LA Galaxy 2025

Discussion in 'LA Galaxy' started by skydog, Apr 22, 2025.

  1. Baysider

    Baysider Member+

    Jul 16, 2004
    Santa Monica
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    All of the starters are flawed, but that's what you should expect to get at these salaries (It's great to find a bargain, but you can't plan on that)

    Nasci 571k
    Ramirez 571k?
    Berry 232k

    We'll still have Yamane, Garces and Reus as TAM. I like to see us spend to get an in-their-prime centerback and also a good central midfielder, so I'm not sure how much money we will have for a center forward.

    Not against getting someone for say 1,200k, but there's no guarantee of getting someone great at that price.
     
    JPAR, ProudNatRN, 73Bruin and 1 other person repped this.
  2. The Cadaver

    The Cadaver It's very quiet here.

    Oct 24, 2000
    La Cañada, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I want LAG to sign whoever is the second coming of Dema Kovalenko.
     
    JPAR, ProudNatRN, cleschke and 2 others repped this.
  3. skydog

    skydog Member+

    Aug 1, 1999
    Durham, NC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    I do think I responded to your arguments. You talk about the “emergence of” Nascimento and our need to give him more playing time to assess whether we should sign him. I responded that I don’t see the need for more evaluation. I don’t see either his resume or his on-field performances suggesting he has real potential and I don’t see anything close to an “emergence.” His low rate of goals and assists (“making players around him better”) are exactly what I would expect of a decent sized, decently skilled but slow reacting forward (or #9).

    Look my assessment may well be wrong- I don’t claim infallibility. And if Nasci ever emerges as a good forward then I am wrong. But I certainly took your post seriously (I find you one of our most informative posters) and I just responded to it with my opinion.
     
    ProudNatRN and TrickHog repped this.
  4. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I agree with Benny on this one. If you look at the timeline, Ramirez got benched for Nascimento at the exact moment it became clear that we weren't going to make the playoffs (even though Vanny and the team wouldn't admit it yet). Since Nascimento is on loan and takes a valuable U22 spot, it's imperative that the team figure out if he's worth that spot before they have to decide in the offseason if he's gonna be signed, since Ramirez was just a one-season placeholder for us and not part of the long-term plans. I'd like to see even more of the younger players from here on out and less of the players on expiring contracts, so we can figure out what we've got for next season after we re-load and get Puig back. Ramirez seems like a servicable forward, which he has been his entire career, but we need to be looking forward to 2026.
     
  5. skydog

    skydog Member+

    Aug 1, 1999
    Durham, NC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    I said my take would be unpopular. Not my first, won’t be my last. :)
     
    ProudNatRN and TrickHog repped this.
  6. Benny Dargle

    Benny Dargle Member+

    Jul 23, 2008
    LA
    I said Nasci was emerging because he was pretty awful and useless in his first set of outings for the team and he started to figure out how to be productive within the system. He has scored goals and provided some creative assists, which didn't seem possible in his first several games. And that is why I thought it made sense to play him over Ramirez. The team was going nowhere, they need to decide whether to exercise an option on Nasci, and Ramirez has no future with the team. I disagree there was no room for evaluation, but even if you believe that, we had to play someone, we had no money or room to sign someone different after we already signed Nasci, and I would have no interest in investing in watching Ramirez trot around without the pinpoint service that he needs to be successful. Ramirez definitely wasn't making players around him better. He's not the creative false 9 type that I explained they really needed in the absence of Puig or a reasonable creative midfielder.

    I could have seen them playing Ruben Ramos Jr. more, but I think he hasn't been ready this year (especially in comparison to Harbor Miller). It's also not clear to me (or the Galaxy I think) that striker is his position, as opposed to wing or midfield.

    So, that's why I was left with the conclusion that you're really just re-litigating the decision to sign Nascimento, since I could see no good argument for playing Ramirez or Berry the rest of this season.
     
    ProudNatRN and JPAR repped this.
  7. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Probably true. :)

    But you did have one point that was not correct. You said Kuntz shouldn’t have signed him, and he didn’t. It’s a loan. Which is why it was important to play him down the stretch once we weren’t going to make the playoffs— so we could see if he was indeed worth signing. And during Leagues Cup he was playing much much better— the injury came a horrible time for him. But I can see your point that he’s not worth signing. But we had to give him enough games to see that.
     
    ProudNatRN, JPAR and natfaninla repped this.
  8. skydog

    skydog Member+

    Aug 1, 1999
    Durham, NC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Sorry I used the word “signed” - I meant I don’t understand why we are trialing him. Call me a numbers nerd, but 1 goal & 1 assist in 5 seasons doesn’t scream “Let’s give that guy a shot!” And then when I saw him play I saw nothing to overcome what his previous 58 outings had shown - he just isn’t that good. I know you guys disagree, but I don’t see what anyone is excited about. The fact he can shield the ball occasionally, score if the ball lands at his feet and layoff a good pass twice a game, isn’t special for a first division pro. It’s not even the bare minimum, imo.
     
    ProudNatRN and TrickHog repped this.
  9. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Nerd.
     
    Dawdler repped this.
  10. skydog

    skydog Member+

    Aug 1, 1999
    Durham, NC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    I knew you would come through! ;)
     
    Dawdler and TrickHog repped this.
  11. The Cadaver

    The Cadaver It's very quiet here.

    Oct 24, 2000
    La Cañada, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Since we now know that none of the games the rest of this season mean a damn thing, here's a couple of things that I would like to see.in those games.

    1. Play Ricky just enough to knock off the rust from the long layoff and get him to trust his rehab. I am thinking a game or two. Then shut him down until pre-season camp.

    2. Play JT most or all the games so he is showcased and becomes a more valuable trade asset.

    3. Play as many of the kids that are marginal or MAY have potential in order to give Kunst the best info possible for the upcoming housecleaning

    4. (And I know this will never happen) Give season ticket holders a rebate reflecting that the team doesn't care about winning the last 9 games - to be applied to next year's tickets. I can dream, can't I?
     
    natfaninla, galvanator, Geneva and 5 others repped this.
  12. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Man, Ramirez had the chance to get @skydog all over this thread yelling "I told you so!!'. But homeboy let him down.....
     
    Geneva, Berks, ProudNatRN and 4 others repped this.
  13. skydog

    skydog Member+

    Aug 1, 1999
    Durham, NC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    I put my rep on the line for this guy and he lets me down like that?! Boo Ramirez! ;)
     
    JPAR, ProudNatRN, hav77 and 1 other person repped this.
  14. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I do feel bad for the guy. A very underwhelming and disappointing season for him. And then to top it off, he goes out there yesterday and lets his man Skydog down.
     
    Berks, skydog, ProudNatRN and 1 other person repped this.
  15. skydog

    skydog Member+

    Aug 1, 1999
    Durham, NC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    He was pretty productive as a depth forward for CLB last season, including I believe some crunch time game winners according to last week’s game commentator. And his 0.49 goal contributions per 90 min for us is STILL second best on the team. Playing half the minutes his 5 g+a is only 1 less than both Pec and Paintsil (6 each). So yes, I still think he should have been used more, especially earlier in season when we still had a chance.

    They just don’t understand us, Christian! :cry:
     
    ProudNatRN and TrickHog repped this.
  16. skydog

    skydog Member+

    Aug 1, 1999
    Durham, NC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Just watched the highlights of the game. I’m sorry but Yoshida is past his sell by date. Unfortunate game for Ramirez. Cerillo and Yamane beaten easily. Great ending to game and of course Nelson & Sanabria would bring it, lol.
     
    ProudNatRN, JPAR and TrickHog repped this.
  17. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I will say— he was the starter the entire season until it was basically over. He was the starter for the first 14 league games and 3 of the 4 CCC games. So he got 17 out of 18 games. And the next 2 matches after that was when Vanney started trying anything to get our offense going— even trying Fagundez as a false 9. And then we finally got a win with Nascimento in the 9, but by then the MLS season was over — and Ramirez is on an expiring contract and we have to decide if we are going to sign Nascimento or let the loan expire. And I know you don’t rate him, but the only reason you can form that opinion is because you’ve been able to see him play a lot in the past 12 games. Vanney has made sooooo many mistakes this season— and some of the 2024 signings and re-signings has been a disaster. But I don’t think switching to Nascimento after 18 games is one of them.
     
  18. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The fall off of Yoshida has been tough yo watch. He’s a great guy but Father Time is undefeated.
     
    cleschke, 73Bruin, Berks and 3 others repped this.
  19. skydog

    skydog Member+

    Aug 1, 1999
    Durham, NC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    You make some good points. The 17 out of 18 isn’t correct - he was used as a sub 4 times by May. But he did get a lot of starts, more than I remembered. He had one stretch of scoring 4 games in a row, two as a sub.
    Given that Vanney can’t recognize talent as quickly as a normal manager (Cabral!) I guess him switching to Nasci makes sense for him.

    I hearby publicly admit I might have been half wrong to object to his lack of playing time. Possibly. :whistling:
     
    ProudNatRN and TrickHog repped this.
  20. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    Possibly? My job here is complete. :D
     
    skydog repped this.
  21. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    And to be fair— these debates are really just shuffling the chairs on the Titanic 2024 Galaxy Cruise.
     
    Geneva, Berks, skydog and 2 others repped this.
  22. Benny Dargle

    Benny Dargle Member+

    Jul 23, 2008
    LA
    We have 20 points and 6 regular season games left to score 12 points and match what I think is our worst season total ever of 32 points (2008 and 2017). Lost cause or still plausible to get to 32?
     
  23. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I see 6-7 points remaining from those games, to be honest, not enough to not be the worst Galaxy team in MLS history.
     
  24. skydog

    skydog Member+

    Aug 1, 1999
    Durham, NC
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Somehow this team is going to finish with a significantly worse record than our 2007 team with Josh Tudela, Mike Randolph, Michael Gavin, Troy Roberts, Ely Allen, Alvaro Pires, Abel Xavier and Josh Wicks, all coached by Ruud Gullit. Now that is impressive! :eek::eek::eek:
     
    Berks, Beirut, JPAR and 3 others repped this.
  25. TrickHog

    TrickHog Moderator
    Staff Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Los Angeles, CA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Go big or go home!
     
    Berks and ProudNatRN repped this.

Share This Page