I don't think Dallas' advantage on development is how the veteran core is stable. Just a couple years ago it was a team built around Castillo, and it hasn't been the same since. I think they have (a) a strong youth system in that area in general, (b) they do their job in creating pro quality players, and (c) they commit to the approach wholeheartedly, 8 HGP on the roster, and they play them. Houston has a weaker youth system which places pressure on the team to teach, they don't seem to do a good job of preparing first team ready players, and whether because of their own development failures or not, they'd rather commit to a player like Sanchez who is past it than players with a future like Memo and Holland. That makes this constantly a "now" team and not one dependable for "5 years forward." FWIW we were better than Dallas this season with a very veteran approach -- although with more use of HGP/RGV than before (perhaps because we elevated their coach, a pattern that may not continue as RGV churns its roster and Cabrera no longer knows its players so well) -- but the problems I see with tilting veteran in our position are (1) we have to acquire market value veterans instead of using entry level salary HGP, (2) the team is inherently older with age/injury risks and the need for constant squad rotation, and (3) an older team has to be constantly churned each offseason with effectiveness which places pressure on the GM not to screw up. Commit to the wrong veteran core (Bruin and Barnes, for example), off year. Overestimate what you scouted, off year. Injuries, off year. Gun for a signing and don't get it and the team is stuck short.......you get the picture. Younger team you know what you have and you know you're not going to have to retire players and sign high stakes veterans every single offseason. I mean, way this thing is set up, if they don't push button on Elis, the forward line gets weaker immediately, you have a backline somewhat falling apart from injuries, mids getting older, loan players aplenty, GK without a decent backup, so whatever success this season, blow it up go back to zero next year.
Lucatero not good enough for the Dynamo or RGV but good enough for Necaxa? http://www.chron.com/sports/dynamo/...h-Liga-12485540.php?__twitter_impression=true
saw that and have been thinking, would it not be free to keep him on the roster as a homegrown player? its been a while since i had to think about the salary budget rules.
Yeah, it seems like a) his roster spot was exempt, b) we don’t have near a full roster anyways and c) I can’t imagine it is an expensive contract. Maybe it was mutual but for the last few years he was the guy with the most potential we heard about coming out of the academy and it ends pretty quickly. Point is, our academy sucks, has sucked, and appears likely to continue to suck.
First thing that came to my mind too. Guys, Luca was the crown jewel. Best “true” academy prospect I ever saw. Better than Navas Cobo and Bryan Salazar. As a 14 year old, he was already whipping in crosses from the deep right wing a la Brian Mullan. This is mind-boggling.
$53,250.00 on the business office, $0 on the cap. Slots 21-30 are off budget, including minimum salary HGP, HGP earning within the subsidy (you can pay HGP in slots 21-24 more than minimum but less than that plus a subsidy amount), and HGP for whom TAM was used. I take the offer as your basic MLB minor league deal and invitation to training camp. Comes back and impresses you tear up the minors deal and sign a major league deal. Based on numbers I expect 10 or more RGV in camp competing for deals again. If he doesn't impress in the spring, you stick to the story he needs minor league time. I don't blame the player because all he has in the way of assurances is minor league salary. I get nervous when better teams grab our discards, and I do wonder about our development and attitude to younger players. However, I could also see a scenario where he signs there for more money than USL (and perhaps even MLS minimum) but in reality is still filler there, here's your chance kid, maybe back end of roster, maybe loaned out. But if we would pay him $30k to see what shakes out and he's comfortable with Mexico and gets $100k for trying to break out there, really, would you blame him?
Deric was really a Texans/UNC/Klein HS product. I get the pro Lucatero arguments and I never saw him. But my thing is what "system" product from here has ever really turned out? Maybe it's our attitude towards the young player or maybe we have no clue at development. But somewhere it's f*cked. I mean it almost violates statistics to not have one work on accident. I defer back to my previous comments that setting up a dibs system doesn't mean you know what you're doing in training players. One reason I think US NT is tailing off is we are no longer an immature system headed by Bradenton where all the best young players train together under the national coaches, we're a mature system where people sign as teens and the onus is on the teams to do their job. The teams have started to seize the development job not because they are better at it but because they are the entitled gatekeepers to the jobs most of the young players want.
$53k can cover a lot of Dynamo legal fees to sue the manufacturer of the fading seats and sponsors who owe the team money!! Better to invest in back-office legal fees and sales gimmicks than actual players!!
IIRC Luca couldnt make the RGV Roster regularly. I don't care how "high" he was rated, if he couldn't hack it in a US second (third?) division player that says a lot about him as a player. Necaxa getting him doesnt mean anything really. Necaxa isn't even close to being in the upper tier of Liga Mx, perennial relegation candidate. Also, as previously stated, him going there does not mean he will be a starter, maybe Copa MX substitute if that. Giles Barnes just left for Leon Club which is actually a decent club, a few years removed from being back to back champs. Does that mean that the Dynamo, Vancouver, and Orlando are idiots for not realizing what a gem and an amazing player he is/was? No. In the Grand Scheme of things Liga MX is losing all those "Cheap" south americans to MLS and are filling in with whatever they have. Now if the conversation is that we aren't churning out players from our academy to our 1st consistently or even regularly, well you are definitely spot on. Something is definitely rotten there. 4th biggest city in the US with a very active soccer community can't regularly produce a starter/bench player for the Local team? We should be pulling in AT LEAST 1 or 2 players from the Academy/RGV every year and trying them out with the first team.
It’s both points, Dynamo have generated next to zero from their academy (and Deric should not count) and if Lucatero was so bad he can’t hack it at RGV - and he was acknowledged as our best academy prospect since inception - then our academy pool of talent must really suck. I don’t think anyone being skeptical of the Dynamo talent evaluation and development capabilities is out of line. It seems to me barring some sort of “Salazar doing drugs on YouTube” type of situation you pick up his option and work with Lucatero another year. Homegrown Academy players are a real advantage to have in MLS so you’d think the Dynamo would try a little harder in this area
I think we all are still adjusting because while Deric was a long tenured servant, he's gone. So he is now of historical interest versus "see what the HGP is producing." Plus Lucatero leaving, that makes Memo the sole remaining signee and by default "dean" of the HGP program. Memo who can't stay in the first team. Historically I'd argue the highwater mark was the initial burst of Deric and Dixon and I think we both know that was the era of dibs-ing traditional club players at the very end of HS with minimal involvement or imprint. It's an indictment of the system when your best years were when you grabbed players from other clubs. One thing I've noticed is it's like they don't even exist recently. Even if we didn't sign anyone directly, you'd think HGP would be cost-free roster competitors every spring. I understand not everyone turns out. I understand youth-senior play is an adjustment. I understand perhaps not every year someone is worth signing, though at a certain point that might be making excuses, a concession we have development issues. But it's also like we're not even bringing in a handful to camp, ok, try out, we'll see if you're Dynamo ready, if not, we can always use RGV fodder. If you're developing players right, shouldn't they be at least RGV-fodder at the end of HS? At least a handful a year? You look at the dynamic and it's like once in a while we nominally sign one kid here who we then in practice ship down, no one else even makes RGV, and we stock the back end of RGV from minor league scouting and the draft, not the Academy. That by itself suggests a breakdown, that not only is it not populating the Dynamo it's not even a popular source for our minor league team. To be real about it, where we are looking for players is RGV and RGV starts out camped with us so in many ways it's like the old reserve team. It doesn't come across like a ladder up from the Academy and with several Academy graduates a year and the supposed role that's supposed to play, that should strike you funny. Now, part of the explanation may be that players like Memo should probably go straight to RGV on quality and need to groom, but have to be nominally signed here for a competitive contract so they don't go sign with Necaxa. So they are really RGV worthy products we make signed here for PR and money reasons. But that also says there aren't first team ready players being churned out, and it's odd there isn't anyone else even worthy of RGV. I'm at a loss for why this is not treated more urgently since HGP and draft picks are cheap players who if they turn out are cap steals. A team on our budget being focused on the veteran player is trying to thread a financial and sporting needle.
It’s simple - the Dynamo are a cheap organization (relative to MLS) that has never had any long-term vision or investment to support the long view. You see it time and time again that short-term cash flow spreadsheet evaluation rules over actual returns on capital invested. It’s “management by crisis” and monthly spreadsheets. Which is why after 12 years in Houston they have jack squat to show out of the academy in a region that should be producing players given demographics and climate. While there is some merit that historically HGPs under the old rules (where you didn’t fully have their player rights IIRC) that the academy may not have been a place to spend all-in, that is no longer the case.
Been saying this for years. If it was not for our first and second seasons instant impact both on the field for what our players did, then all of us in Houston who enjoy live outdoor soccer that showed up in big numbers game after game and those that did our own reaching out to the radio and TV folks, AEG and their staff, some that are still around from their reign, our FO would have hit this market with no concept of how to grow a professional soccer team in the Gulf Coast South. Compound this with the above mentioned short term cash flow and it has always appeared that our FO suits are just sitting in their offices hoping and praying week by week that someone, ANYONE, will cough up their money to purchase seats anywhere inside the stadium. Just to cover that month's rent roll, pay sheet and other overhead costs. Our FO demonstates no forward thinking on how to be ahead of the booming U.S. pro soccer market. As someone that has been coaching in inner city Houston and with my own sons in the suburbs for the past 18 years, our city is stacked with talent in both the inner city and burbs. The talent is not the problem. The problem in gathering said talent, getting them together at an early age and going long on a residential Academy if one is really serious. Until then, our Academy will produce some quality players but nothing like it would if our mindset was different. "All in" is the concept, certainly in that we can play year round in our climate. Demographics are another powerful asset our city has. We have every type of footballer available! Inner city Africans and Latinos (my team) and suburbs white boys that are tall and can run like deers. Then the rural whites and Latinos who are in the mold of Clint Dempsey and Gringo Torres. They made it! Dem type of soccer players are out there in the small towns around our great State. WE MUST CULTIVATE THEM as well! Nail this to our Front Office door please.
You look at USYNT and there are people in those pools who aren't great with the ball yet but are tall or fast. But you look at the people we have signed for the past few years, and give or take a back or keeper, no height, no speed, and the technique is decent but not exceptional. Sorry but to me that's a dime a dozen college player. Many college kids aren't fast enough to do something professionally, but they show up every day and work, they hustle, they can make an isolated nice pass. To me it's like the Xerox got stuck on Alex Lopez and we should know better. Look for some kids with more speed, height, grit. Scouting to me is not just what does the touch look like. I know plenty of touch players who were relegated to college or HS benches because it's a running sport and they couldn't keep up. That is what happens as the sport transitions from youth to senior. And yet the prototype seems to be squatty, slow, and technical. You look at what works for us offensively and it's speed. Back in the day it was tall Ching and Jaqua and Weaver. If you aren't Brad Davis technical I can get one of you every draft. There is a reason the goal in baseball scouting is a "5 tool player" and not just hitters or fielders.
Like I've said before, pennywise, pound foolish. If you created the sort of player who sells for millions then it pays for itself. Teams like Ajax survive and thrive on low player budgets doing precisely this. It does require the upfront expense but it pays for itself. And to me it's far cheaper than Torres or Elis, having to go pay market to get a player, and they take a veteran high six figure salary plus a six or seven figure transfer and/or loan fee. I pay the kid $50-200k salary, no acquisition costs beyond broader academy cost, and under the dibs system I don't have to outbid Necaxa, as long as I develop them well enough and pay enough. And the best ones I can sell for six or seven figures in 5 years, or trade from a position of strength. Like I said, we are cheap, but in a "thread the needle" kind of way where we will throw significant sums at market veterans rather than investing the money in an academy. Since we won't spend with TFC or NYC it's fighting at a disadvantage and hoping to punch above your weight while playing a rich team's game. And from a PR standpoint, I think a halfway savvy fan can tell, oh, the draft picks and the HGP don't turn out, and so we spend money on veterans. But while doing that, we won't pay Giovinvco money. They can tell we are on the market but they can tell we won't spend big bucks. Over time isn't that a fan-shedding strategy? To have it emblazoned out there, "We Are Cheap?" Nothing about our process sells "niche" or "give us time." Our process is "this is what we could afford." And I don't trust Jordan to line up "what we can afford" well enough most years to compete. Last year he lucked out. This one feels like regression to mean.
With regards to the Houston area being capable of developing talent - that talent can't really ever seem to find a path to MLS no matter the situation. Not that it justifies the track record the Academy has not developing a single player. Lucatero should have had his option exercised for the last year. What's the harm? $100,000 tops. Our team is so cheap they can't pay the $100,000 for one more year to try to get the best out of the best player in the history of the Academy in ten years. (What's sad is the $100,000 is probably closer to $65,000).
You do make a good point that the Houston area has struggled overall in getting players to MLS. Not a lot of guys going Pasadena to Seattle. On the financial point, unless there is some Salazar-type issue, another cheap and pennywise pound-foolish decision, but unsurprised.
One thing I will throw out there, is in the baseball minors, they tend to favor the golden boys over established veterans. Veterans there tend to serve a purpose a la Bull Durham. You aren't there to go to the show, at least not first. You are there to teach and to fill out the roster. I say that because my impression is that we instead "play to win" at RGV and might favor a no hoper 25 year old like Kevin Garcia in terms of playing time and promotion potential, over some 18 year old or draft pick who we developed and think the world of. This is silly. The idea is not supposed to be who is ready tomorrow. It is supposed to be if I get x in a professional setting with playing time he may flourish in a way y had a chance to but already hasn't. So even if y looks more polished, that's not supposed to be the point. I thought it was a developmental team. In which case I should err on the side of seeing if my developed players can turn out right. It should only be roughly when I bail on those players, or want to send a message, that we turn to some 25 year old career minor leaguer under the theory if the prospect is half baked we might as well try to play better. I understand we want RGV to sustain itself financially, and don't want to try to lose on purpose. I understand at times you might bench a young player to motivate them or signal something. But it oddly doesn't sound like players like Lucatero, first team signed and seen as promising, are actually favored for playing time over some career USL player or guy who's bounced around half a dozen leagues, people who fill out these rosters and have a known, lower ceiling. I know on pro first teams, college, HS, club, you start your best team. But developmental teams are supposed to be different. You play the people you hope will be on the first team. At least one reason why the progression seems to seize up at RGV is RGV seems to take a mixed roster of picks, HGP, and lifer second division players, and play to win. The kids instead seem to sit. Another reason this is worth noting is when you play the game this way, then your "rookies" are 24, 25, 27 year old lifer minor leaguers. Even if they turn out they have 5 years left. People talk up Cabrera, RGV made the playoffs, etc., but if you elevate his favorites quite a few are lifers with little to offer, and you just blocked your own long term system prospects to make the coach look better and more like a winner. So what. It's a development team. In MLB teams only care for PR and local purposes whether their minor league teams win. That's not really the idea organizationally. The real idea is Bregman or Correa is the future and it doesn't matter if their lifer competition is hitting .280, because you already know that time he made the show he had a 10 game hitless streak. "Big picture," not "best available." I think we're about this all backwards.
Carlos Correa hit .232 in the Gulf Coast (rookie) League his first season. He has also hit better for Houston than he ever did for Fresno. Other teams he hit better for. But that didn't stop his progress to the top. Ditto Alex Bregman who hit .259 in Quad Cities (A). But also Mark Appel who was 3-7 for 2015 in the minors, improved the next season but had a high AAA ERA, and we traded his tail. The whole idea is they get plenty of games to either figure it out or make clear you should be disappointed. You don't bench them where you don't know if the prospect can play or not because he doesn't even get a swing. The way we act is like either (a) we're stupid and going to favor veterans over kids or (b) we don't even trust our own academy to produce.
The Dynamo went the cheap route and outsourced the business and club operation (and stadium building) to a 3rd party group that they have to deliver a more competitive yet less developmental squad to. In theory the Dynamo I believe have full roster and coaching control. Now, I have zero knowledge of what the operating agreement says but if the Dynamo don’t try to win with some “minor league veterans” it may piss off the RGV owner. This exact issue used to be a problem in hockey but now the vast majority of AHL teams are owned outright by NHL teams. The Dynamo should have owned the team outright, launched it in Houston so everyone could train together (Dynamo and USL squads) and make call-ups easier, and found a local stadium to play at with a 5,000 seat capacity and a grass field (and the team may have actually had to pay to install a new pitch). Like today, there is a rumor about some Peruvian keeper at Veracruz that we are trying to get on a loan for RGV? Are there not 20 American college keepers we could sign and send there?
IMO Lucatero's demise was in part because of the coaches preferring to play Escalante instead. Not getting playing time has delayed his development back a year. Still the Dynamo should have kept him. Escalante played because he is older and more mature and able to handle the physicality of USL better than Christian. But you can tell Lucatero is a smarter more technically gifted player - he just needs more meat on his bones. The coach last year at RGV wasn't good - it looks to me he was more concerned with trying not to lose than developing some of the players. Escalante had some flash but he was a selfish player who mad ethe same mistakes over and over. He did not make good decisions on the ball and lazy in helping to defend when necessary. We wasted to much time with him and it came with a cost of not playing Christian. Maybe Wilmer decided his fate when he coached him that first year of RGV? At least he helped Memo at RGV , who hopefully gets more playing time this year.
We have millions of kids playing soccer in this area - there HAS to be at least one who could play in defense! Instead we have to go to South America to get a player. SMH. My initial worry with hiring Cabrera was that he was part of all that non-USA player discrimination at Chivas USA. Still not sure about that.