Maximum Optimal
07 Aug 2006, 01:30 PM
The All-Star Game has generated some interesting discussion on topics such as how Mulrooney got lost in the defensive mid shuffle in the last cycle and how Albright deserves a closer look as a starter for the next cycle. These threads made me think about how players should be integrated into the national team squad and I thought right back would be an interesting position to discuss some of these issues.
Before getting to specific names, I want to start with some general principles that I think should guide the process:
1) Ideally, the coach should try to identify three or four candidates who he would be happy to have on the WC squad by 2010. Among those he would chose two. Having three or four allows some cushion for things like injuries and loss of form.
2) It is a waste of time to look at players who will be over 32 by the 2010 WC. You can bring in a player like that in an emergency situation in the qualifiers but otherwise do not do so.
3) It is much easier to judge whether a young player in a top league abroad is ready for international competition than it is to make such an evaluation for a similar player in MLS. This means you have to discriminate in favor of the guys in MLS in terms of national team PT because such PT yields more information about how those guys fit in.
4) In deciding how to allocate PT you need to look at the pipeline and decide if a veteran who might be a good candidate now is likely to be eclipsed by someone coming up. If that is the case you need to be careful not to waste PT on the veteran.
Underlying several of these principles is the assumption that EVERYTHING should be geared to forming the best squad for WC2010. As a corollary, I am willing to assume that qualifying is safe enough to be willing to use it mainly with that goal in mind.
Anyhow lets move on now to the specifics of right back. We start the cycle, with an incumbent (Cherundolo) and main backup (Albright) who will both be 31 in 2010. Neither player is perfect and 31 might be getting a little old for a position that requires a lot of running, but I think that barring injuries but should be serviceable in 2010. I occasionally see someone make an argument that Hejduk's exceptional fitness might allow him to make the 2010 squad. My reaction is fuggedaboutit. See Principle #2 about. Any PT Frankie gets will be a monumental waste.
It will be a waste in part because of what is in the pipeline. I think there are two young players, who at the moment are not as good as Cherundolo and Albright, but might be better by 2010--Marvell Wynne (who will be 24 in 2010) and Quavas Kirk (who will be 22). As I said neither are ready at the moment. Both have shortcomings that may not ever be fully overcome. But both have the potential to be better than Cherundolo and Albright by 2010. Those two are the ones that need to be nurtured in this cycle. Wynne is a bit older and further ahead. I would bring him in at the 2007 January camp and start giving him some gaves then. Kirk I would let play with the U20s. Then bring him in in the 2008 or 2009 winter camp depending on how quickly he develops. At a minimum I want to give him three starts in as high pressure matches as we can find by the end of 2009.
How do the principles outlined above apply to some other possibilities? Brian Mullan has his fans on these boards but see Principle #4 above. Mullan will be 32 by 2010. I have to conclude it would be a waste to give him PT. What about someone younger like Tim Ward (yes he has played mainly on the left side but is right footed) or Drew Moor or Josh Gros. Guys like that we have to be open minded about. They don't have the upside of Wynne or Kirk but ultimately the game is about performance. So if they outperform Wynne and Kirk we give them a shot. But we should start out with a strong presumption in favor of the high upside guys.
What about Spector? See Principle #3 above. I think there is less need to give him PT unless we decide by the qualifiers that he is better than Cherundolo and Albright. We will pretty much know this from his performance in the EPL.
Before getting to specific names, I want to start with some general principles that I think should guide the process:
1) Ideally, the coach should try to identify three or four candidates who he would be happy to have on the WC squad by 2010. Among those he would chose two. Having three or four allows some cushion for things like injuries and loss of form.
2) It is a waste of time to look at players who will be over 32 by the 2010 WC. You can bring in a player like that in an emergency situation in the qualifiers but otherwise do not do so.
3) It is much easier to judge whether a young player in a top league abroad is ready for international competition than it is to make such an evaluation for a similar player in MLS. This means you have to discriminate in favor of the guys in MLS in terms of national team PT because such PT yields more information about how those guys fit in.
4) In deciding how to allocate PT you need to look at the pipeline and decide if a veteran who might be a good candidate now is likely to be eclipsed by someone coming up. If that is the case you need to be careful not to waste PT on the veteran.
Underlying several of these principles is the assumption that EVERYTHING should be geared to forming the best squad for WC2010. As a corollary, I am willing to assume that qualifying is safe enough to be willing to use it mainly with that goal in mind.
Anyhow lets move on now to the specifics of right back. We start the cycle, with an incumbent (Cherundolo) and main backup (Albright) who will both be 31 in 2010. Neither player is perfect and 31 might be getting a little old for a position that requires a lot of running, but I think that barring injuries but should be serviceable in 2010. I occasionally see someone make an argument that Hejduk's exceptional fitness might allow him to make the 2010 squad. My reaction is fuggedaboutit. See Principle #2 about. Any PT Frankie gets will be a monumental waste.
It will be a waste in part because of what is in the pipeline. I think there are two young players, who at the moment are not as good as Cherundolo and Albright, but might be better by 2010--Marvell Wynne (who will be 24 in 2010) and Quavas Kirk (who will be 22). As I said neither are ready at the moment. Both have shortcomings that may not ever be fully overcome. But both have the potential to be better than Cherundolo and Albright by 2010. Those two are the ones that need to be nurtured in this cycle. Wynne is a bit older and further ahead. I would bring him in at the 2007 January camp and start giving him some gaves then. Kirk I would let play with the U20s. Then bring him in in the 2008 or 2009 winter camp depending on how quickly he develops. At a minimum I want to give him three starts in as high pressure matches as we can find by the end of 2009.
How do the principles outlined above apply to some other possibilities? Brian Mullan has his fans on these boards but see Principle #4 above. Mullan will be 32 by 2010. I have to conclude it would be a waste to give him PT. What about someone younger like Tim Ward (yes he has played mainly on the left side but is right footed) or Drew Moor or Josh Gros. Guys like that we have to be open minded about. They don't have the upside of Wynne or Kirk but ultimately the game is about performance. So if they outperform Wynne and Kirk we give them a shot. But we should start out with a strong presumption in favor of the high upside guys.
What about Spector? See Principle #3 above. I think there is less need to give him PT unless we decide by the qualifiers that he is better than Cherundolo and Albright. We will pretty much know this from his performance in the EPL.