Expansion Draft Precedent and future implications

Discussion in 'MLS: General' started by ojsgillt, Sep 25, 2003.

  1. ojsgillt

    ojsgillt Member

    Feb 27, 2001
    Lee's Summit MO
    Since MLSnet.com has every other draft except the expansion draft recorded, it took a little research to find.

    Since Chivas might be in business next year, it would be good to remind ourselves what is involved in an expansion draft.

    Thanks to the good folks at www.soceramerica.com

    more draft info http://www.socceramerica.com/article.asp?Art_ID=14720

    players available in the draft and those who were protected http://www.socceramerica.com/article.asp?Art_ID=14694

    players taken in the draft http://www.socceramerica.com/article.asp?Art_ID=14749

    A lot has changed since then, roster sizes, and only 1 team in a draft if Chivas are in business.

    What changes should be made to the format?
    Is 12 picks enough, or too much?
    And for all you conspiracy theorists, why was proof of procedure so hard to find, could it be purposefully hidden?

    What I really find interesting is who was taken, who was unprotected and who was protected.
  2. Fah Que

    Fah Que Member

    Sep 29, 2000
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Expansion team can be a wonderful opportunities for young MLS players.

    I hope MLS can conduct expansion draft without ripping out the core players from each team and dilute the playing field. MLS cannot afford to lower the standard any further. Expansion team is going suck anyway. Fans are going to have low expectations. There is no point making them competitive right away and make the rest of the league more mediocre than they already are.

    Now I don't know how expansion draft works, but I have an idea.

    Ideally you want the expansion teams to end up with players who has a lot of potential but are rotting on the bench. A good example is Ante Razov. He was rotting on the bench in LA. A good current example now is Bobby Convey, Jamil Walker and possibly Santino Quaranta. (As a quake fan I hate to see Jamil go, but he is behind Donovan, Derosario, Mullen, and Ching on the depth chart) I hope MLS rescue those players and put them on expansion teams.

    The expansion team should have a core of very good 3 foreigners surrounded supporting American cast who are considered young up and comers.

    Now, the expansion team should have a maximum age of 25 for at least half of the team (sorry about age discrimination but it's good for the league)

    The expansion team can draft any players who aren't starting in the final .... say.... 5 out of last 7 games of the previous season. (If a player is injuried, go back to the 5 games before he is injuried.) Basically anyone who is not in the final starting 11 on a team is fair game. By doing things this way, a coach canNOT NOT release a player because he fears the players might be good in the future and can go back to haunt his team. If coaches want to pick and choose who they want to keep and they have to do it by playing them.

    The reason is this.

    Some coaches are not capable of integrating inconsistent, inexperienced young players into their teams and therefore they either don't even do it(example Fitzgerald of Columbus) or sort of do it but suck at it (Hudson), but how do those players get good and consistent without any experience on the field? It does them no good sitting on the bench. If Bob Bradley and Dave Sarachan can do it with decent success, it can be done. So basically if a coach doesn't start them, he loses them. If Convey and Quaranta are not going to start for DCU, they should be able to have a chance to go to an expansion team.
  3. bunge

    bunge BigSoccer Supporter

    Oct 24, 2000
    I say the league should take all the players that didn't play a certain percentage of available games and put them in camp for the new team's scouts to judge. Then they're left open in the draft.
  4. ojsgillt

    ojsgillt Member

    Feb 27, 2001
    Lee's Summit MO
    First off if you don't know how the expansion draft works read those articles I linked they are very informative.

    I think it should be totally up to the coach and GM as to whom they wish to protect from the draft. If they want to keep a young player so it won't haunt them later then that is there gamble because they have to let someone else become elligible. Being forced to make someone elligible because they didn't play a certain % of games is complete crap.

    If you look at some players who elligible and players who were protected there were many gambles taken and lost.

    Some people not protected: Keep in mind this is in 97
    Scott Garlick
    Jesse Marsh
    Tom Presthus
    Deigo Gutierez
    Paul Caliguri
    Ezra Hendrickson
    Kevin Hartman
    Steve Jolley
    Danny Pena
    Manny Lagos
    Zach Thorton
    Kerry Zavagnin
    Ramario Corrales
    Troy Dayak
    You could make a real solid base out of those players

    Some of the people protected:
    Ubusuku Abukusumo
    Frank Klopas
    Mike Lapper
    Todd Yeagley
    Gerell Elliott
    Brandon Pollard
    Alain Sutter
    Mario Gori
    Sean Bowers
    Digital Takawira
    Ryan Tinsley
    Nino Da Silva
    Dan Calichman
    Jose Botello
    Martin Machon
    Antony De Avila
    Rhett Harty
    Miles Joseph
    Brian Kelly
    Carlos Parra
    Paul Keegan
    Leonardo Squadrone
    Jacek Ziober
    Joao Batista
    Arnold Cruz
    Michael Emenalo,
    Esmundo Rodriguez
    David Kramer
    Lawrence Lozzano
    Those are some real stinkers that were kept

    Now go and look at who was drafted...... What the hell was Miami thinking?
  5. NateP

    NateP Member

    Mar 28, 2001
    Plainfield, NH, USA
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I agree. Back in '98 teams had to expose half their 20 man roster and I think that's a good starting point. The difference this year is that the roster is split into two groups (senior & developmental) and having quality players in those DR spots is important (see Metro and Chicago). I'd propose that teams are able to protect 12 out of their 24 man roster and that at least 2 but no more than 4 of the exposed players must be on the DR. Then teams can follow the same procedure above where when they lose a player they can pull one back from the exposed list and no team can lose more than 3 players. Last time the expansion draft gave the new teams 12 of 20 players (60%) so I'd propose making this draft 14 rounds (58.33%). That plus the 3 allocations mentioned in another thread, plus the usual 2 discovery slots, and the first pick in each round of the draft should allow Chivas to field a decent team.
  6. ojsgillt

    ojsgillt Member

    Feb 27, 2001
    Lee's Summit MO
    good points. It is also wise to remember that just because players are drafted doesn't mean that they are kept. Look at what Chicago did, Peter Wilt and Bob Bradley made some smart trades as well.

    Lika AJ Wood for Jesse Marsch and Campos/Armas for Hartman/Pena.

    That Campos/Armas for Hartman/Pena trade baffles me to this day. This is a classic example of an expansion team holding players "ransom". In case anybody was unaware, Hartman and Pena were left unprotected by LA and then drafted by Chicago.
  7. BenC1357

    BenC1357 Member

    Feb 23, 2001
    This list makes me laugh!
  8. Karl K

    Karl K Member

    Oct 25, 1999
    Suburban Chicago
    Thanks for that interesting look back into the history of the expansion draft.

    Meanwhile, I would hypothesize that with the league just two years old, and a lot of professional talent assessors still figuring out why a so and so is, or isn't, a good 1st division player, there were some definite "market inefficiencies" in the '98 event.

    As a result, I don't think the '98 draft's 'wackiness' is likely to be repeated in the next one. I bet things are much more rational, and much more understandable...though no doubt there will be one or two extremely goofy exceptions to prove the rule.

    However, if I were managing an expansion draft for a new team, I would study very hard every move that Bob Bradley made in '98. The aforementioned principle -- grab somebody unprotected that a team really wants to keep and trade him back for what you REALLY want -- can be a very effective maneuver.
  9. dncm

    dncm Member+

    Apr 22, 2003
    Or plain outright steal them and don't trade them back - thus hurting the strength of the losing team. See Mr. Bradley and Chicago say thank-you-very-much for Francis Okaroh from the Revs. This one is crazier than the Hartman/Pena - Campos/Armas deal.

    The Revs actually believed that no one would take him based on his age and ties to the local community. Bradley must have laughed his arse off at this logic.
  10. dawgpound2

    dawgpound2 Member

    Mar 3, 2001
    Los Angeles, CA
    Remember, when a team comprises an expansion protection list, salaries often play a large part in their decisions.
  11. Northside Rovers

    Jan 28, 2000
    Austin TX
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Really? Chicago Fire 1998. They pulled the double.

    They may or may not. One thing for sure is that Vergera's expectations will be high.

    So, in 1998 Chicago and Miami had 120 players to choose from. I see no reason why Chivas couldn't choose from 60 or so. No more than 3 from any one team. And 5 out of 6 protected must be domestic players.

    This would be a hard thing for MLS to screw up. Teams will fight hard to protec their rosters and Chivas will only be grabbing 17 - 24 players so dilution of the league is hardly an issue. If MLS could have 12 teams in 1998 it sure as shinola can have 11 in 2004 without lowering the quality.
  12. nadpolice9

    nadpolice9 New Member

    Nov 26, 2001
    Boston , MA
    chivas wont struggle because the si and ti spots will be filled by mexican internationals and should be quality players. i wonder if they will or can just have players from chivas mex play for mls.
  13. ojsgillt

    ojsgillt Member

    Feb 27, 2001
    Lee's Summit MO
    This draft was held in november of that year, about 1 month after the Cup. Could we see something similar this year?

    Chivas will definitely be looking for latino players especially mexican decent. Would it be wise to protect those types of players to screw them over?
  14. kevbrunton

    kevbrunton New Member

    Feb 27, 2001
    Edwardsburg, MI
    Chicago Fire
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    That assumes that someone who knows the American soccer marketplace is actually making decisions there. Bob Bradley had been in the American soccer marketplace for years and therefore was in a very good position to know who he was drafting. I don't know who was responsible for the Miami picks, but in hindsight, they obviously didn't know their stuff. If Vergara brings someone who really knows soccer from Chivas up to run the MLS team, then he may have great soccer ability but may not know beans about the American market of players. Don't forget, that it's also a real skill to not only put together a good team but to do with within the confines of the salary cap.

    This is exactly what I was thinking -- not to screw them over, but to potentially use their stated bias against them. If I'm the GM and I get down to the fact that I have 2 more protection slots and 4 players I'd really like to have protected and 1 or 2 are hispanic and the others are not, I'm going to protect the 1 or 2 of hispanic background on the assumption that Vergara is less like to pick the non-hispanics.

Share This Page