55 days and counting to the next major date in the MLS and Revolution off-season. I didn't see any mention of a mandatory roster compliance date or waiver draft between now and then, so this is the next big thing looming on the horizon. It would be great if we could hear a little something from the Revs information vault, but I somehow doubt it. Feel free to post your speculations, rumors and legitimate info here. I think the first round draft order will look like this: 1. Real Salt Lake 2. CD Chivas USA 3. Chicago Fire 4. FC Dallas 5. New England 6. San Jose 7. Los Angeles from Metrostars for 2004 #11 pick 8. Colorado 9. Chicago from Los Angeles 2004 #14 pick 10. Columbus 11. Kansas City 12. Metrostars from DC United for rights to Moreno
I've been away for a while, and some of my info may not be the most accurate, but if I'm right, RSL has Kreis, Andy, Kam, Rusty, Henry Ring, Cletus might be coming back to play for them, and they get the first overall pick. All conspiracy theories aside... Anyone else think that that team could be pretty tough this year?
Most think #12 will go to Dallas for Vaca's future considerations. here's my breakdown LA gets CLB's pick for Simon Elliot KC might give theirs to CLB for Diego Walsh (a 1 or 2 conditional) The draft order is usually playoff adjusted, so will be RSL CDC CHI DAL SJ MET COL CLB NE LA KC DC I have NE giving their 5th round pick to CLB for Vercollone. Will gets something probably from SJ for Chris Brown. Small possibility of getting another pick from LA from the Serna trade, but I think the second pick that was conditional was likely a 2004 pick
actually Coach Barry has it right. The two expansion teams have the first two picks, then the two teams who missed the playoffs, and out of those its the teams who had the worse record followed by the MLS Cup runner up then MLS Cup winner.
no, every year I'm pretty sure that the 1st round exits and 2nd round exits are separated and ranked by record. that's the pattern i've seen in every draft since 96. The 2003 playoffs had no upsets in the first found, so I'll look at 2002 playoffs and 2003 draft natural order DC MET KC CHI DAL SJ CLB COL NE LA DC & MET didn't make the playoffs NE cup runner-up and LA Cup winner where we disagree KC CHI DAL SJ CLB COL note the 4 teams losing first round were KC, DAL, CHI, and SJ the conf final losers were CLB & COL the overall standings http://www.mlsnet.com/MLS/history/archive.jsp?year=2002&content=stats_league would indicate those teams would be ranked KC CHI CLB COL & DAL (tied in points) NE not the order that was used this link proves my natural order is correct http://web.archive.org/web/20030405051251/www.mlsnet.com/special/draft/2003/event.html clearly the order went by playoff exit and not worse record for those teams in the 2003 draft (at least clearly to me!, if you can follow my ramblings) have the rules changed since 2003? I'm pretty sure this pattern holds for every draft since 96
So we have these picks: 9, 18, 27, 36, and 54. The 45th pick went to Columbus for the Vercollone trade. Is this right?
I haven't even remotely finished my analysis on the Draft Pool, yet... but my gut feeling after watching most of the season is that this is a good year to have a mid-to-late first round pick. Why? Because I don't see anyone "special" in this draft class. There's no Freddy Adu, no Alecko Eskandarian, no Chad Marshall, no Taylor Twellman. What there does appear to be are about 10-15 guys who I think will be good, solid pros. Among those 10-15, there are three or four "wildcards" that I think have boatloads of potential, but who also raise some red flags -- Knox Cameron, for instance.
Always look forward to the pre-draft efforts that you and the rest of the Revsnet & Matchnight gang put together. The Magpie
The rules may have changed. While I didn't look at the 2003 draft history, I looked long and hard at the 2004 draft. The natural order of last year's draft is consistent with my 2005 list as explained by jmmusa above. "The two expansion teams have the first two picks, then the two teams who missed the playoffs, [then the remaining teams in ascending order] followed by the MLS Cup runner up then MLS Cup winner."
I've looked at 1996-2004, and all are consistent with mine. There were no upsets in 2004 and that's probably why it worked for 2004. I'll break down 2004 later. I disagree until I see some real proof.
Let's look at 2004. natural order DAL CLB LA DC COL MET KC NE CHI SJ We agree, DAL & CLB didn't make the playoffs, dallas worse record, CHI runner-up, and SJ as Cup winner. that leaves LA DC COL MET KC NE your pattern says, by record only LA 36 DC 39 COL 40 & MET 40 KC 42 NE 45 that works, but try my method too 1st round playoff exits: DC, MET, LA, COL ordered by points LA DC COL MET conf final losers ordered by points KC NE so it works too both our methods work for 2004. But mine works for 96-2003 and yours doesn't. so i'll need to see some evidence of a rule change. if you still disagree, we can just leave it at that and wait for the list to come out (sometime soon hopefully)
Mike, what do you think of Pat Haggerty of BC and where he would be available? I've seen Nicol and Mariner at BC scouting and I don't think they were there to see Charlie Davies (or were pretending they weren't!). Melamed seemed rather disappointing to me this year. I thought he looked better the previous two years.
I like him. Big, fairly mobile, good man-marker, real solid college player. Seems to be he'd be a solid pick anywhere from the 3rd round on. A candidate to make a team as a developmental player. Agreed, although he's played a lot more midfield this year than he did the last two years.
I'll start putting scouting reports up on MatchNight after the Final Four. I'll say this, though... if life was fair, the Revs would get a chance to draft Michael Parkhurst out of Wake Forest. He was the ACC Defensive Player of the Year this year, and a pretty likely P-40 signee playing the center of defense for the Demon Deacons. He's not the best athlete I've seen this year, but he's probably the best soccer player in the college ranks - doesn't give the ball away, rarely caught out of position, very dependable... I like him a lot. He could start for us in defense right now, I think. Oh, and he's from Cranston, Rhode Island and grew up watching Revolution games on TV.
Bio below, and impressive credentials: http://wakeforestsports.collegesports.com/sports/m-soccer/mtt/parkhurst_michael00.html Photo from Andy:
5' 10" and 150 lbs..............do you really think Nicol would even look at him as a central defender? Maybe as an outside defender instead of Heaps, but I'll bet Nicol wants size and experience for the center, particularly if he's sticking with a 3-5-2 (which the midfield will likely require).
Currently on MLSNET: Combine list to be announced Thursday Major League Soccer will announce Thursday the list of 66 college players nominated and selected to participate in the 2005 addidas MLS Player Combine. The event will take place at The Home Depot Center over a four-day period from Jan. 8-11. The player list will appear on MLSNET at 1 p.m. ET.
I never said he'd start for us in the center of defense, although he is kind of Rusty Pierce/Nick Garcia sized. I think he'd make a very good outside defender in either a 3-5-2 or a 4-4-2. There's no one in this draft - Stewart included - that steps right in to the middle of any MLS defense, IMO. In other words, I don't see a Chad Marshall out there. If the Revs want to address their needs in the center of defense, they're probably going to have to look outside the country.
I didn't see Parkhursts name on the Combine list. Can/will players be names be added to the list later? Are there players that will skip the Combine who expect to be drafted? Will we see A-League players back on the list again this year?
Seems to me, and feel free to correct me, that for all of the Marshalls, Bocanegras and Garcias, there are a lot of pretty decent MLS central defenders that were pretty unheralded before coming to MLS (guys like Petke, Jolley, Curtin, ..., even Lalas[?]). Maybe some of them were prime prospects, but I think many weren't. The college game is SO different from MLS that figuring out who can thrive in the pro game is a fine art.