Dipsy's job.
jjayg
13 Jan 2005, 10:29 AM
Hehe. Yeah, I meant Razov.
I only mentioned Kirk as the potential 4th forward. If he was 4th he would still be played in a developing role, not as a starter or even someone we would depend on. My personal opinion on Kirk is that I haven't seen enough to think he will be all that great. But a lot of people seem to think the Fire should take him because he's from the area. I am not of that mindset. I would take him in the third round but he wont last that long.
Stogey23
13 Jan 2005, 11:19 AM
Back to the draft in this thread-- so I take it there's no chance that we'll get Danny O'Rourke?
By all indications he'll be around at Number 3. However, all of the pundits seem to think we won't take him there.
Connolly has us taking Jack Stewart.
jjayg
13 Jan 2005, 11:32 AM
The only way I see us taking O'rourke is if we somehow trade Buete and/or Pause.
Greddy
13 Jan 2005, 12:54 PM
I think we should draft players that don't suck.
You obviously weren't in the "war room" last year.
kebzach
13 Jan 2005, 09:52 PM
The only way I see us taking O'rourke is if we somehow trade Buete and/or Pause.
I'd be open to trading Pause to get O'Rourke. Buete has a fighting spirit I like out there, and I think Danny is a better player NOW than Pause, and Pause has 2 years in the league on him.
Bob Morocco
14 Jan 2005, 03:03 AM
http://www.mlsnet.com/MLS/news/mls_news.jsp?ymd=20050113&content_id=20978&vkey=draft2005&fext=.jsp
Everything I predicted will not happen and I think Colorado has screwed us and gotten rid of its 16th pick for two third round picks so now we get the worst pick in the third round. But one day we shall rain down vengence on the Crapids who have stabbed us in the back and they will rue the day that they traded their second round pick for two third round picks.
lammygeek
14 Jan 2005, 11:05 AM
http://www.mlsnet.com/MLS/news/mls_news.jsp?ymd=20050113&content_id=20978&vkey=draft2005&fext=.jsp
Everything I predicted will not happen and I think Colorado has screwed us and gotten rid of its 16th pick for two third round picks so now we get the worst pick in the third round. But one day we shall rain down vengence on the Crapids who have stabbed us in the back and they will rue the day that they traded their second round pick for two third round picks.
anyone else notice it also looks like we traded pick 25 (RSLs 3rd round we got for evan/dipsy) to dc, who traded it to metros? what did we get for that???