Reactions to the draft

Discussion in 'Real Salt Lake' started by Arelius, Nov 19, 2004.

  1. JoeW

    JoeW New Member

    Apr 19, 2001
    Northern Virginia, USA
    Here's my take on this draft. You didn't do horribly. Given realistic expectations (that you get 5 players who make your final roster and 2-3 starters), you probably accomplished that.

    1. Countess. I know Ellinger thinks highly of him--maybe he'll turn DJ around. But there were better keepers available for less money. Heck--Henry Ring makes half as much money and beat out Countess in Chicago and was available. Countess makes a lot of money for an MLS starter. If he's going to be your starter, you need to count on using an allocation and a discovery on veteran defensive talent. With time he'll be fine. But right now his distribution and organization skill (as of his starting year in Dallas) was substandard.

    2. Bechncke, Pierce and Akwari. You did very well here. You got 3 cheap, young MLS veterans for the backline. At least one of these 3 will end up starting for you and that won't be a shame. Maybe 2 will make it as starters.

    3. Brenes has potential. But that said, Metro desperately needed backline and D-mid help and he never locked up the position as his. Plus, Bradley has a terrific rep for bringing out the best in young talent--and Brenes never stepped it up with Metro.

    4. Ara is basically a superdraft choice 2 months early--he's basically a college senior with no MLS experience. He barely played this year. You're getting an extra third round pick in the superdraft. Maybe he sticks, more likely he won't b/c of all of your picks, discoveries and allocations.

    5. Kamler and Brown--that's about getting two inexpensive MLS veterans. At best they're role players for your side. In reality, Kamler may retire. Brown has bounced around and still hasn't connected with a team.

    6. Scott--I think this was done with 2 factors: he has offensive talent combined with quickness--always worth taking a gamble on, and maybe he gets Brenes to feel more at home.

    7. Andy Williams--well, he is an A-mid. But you could do better with an allocation. Heck, I think Mathis is a better A-mid. My understanding is that Ellinger with with Columbus when Andy Williams first came to MLS and the crew. So I guess (like with Countess), he thinks highly of him. Certainly he's a serviceable A-mid with a lot of skills. But the rap on Williams is that he disappears from games and isn't a complete player. With Mathis, Kreis and Williams as your attacking triangle, you've got 3 guys with skills who are capable of magical moments and know MLS. But no height (you'll have to score on heads by using your backline--well, given the guys you drafted, maybe not), no speed and all 3 of those players (less so with Kreis) will just have games where they don't show up. Again, you could have done worse. OTOH, you could use an allocation on an A-mid and get a player like Guevara or Christian Gomez or Andreas Herzog who all had more impact with their teams last year than did Williams.
     
  2. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    1. Countess's salary is in the range of most MLS starters
    2. Not sure if Pierce is cheap. May be out of contract.
    5. Is Kamler inexpensive?
    6. Most teams haven't done better than Williams. Herzog wouldn't play defense. Cancela got benched. Unless MLS is opening up the checkbook more (they actually probably are), allocations are tough to deliver a decent A-Mid (Nowak/Etcheverry/Cienfuegos) nowadays. Herzog looked good early on, but where was he down the stretch - (the bench). Guevera and Gomez are the only foreign A-mids (Ekelund aging and seems on the way out) that I can think of. Everyone else seems about on par with Williams.
     
  3. numerista

    numerista New Member

    Mar 21, 2004
    Any chance you're confusing him with Gilberto Flores? Brenes is a creative left midfielder.
     
  4. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    I think Metrostars at first tried him on defense at least once. I'm pretty sure I remember him being under consideration as an answer at left back, but before settling was off to the Olympics. After that I didn't really track him. Late in the season Metrostars stuck with Leitch/Parke/Pope/Bonseu
     
  5. ChrisE

    ChrisE Member

    Jul 1, 2002
    Brooklyn
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    American Samoa
    Two notes.

    4. Ara is actually better than "just" getting a third round pick. Only 4 of 10 3rd rounders from last year ended up with their teams; 4 of 10 in 2003 as well. The fact that Ara made the D.C. team (and got a full contract) indicate he's better than the average third round pick. He very likely sticks.

    6. Scott did quite well in Costa Rica before coming to MLS; there's good reason to think he's an MLS-caliber forward stuck in a bad situation last year.
     
  6. numerista

    numerista New Member

    Mar 21, 2004
    Chris --
    An even stronger point might be to refer to your Development Player work, which suggests that young players in MLS do tend to improve, even if they don't play much.

    Also, a technicality: Ara was pick #24, which is now in the second round.
     
  7. JoeW

    JoeW New Member

    Apr 19, 2001
    Northern Virginia, USA
    1. As for Countess and average salary, I guess it depends upon who's salaries you figure in (and the problems with averages). He made more money than: Henry Ring and the majority of the keepers who were in the expansion draft. Meola and Howard are oddities in that they make so much more than MLS keepers usually make. For an MLS starting keeper to make $80k-100K is not particularly low (except compared to the rest of the world). Garlick, Cassar, Rimando, Ring, Reis, all make substantially below $130K. I thought Hartmann and Cannon did as well (though I could be wrong about that).

    2. Ara has potential and may turn out to be a fine player. But Ara made DCU this year b/c they had a total of 3 draft picks and were cap strapped (and one of the 3 picks--Huson--decided not to play pro ball and didn't show up to camp). And to argue that he got a full contract therefore that proves he's a legitimate talent--that's off-base. DCU already had the following players who were P-40: Eskandarian, Carroll, Stokes, Adu, and their third keeper (Perkins). They added Thompson from Dallas and Kuffour as P-40's. There was no room for Ara to NOT be a full roster player. So to argue that Kevin Ara stuck with DCU and that proves he's a fine player is like arguing that b/c DCU scored 3 goals on KC (something few teams did this year) than reserve forward Thiago Martins must be a real talent. Ara missed much of the season to finish his college degree. The way to view him (b/c of his lack of experience and PT and that he was trying to learn a new position) he's that he's basically a college rookie. Except he isn't P-40 and isn't of the talent level of a first rounder.

    3. I agree that Scott showed talent in Costa Rica. It would be a pretty pitiful statement if MLS teams were saying "I know this guy was the drecks in his home country but by golly we think he'll be fine in MLS." The reality is that almost every foreign player who is imported to MLS has shown at least flashes of brilliance (if not sustained great play) before coming here. That's why you bring them. Case in point: Sergio Galvan Rey--who has proven at the highlest levels of South American soccer that the man can score goals. But he sure stunk it up in MLS. Doesn't mean Scott will. Just means that he didn't earn PT in Columbus and they felt another player who got no minutes (Testo) was worth more. Scott is quick and has skill so that's always worth a gamble. But you can say that about a bunch of players on the expansion list.
     
  8. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    1. I broke down GK salaries over on the Dallas forum
    Every team had a GK between 80-140k but Columbus (Busch still on first contract, Jordan unknown), KC (Meola near max). Backup GK's tend to be more in the 30-40k range. Sometimes backups win the job, hence Ring, Busch, Cassar. Ring is out of contract now. For 4 years after being drafted, MLS rookies are usually cheap (24k-30k). Then they usually double the salary, usually triple it for GK's.

    https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3561637&postcount=21

    2. I agree it doesn't say THAT much about Ara, but some teams filled their roster with A-League or undrafted players (Colorado) not giving their draft picks a contract. I haven't double checked, but half of the third round sticks around. He made the full roster over Perkins but I'll admit few teams put 3 GK's on the senior roster. Most college rookies were develomental or protected. Cap problems do force teams to use rookies to fill out the roster. But there are usually only about 5 spots a year in MLS filled by rookies not playing but on the senior roster. I still think it says something.
     
  9. numerista

    numerista New Member

    Mar 21, 2004
    If you take the pre-season perspective, I think you're probably correct. However, there's more to the story than that. DC later had a bottleneck on its senior roster, at the time they chose to promote Perkins. If the team hadn't been impressed with Ara, it could easily have asked him to change status and gone with three keepers in the 18 (this is a benefit of having so many P-40s). Instead, they dropped Doug Warren, a player whose talent I think you respect.

    How do you know that Ara didn't have the talent to be a first rounder? Let me show you something...

    The 2004 MLS Draft, Expurgated

    Here are the the top ten American field players from the 2004 senior class, in the order that they were selected:
    1. Matt Taylor, F, UCLA
    2. Scott Buete, M, Maryland
    3. Leonard Griffin, D, UCLA
    4. Chris Wingert, M, St. John's
    5. Adolfo Gregorio, M, UCLA
    5. Seth Stammler, D, Maryland
    6. Memo Arzate, M, UCSB
    7. Jerry White, F, Wake Forest
    8. Kevin Ara, M, Harvard
    9. Kevin Taylor, D, Michigan
    10. Ty Maurin, M, UCLA

    Why is this list interesting? It lays out very clearly that if you don't come from a strong program, it's hard to be a high pick. Apart from Harvard -- a mid-table team in a mediocre conference -- every school on that list was among the top 12 seeds in the 2003 NCAA tournament.

    And what does that suggest about Ara? It probably means that he's a little more raw than the big-school kids. It also means that he wasn't as heavily scouted. For at least a year or two, none of us are going to be sure what he's capable of.
     
  10. JoeW

    JoeW New Member

    Apr 19, 2001
    Northern Virginia, USA
    1. On the GK salary range, to say that every team (except the Crew) had GK's making between 80K-140K is quite a range. More accurately, if you look at what GKs started games this year that made less than Countess, you'd have quite a list. Now it's not that Countess' salary is such a big deal--but he's very young (and traditionally GK's get a lot better when they're a lot older), he's coming off a year where the man couldn't earn PT and I don't think it's a done deal that he starts. It's one thing if he's P-40--I'd love to have him. That the former Chicago Ast. GM picked him seems to indicate that he's not such a locker room cancer (ie: some of the rumors out of Dallas). I think he's got superb shot stopping potential right now. But the rest of his game is substandard--ask the Dallas fans that. There were better keepers available for almost half as much money. But of course the season will be the real test of this argument. If he keeps the starting role and plays superb ball, than it's probably not a bad pick.

    2. On the Kevin Ara deal--I don't hate the guy. Heck--he "played" for my team. But I think I'm reasonably objective (ie: I"m not in the tank for everyone who ever wore a DCU uniform) on this. From the git-go (before the waiver lists were ever submitted) I was criticizing Connolly's original article that the expansion teams would have decent starting lineups from this draft and on DCU's list arguing against the believe that the team would be crippled by who we exposed.

    As for Ara specifically, he was in the Combine last year. Competing against younger players (with less experience) he dropped down to the third round. The arguments about making the roster, over Perkins, etc. prove his value and talent are off-base. DCU went through most of the season in cap purgatory b/c players like Thiago Martins, Eliseo Quintanilla and mostly Santino Quaranta were hurt all season (Quaranta got healthy only at the end). Yet they stayed on the active roster and cap. DCU already had plenty of P-40 talent (and Ara wasn't eligible for P-40). By defacto, he had to be active roster. In fact, DCU went through a large part of the season with not enough bodies on the roster--they had enough P-40's and discovery players but couldn't afford any veteran roster players. Why move Warren to discovery rather than Ara? B/c they didn't have the cap room if they moved Ara--Warren made about $15K more than did Ara. And Warren refused it anyway.

    Finally, I'd argue the reason DCU picked Ara is b/c Nowak had a vision of what he wants Ara to be. In college he was mostly a striker or A-mid. Nowak viewed him as a defensive midfielder, with good vision (which he has), good distribution, tall (so potential to be strong in the air). The downside of his game (if I remember Knave's comments--he saw him at the combine) was that he didn't use his body well and was thrown off by contact (a problem for a D-mid). The problem is that he didn't have expertise at this position. And the rest of the league probably evaluated Ara as a forward/A-mid--and decided to pass on him. Maybe he'll turn out to be a find. Or maybe not. Nowak's comments after the combine were telling. When asked if there was any talent there (b/c of the rumors that the 2004 draft was weak), he said that after the first few selections, there was a lot of talent but it was a 2-3 year project before you'd see it produce. I suspect he was thinking in part of Kevin Ara when he said that.

    3. It's difficult to compare the Chivas/RSL drafts. The rumor (and given the recent Stewart trade it seems true) that Chivas can now actually acquire through discovery and allocation and start 10 non-Americans certainly leads one to believe that Chivas will take players currently under contract to Chivas Mexico and send them north to LA. In otherwords, their draft was about acquiring 5-8 subs, no starters, who will fit into their system, speak spanish and not bust their cap. They probably accomplished that. But it all depends on who they bring in. Ultimately though, it's not about whether RSL did better than Chivas in the expansion draft (or even superdraft or allocation signings). It's what kind of team RSL puts together. And for that answer, you'll have to wait until opening day.
     
  11. Arelius

    Arelius Member

    Mar 23, 2004
  12. jasoncox

    jasoncox New Member

    Jun 28, 2004
    Dallas, TX
    Club:
    Real Salt Lake
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Well, he was third on the depth chart in CHI and isn't all that cheap for a starter. You never know though. Sometimes a change of venue can be a good shot in the arm.
     
  13. prk166

    prk166 BigSoccer Supporter

    Aug 8, 2000
    Med City

Share This Page