GrillMaster, good points, especially about Thiago/Esky, but it's difficult to give up someone with potential that counts zero against the Salary Cap (P-40's) thus my choices. Ursula, I agree that Namoff is extremely valuable for his salary spot, and he's one I'd really like to keep, but I also see him as one that might not be selected. While other teams might want him, they're unlikely to trade for him, and Chivas certainly wouldn't want to keep him, so he might be exposable. As for Warren/Rimando, let me make this clear, I'm a big Warren fan, but he's no Rimando. Warren--as a rookie--has already missed time for injuries and personal reasons, shown a real deficiency in communicating/organizing the defense, inexperience with the speed of play, and real difficulty making a 2nd change of direction. That's just too many things to be exposed once the rest of the league figures him out. I think he'll be a solid MLS starter, but he has a long way to go to be a Rimando, and he's noway near as durable. Plus, if Warren ever does fulfil his potential, at his size, he's a candidate for Europe, whereas the superior Rimando likely will not be made an offer because of his size. Plus, it'd be very difficult to ever be as exciting, charismatic, or acrobatically crowd pleasing as Rimando. IMHO, Reyes and Rimando are no-brainers, they absolutely must be protected. Regarding the method of protecting, I think Marco10 is correct. Whether another one will be done that way or not, who knows. Another major factor is whether it'll be 2004 (1 team) or 2005 (2 teams). -Digital
Yeah I'd agree here, though I actually wouldn't mind losing Cerritos' salary... True but that reasoning depends on if we have one or two teams in the expansion draft as you allude to below. With two teams, Namoff would be scooped up in no time. [quote As for Warren/Rimando, let me make this clear, I'm a big Warren fan, but he's no Rimando. Warren--as a rookie--has already missed time for injuries and personal reasons, shown a real deficiency in communicating/organizing the defense, inexperience with the speed of play, and real difficulty making a 2nd change of direction. That's just too many things to be exposed once the rest of the league figures him out. I think he'll be a solid MLS starter, but he has a long way to go to be a Rimando, and he's noway near as durable. Plus, if Warren ever does fulfil his potential, at his size, he's a candidate for Europe, whereas the superior Rimando likely will not be made an offer because of his size. Plus, it'd be very difficult to ever be as exciting, charismatic, or acrobatically crowd pleasing as Rimando. IMHO, Reyes and Rimando are no-brainers, they absolutely must be protected. [/quote] I'm in favor of keeping Rimando too. Yeppers...
For the 750 gazillionth time, Chino Alegria will NOT be a senior international next year. Chino will turn 25 in 2005 (with a birthdate in calendar 1980). According to MLS guidelines, international players count as senior internationals in the calendar year in which they turn 25. Links at: http://www.mlsnet.com/teams/dc/roster.html and: http://www.mlsnet.com/about/regulations/index.html#rosters If I have to post this one more mother-fricking time I will cut an incision in the bowels of the offending poster, tie them to the top of the Washington Monument, and kick the mother-fricker off the top to see if their bowels will keep them off the pavement, or if they'll break and the offender will go splat. READ THE FVCKING RULES PEOPLE! ... There. I feel better now. As it happens, it has no bearing whatever on whether you protect Chino or not. He's not worth protecting. Last time there was no special status. There were 20-man rosters, you had to make at least 10 players available. If you had more than 20 on the roster (due to injured reserve, or P-40 players) then you could only protect 10 max. Each time a player was picked off your roster, you were permitted to protect an additional player. After you lost your third, you were done, as far as the roster raiding was concerned. SO, assuming for the moment that you are permitted to protect ten players, they are: Goalkeepers: NONE. You're not going to lose both, good goalkeepers are a dime a dozen in this country (possibly the only country in the world that can say that), and under NO circumstances do you ever protect a short goaltender who just lost his ACL. Little Nicky may never play again, you realize that, don't you? He's certainly not going to be able to get to the upper 90 any more. It's not even worth discussing. Defenders: (4) Nelsen, Petke, Namoff, Reyes Midfielders: (4) Kovalenko, Convey, Olsen, Stewart Forwards: (2) Martins, Cerritos You protect your starting 11. Everyone else is expendable, replaceable, or, in the case of Etcheverry, too damn expensive to be taken. You could potentially put Stewart on the too expensive list, but I think there would be significant interest in building around him--it's only here where the matchup wasn't the best. That can be fixed. Available: Forwards: Eskandarian's not a bust, but he needs a lot of time--he spent too much time in college and is paying the price. Take the risk. Quaranta is a bust. If he comes back, you can try again, if he doesn't, he's somebody else's problem. Barclay's a flaming idiot as well as a bust. If he isn't picked, you cut him anyway. Stoitchkov is too old to be picked up. Any team taking him as a player needs its head examined. However, I think his contribution has actually been pretty positive here, and I'd love to see him stick around. Mostly as a coach. But you don't protect him. Midfielders: Etcheverry. If no one in their right mind is going to take Hristo, then it's less likely that anyone is going to take Marco. If they do, they're welcome to him. Not worth a protected slot. Chino. Not a Senior International, not an integral part and not worth a protected slot. Brian Carroll. I'm tempted here. The kid's a project, but might be well worth the wait. I can't see exposing one of the other guys in his favor though. Perea. Who? Quintanilla. This is the toughest choice. This is actually the guy I'd keep if you decide to risk Stewart. Definitely the first guy you protect if you get hit. I don't think he really fits in the direction this team is going, BUT he's far more adaptable than I originally thought, and does bring the calming, possessive influence that you occasionally need to put a game away. I like his attitude, too. I'm really wavering on this one, because this is a guy who should probably see game action at some point every time he's healthy--either as a starter or as a first option. Defenders: Ivanov. His SI status plus his up-and-down season make this guy worth risking. Not the end of the world in the unlikely chance that you lose him. Prideaux. Toughest choice on the backline. If you expose him, you're going to lose him. On the other hand, if you've only got four defensive slots, who's he going to displace? Nelsen and Petke are better, Reyes is totally different, and Namoff is more versatile. Sorry Brandon! Stokes. Same boat as Carroll. But who are you going to unprotect in his favor? Seriously. Who? Goalkeepers: Rimando. May never play again, and may not come back full strength even if he does. This is a short athletic goaltender we're talking about here, and a blown ACL. No reason to protect him. Warren. Baumstark proved this guy is expendable, even though he's good. If we lose him, we'll get somebody else. We're not going to lose both him and Rimando. Geddes. Don't make me laugh. Baumstark. Doesn't count--he's our roving 'keeper. If we lose a guy, I'm sure we'll sign him, otherwise it's a wash. And that's the lot. Pretty straightforward, if you ask me.
Why protect Cerritos? He hasn't exactly lit up the boards and he has less to offer than Stewart or Martins. Plus his high salary will be a hit on our cap, which is already pretty high. He just doesn't do enough as a forward to keep us (me) from protecting him in a draft. We can't trade him away (no one would take his salary) and we can't afford to keep him forever. He'll have to go eventually and his loss means money in our pockets for other, possibly better, forwards.