Matt Turner ahead of Zack Steffen as US national team goalkeeper?

Who would be a head of him? He’s shown more than anyone not named Steffen. If he gets a new job in any decent league and returns to form he’s a lock at n2.

 

You're welcome to completely outsource your opinion, but an appeal to authority is a logical fallacy for a reason.

Does a Man City scout know more than me? Of course. Are they going to be accurate 100% of the time or even close? Of course not.

They've spent about $400M on defenders in the last four years, and continually make the same choice to prefer offense over defense. I'm not sure these guys are even trying to make choices with goal prevention as a whole -- but they sure as heck can't figure out how to make a solid defense.

How about Chelsea? Did the Chelsea scouts know more than me when they paid like $80M for Kepa? KEPA MUST BE AMAZING.

I can take Man City's opinion and give it strong weight, and disagree, and still be right.

For that matter, Earnie, Brian and Gregg know a lot more about soccer than you or I. If they choose Michael Bradley to start at CDM, who are we to question? They must be right.

 

I like Zack Steffen a lot, and he's certainly our #1. But I don't think he's anywhere in lock territory. He's not currently performing at a Tim Howard level.

Tim Howard was a great GK. I have no idea if he's good at evaluating GK. I have no idea if he's being honest with his evaluation, or whether he's being supportive. I have no idea what Tim thinks of Matt Turner, etiher.

I also don't know why Yeovil Town would be relevant. Tim Howard is a backup at Man City. He did well but not outstanding in the Bundesliga last year. I have no idea how that actually ranks versus say, being the best GK in MLS (if Turner is that). I'm not sure that should be definitive, either.

What I do know about Steffen -- he's pretty good. He's great at penalties. He doesn't seem to make as many outstanding saves as I'd like -- he's not at that Keller/Howard sort of level. He's decent at playing out of the back, but he certainly had some trouble with the USMNT making the wrong play.

In other words, I think it's kind of silly the push back to giving Turner any kind of shot. People seem ready to give Horvath more chances, and he hasn't played in like two years. Turner is putting up HISTORICALLY GREAT shotstopping numbers in MLS and all I hear is "If he was so great, a European team would buy him."

I don't need that to see him called in and give him a shot.

 

What if he gives up 5 goals in a half? Shouldn't he have to, you know, play well to actually get on the depth chart?

 

You haven't been paying attention. Steffen is the number two. We are going to try to play out of the back with Turner and "Donkey Touch Long". It will be really interesting watching Tata pressure us harder than last time.

 

I think we need to stop with thinking we're going to be looking at goalie's in this day and age who have poor foot skills at the international level. Sure, a club here and there may be fine with a throwback type, but the idea of goalie's being better with their feet has been evolving for decades now. It's not some new thing, it has just accelerated. The term sweeper keeper goes back to the 80s. More and more teams at all levels are playing out of the back and need a goalie who can play with his feet. That's just the way of the world and you can't wish it away and return to a simpler time where you could just stick a guy back there to save shots.

 

Oh, it's terrible, no doubt. But I'd want to see Horvath play against before I give him the automatic #2 slot.

I get that Turner has become part of a larger holy war here, but the dude is an absolute shot stopping beast. His performance this weekend was something I'd welcome on the National Team. He should get a chance. And so should Horvath.

 

Articulated everything I was trying to convey much more artfully than I was able to.

I get your point, about the data point, to a point, but not to put it to pointedly; the market doesn't have to have pinpoint accuracy, to prove my point about it's efficacy as a point of reference.

The market gives us multiple data points, a frame of comparison and context. It is a crucial and invaluable tool for these evaluations and better than Butters eye test and at least as good as shotstopping statistics from an inferior league.

It isn't just that Steffan was valued much higher by city, he isn't just a volume purchase without merit, that would be Miazga. He is in their first team roster and playing games for them, that is ********ing massive. It isn't just that Man City a team that values foot skills didn't purchase Turner, no one did. Not even a team from the Championship that is tailor made for Shot stopping only, not another MLS team, Bruce in his infinite wisdom didn't even offer him a livable wage to secure him long term, or save him the ignominy of being the third highest paid dude on the roster, nothing.

It isn't just that Steffan went to Europe and the jury is out, he failed, rose again and played very well in Germany, any other reframing of it is revisionist history, Dusseldorf loved him and wanted him back and he and that defense were under assault the entire time. Then there is the whole thing where he has played very well for us, even if I agree that he is not Keller, Howard, Freidel level yet that's got nothing to do with anything, as neither is Turner.

You are better than these statements. Howard is better than Butters at evaluating keepers. And absolutely no one else is pushing back on Turner being called in, or even being our presumptive number two. It was the pro Turner side of this discussion that posited him being ahead of Steffan and starting for us. Any negativity towards Turner is pushback against that asinine, ridiculous and idiotic suggestion.

 

It has efficacy as a point of reference.

My issue is this: it is used here as a bludgeon, as a way to stop discussion. The response is "Man City bought Steffen and not Turner, so discussion over."

I'm saying, well, in addition to that data point, let's look at what Doyle pointed out: Turner has elite shotstopping stats and Steffen didn't.

Moreso, let's look at other data points: there's tons of film. Watch it. There's other stats. Let's look at those

And let's get other data points: Call him in and let him play.

People can say "Man City" all they want; Zack Steffen is not playing GK at the level that say, Kevin de Bruyne plays CM, though that's the implication. He's a good option, but not one to be not challenged. Which we can determine, from, you know, watching him play.

I'm not proposing Turner is better. I just don't think where they play is more than a data point. I have no idea why a decision maker would want to reduce available inputs to a single, blunt data point.

Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player of all time and was one of the worst talent evaluators in recent NBA history. Playing a position at a high level and differentiating between professionals at that level are not necessarily the same toolsets.

Of course Tim Howard knows more about goaltending. But the best players are not always the best talent evaluators. Just like they aren't always the best coaches.

Tim Howard's opinion -- which I don't think had anything to do with Matt Turner at all -- is also a valuable data point. But man, what if Tim Howard had said Matt Turner is better?

Is the club opinion still all encompassing?

What if Turner outperforms Steffen but is still at the Revolution? What if he comes in a match against Mexico where Steffen is unavilable and has a Keller/Howard game? But he's still in NE?

I'm not anti-Steffen at all, but I've got people in multiple threads basically telling me that Club Affiliation should be the key, and in some cases, only determinant of who plays. Not actual performance.

All I'm saying is that it's an important data point, but people on here take it to be so much more.

 

This is purely speculative, but I just think you are challenged a great deal more by playing against more talented players, and teams than you are by playing lesser talented players and teams, period.

I think it's as simple as that. I don't mean this to say that you're automatically better because who knows, maybe you're just a fantastic keeper period, and perhaps you don't want to play in Europe for whatever reason, and as such, whatever differences might apply, don't because you're superior period, to a lesser talented player plying his trade in the EPL or Bundlesiga or anything else. Who knows.

I just think that generally speaking, you'll be tested more, and more likely to be found out playing against tougher competition. You'll end up training with more talented keepers, and you'll end up training against more talented players, and more talented teams, and that always matters, but it isn't necessarily decisive and in a situation like this, I'm not going to argue too much one way or another. Initially I thought it was ridiculous, but in retrospect, the analytics are interesting, and I'd also think it critical to add that we would want Turner to get some experience w/various fullbacks and centerbacks in the system. Steffen has enough problems distributing and playing out of the back w/guys he's actually played with numerous times, I think it would be rather important that Turner get a lot more experience communicating w/these guys so they intuit one another's decision making in time, and that aint happening if he's just thrown into the lineup w/little to no experience playing w/the various guys.

 

Otoh, if it's not close, than why isn't he in Europe, because if he is that better, the only possible reason is his personal preference. If he's as good as you think, there should be a ton of transfer offers piling in, period. Are there?

 

I don't know. He is 26 years old with, basically, 2 years MLS experience, not 17 years old winger. He plays for NT he gets offers. Horvath got his offers, did it make him a better GK?

 

It isn't. The fact that the World Cup still, STILL (decided to heighten the urgency of the word) heavily impacts player values, and transfers etc is absurd. It's a tiny, small random sampling of games in a competition that doesn't remotely reflect club competition in domestic leagues, and yet it's been heavily impacting sales, and transfers for decades. So clearly I'll cosign on your argument there.

However, when leagues throughout Europe are turning over rocks in the USL too look at players, when they're sniffing around guys that are 13-14-15 on every continent, clearly they're paying attention. Compare how difficult it is to dig up guys from the USL, and like Evan Rotundo's etc (or some analogy to him) as compared to a guy you can see by flipping on a tv and catching an MLS game, and it seems very simple to me. I just don't see Europe these days, failing to take seriously or pay attention to players in our leagues, in our academies etc. They are grabbing guys like Chris Richards before anyone even realizes that Chris Richards is Chris Richards etc. Why would they be clueless about a guy whose been a stud for years in the MLS at this point and is cheap as hell like Turner? It's not like he'd cost much, and if he's as good as Steffen as many are arguing why on Earth wouldn't they be breaking down the door for a guy whose salary is like 1/12th that of Steffen's or whatever if they can pull off such an investment a multi million dollar level transfer talent?

It's franchise malpractice to fail to look into him at that point, and teams are't this clueless anymore. Sure some leagues aren't digging into this gold mine like others, probably because of age requirements, and international slots to some extent, and to another degree, probably some residual prejudice against our nation's ability (although I think that was mostly about the nineties and the aughts).

 

If he's as good as you think, it makes a ton of sense to bring him in. If he's good enough to trump a guy Manchester City is using, and purchases, why wouldn't almost any team in England, France, Italy, Germany, Spain etc buy him? Heck there are American owners of some of these teams. If you can get a Steffen+ for basically 9 cents on the dollar, why wouldn't you?

I'd imagine it's because they don't agree w/your assessment. Though I do think age matters too, but keepers can play longer than field players at a high level, so I doubt age matters that much.

Btw, I'm not arguing w/your assessment, I haven't watched Turner play at all beyond a couple of clips after seeing this thread, so I don't speak as an authority or even someone w/a clear and emphatic preference, I just think there's a hole wide enough for the proverbial tanker truck to drive thru in the pro-turner argument. Europe would not ignore the guy, collectively as a continent, if he was/is this good. It makes no sense to do so. They brought over much lesser keepers, Klinsmann's son, Brady, Horvath as you mentioned etc lots of guys. Why not Turner?

 

My thoughts too. I worry a little bit about it from the stand point that failure in these spots can impact confidence going forward for a while much like it does with a Forward. There have definitely been keepers that got a case of the yips, like forwards that got a case of the finishing yips, but if you can handle that cauldron of competition, and just soak it all up, it's infinitely more helpful to my mind than continuing to play in a small pond where spot is largely secure, period. It's impossible for me to believe it wouldn't help, if the player has the mental make up, and the talent and skill to handle the competition and environment and thrive from it.

 

In a sidenote, just listened to the John Cleese Eulogy for Graham Chapman from thirty years ago. Holy ----. That was an awesome 2 minutes.

 

Let's not pretend that Steffen is MC quality GK. He is a good keeper, mid range BL level. Spector played a few games for MU and that didn't mean much. Zelalem played for Arsenal somewhere at age of 16. All the young keepers that you mentioned had YNT careers and were well known. Turner came from nowhere like Long or in lesser degree Dempsey. He is a few months older than Steffen and Horvath with a few less years of experience. Wasn't drafted after college and, I believe, wasn't even invited to the combine. If he gets ahead of dead wood of Hamid, Horvath, Johnson and Guzan he will get his offers,

 

Steffen isn’t City quality. Agree mid range BL/EPL level.

Turner isn’t a month older he’s a year older than both.

Hamid, Johnson and Guzan are deadwood sure. How is Horvath? Yes he’s not playing and needs to move. He’s also facing the Belgium teams n2 with a CV that’s better than any of our GKs. Second he moves and lands in a decent league and gets his form back he’s back in contention for a starting spot. His ceiling is possibly the highest. Not sure he reaches it but he’s got talent and proven that he can play at a high level.

 

Turner is making stops in MLS. Distributing ok too. Again, in MLS. I tend to not overrate results there to crown someone a starter for USMNT. Rather it's a sign they need to be invited to camp to see how they might fit.

 

I agree with you on footwork. Maybe I should said technical ability on the ball. If Turner could be improving this area why hasnt he already done so?

This whole debate about playing out of the back in the context of the usmnt is really odd to me. It is a fact that Berhalter wants to play that way. I guess Tuener can play on some Theoretical team (aka the TUSMNT).

I have been a huge fan of Steffen's for some time and think he has the potential to be our best ever GK. Turner doesn't have that potential with his shortcomings. He is never going to play at a top club. This means Steffen's advantages in experience are only going grow more and more.

I think that clown Doyle found a statistic that over shoots any superior shot stopping has over Steffen. I have always viewed Steffen as a very good shot stopper. These clips show that. I am not sure how anyone would discount the ability to distribute like these guys.

 

That’s fine but which camp matters. Tho less so for GKs. Jan camp... absolutely.

 

For all you Steffen 'isnt Man City level goalkeeper." The facts say otherwise.
1. Man City paid $7.5M for him.
and more importantly
2. Man City has played him in a Cup match already.

So say what you want but pretty sure Man City doesn't sign guys and play them that aren't Man City level.

 

Horvath is at his ceiling. He is poor. He doesn't control penalty box and useless on crosses.
And apparently he isn't able to learn that. His reflexes are great, but that's it. He is where he is because nobody wants him. Will be in MLS in a year.