News: Kellyn Acosta traded to LAFC?

Discussion in 'Colorado Rapids' started by JasonMa, Jan 14, 2022.

  1. Sports Yak

    Sports Yak Member+

    Jul 17, 2007
    Lakewood
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    I understand everything being written, but going to LA leaves an awful taste. Never liked them.
     
  2. TheWarmBurger

    TheWarmBurger Member+

    Colorado Rapids
    United States
    Aug 7, 2018
    Arizona
    More details about Acosta to LAFC. Apparently there was no club known interest from EU before the trade, and that the only thing they got was afterwards and it was a free loan.

     
    JasonMa repped this.
  3. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    So I've been working the math on this move. Trying to take both sides out of any possible European offer. It does require one assumption, namely that at this point in their respective careers Vines is generally more valuable than Acosta. At 26.5 years old Acosta is largely who he is now, while players can improve from this point they usually don't take large jumps in quality. Meanwhile at 22 Vines still has a chance for significant improvement.

    So, that assumption in place, lets look at what we know.

    1. Vines was sold for $2M
    2. Because of MLS roster rules, that limit the amount of transfer fee that can be converted to GAM for salary use, from a team-building (not owning) perspective GAM is more valuable than cash once you break $1M (the max cash you can convert to GAM from a sale).
    3. Acosta was traded for $1.1M in GAM that both sides feel is likely to go up to $12.5-$1.3M (per Sam Stejskal's Athletic article and something I've heard)

    So, in order for the Rapids to have pushed Acosta out and ignored a European offer, and for that to somehow been the wrong choice, the offer from Europe would have had to have been better than $1.25M in GAM.

    if we believe (and I do) that Acosta isn't as valuable as Vines, that means he likely tops out at around $1.75M, if I'm generous. So does it make sense for, in the best case scenario for Acosta, Padraig Smith to give up $250K in GAM to get $750K in cash that can't be used on the roster? At that number yeah, probably. But at anything less than the possible max for Acosta? Probably not. Trading $250K of salary for $500K or less in cash doesn't help build the team, and of course anything under $1.25M in cash is less than the GAM.

    So while its possible that the Rapids had a real offer for Acosta that we passed on, and while its possible for that offer to be higher than the GAM, and its possible that its enough higher than the GAM for it to be a good deal for the Rapids, the odds seem very very low. Or I'm significantly undervaluing Acosta.
     
    jspsam, Andy126 and m vann repped this.
  4. TheWarmBurger

    TheWarmBurger Member+

    Colorado Rapids
    United States
    Aug 7, 2018
    Arizona
    Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t teams also need to give up a chunk of transfer fees back to the league for players transferred outside of the MLS?

    So if that is still the case, then the number for Acosta would’ve needed to be even higher by comparison as there is no league cut of the GAM coming in from the deal with LAFC, whereas there would’ve been a league cut out of the transfer fee to this “EU Interested Club.”
     
    Andy126 repped this.
  5. m vann

    m vann Moderator
    Staff Member

    Colorado Rapids, Celtic FC, & Louisville City
    Sep 10, 2002
    Denver, CO
    Club:
    Celtic FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I sense a bit of anger and bitterness in Acosta’s tweet, I get it. Who knows what the real story is. It probably lies somewhere in between. While I would have rather seen Acosta sold abroad and not to a Western Conference rival, the Rapids are under no obligation to sell to Europe. They have to do what’s in the Rapids best interests. If taking the trade was the monetarily value, you take the trade. It’s a business. Pure and simple. I feel for Acosta and if I were in his shoes, I’d probably be a little angered but it’s a business at the end of the day.
     
    Sports Yak, Andy126 and JasonMa repped this.
  6. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Not for homegrown players, which Acosta is (homegrown by Dallas, but that status transfers when traded).
     
  7. Stuart95

    Stuart95 Member+

    Mar 11, 2012
    NoVA
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Good rundown Jason ... only thing I can add is that when they discussed the trade on ETR yesterday they said that Dallas still had a transfer percentage of Acosta which would be triggered on an international transfer. This meant that MLS, FCD and the Rapids would all split the fee. Apparently, that isn't the case on an inter-league trade. As a result, Weibe and Gass said it was a smart piece of buisness.
     
  8. JasonMa

    JasonMa Member+

    Mar 20, 2000
    Arvada, CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Weibe and Gass were incorrect. That option from Dallas expired after the 2020 season. The Rapids would get all of any sale (and now get a percentage of any sale LAFC would make).
     
    Stuart95 repped this.
  9. Stuart95

    Stuart95 Member+

    Mar 11, 2012
    NoVA
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'm glad you keep track of this stuff Jason ... GAM, TAM, DPs, Young DPs, I am always amazed at the Byzantine roster rules in MLS!
     

Share This Page