Rev News 11/11

Discussion in 'New England Revolution' started by Rev-eler, Nov 11, 2004.

  1. Rev-eler

    Rev-eler Member

    Feb 13, 2000
    San Francisco
    Revs can feel draft, Gus Martins, Boston Herald

    it's not so much the delivery...it's that sunil could give this type of answer to someone like gus with a straight face.
    :rolleyes:
     
  2. mosler

    mosler Member

    Jan 2, 2003
    Mashpee, MA
    If Tom Hill is correct in his matchnight article, the Revs will leave exposed

    1) Joe Franchino/Adin Brown
    2) Felix Brillant
    3) Joe Max Moore
    4) Carlos Llamosa
    5) Richie Baker
    6) Steve Howey (SI)

    This list really doesn't give me much heartache.
     
  3. Rev-eler

    Rev-eler Member

    Feb 13, 2000
    San Francisco
    clearly the revs are going to lose at least one person we'd 'like' to keep....i'm sure.


    however, the quote over the international players is ridiculous.
    1. he lists five, says they 'have to' protect 4.....but, clearly THERE'S ONLY 2 that are worth a hoot in the first place! and...all 5 are not irreplacable in my opinion.
    2. richie baker is likely not even around next year according to most accounts. so, that's a token name thrown up there.

    the quote almost makes it sound they're in dire straights w/regard to the intl's and torn about which 1 single player will be left unprotected......which is completely nonsensical. anyone that follows the revs could just laugh at how 'disingenuous' sunil was when making this comment.

    in addition, i guess i'd expect some pool writer to 'just print it'....but, i would've thought gus (who's been known to be more 'editorial' than someone like fda) to crane his neck some and go 'huh'? you're joking, right?

    p.s. if sunil WAS dead serious.....i think we're in trouble.
    :confused:
     
  4. Rev-eler

    Rev-eler Member

    Feb 13, 2000
    San Francisco
    oops, reread it a couple more times.
    maybe i need to give sunil a bit more 'credit'
    maybe he's saying.....'damn, we HAVE to protect 4 of these guys!?'
    :eek:
     
  5. Ultra Peanut

    Ultra Peanut New Member

    Jun 3, 2004
    Achewood
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Or, through the magic of this being print journalism, you don't actually see him (or Martins, for that matter) turning around and going "BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!"
     
  6. JMMUSA8

    JMMUSA8 New Member

    Nov 3, 2001
    Webster
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Revs can only lose 3 players in the expansion draft, so we are not going to see those 7 guys go.
     
  7. Mainer5

    Mainer5 Member

    Apr 12, 2001
    Topsham, Maine
    Out of those listed, I would hate to see brown or Franchino gone.

    Joe Max can't get healthy

    Baker never really made an impression

    Brilliant, was a good sub at best

    Howey never got a chance to show much

    Avery John is solid, probably the best choice for someone fishing for a good younger player

    Llamosa, same as Joe max, and aging fast.
     
  8. Soccer Doc

    Soccer Doc Member+

    Nov 30, 2001
    Keene, NH
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    In this chess game keeping Baker around and exposing him in the draft is a win--win situation---both for the Revs and Baker. Baker is young and able and could well be picked up in the draft. If he is he gets another chance at making it in the US and the Revs can pull somei=one off the list. If he's not picked the Revs can release him and he can get back to Ireland where he is welcome. All that was being rumored about his return to Ireland is on hold to see how he fairs in the draft. Smart move to keep him on the roster till after the draft
     
  9. soccertim

    soccertim Member

    Mar 29, 2001
    Mass
    Unfortunately, this list is in direct conflict with Sunil's statement, "You can only expose one international player. You have Felix (Brillant), Richie Baker, Avery (John), (Jose) Cancela and Steve Howey. We have to protect four of them.'' This would indicate that out of the 6 on Tom's list, the 3 internationals would have to be paired down to 1, presumably replaced by American players. The last 2 off of Tom's list are Kam and Heaps, and both are replaceable. Based on Sunil's comment, though, I'm curious about what's going on with Howey. Are they going to bring him back next year? If they aren't, they should have waived him by now. It seems foolish to lose Heaps or Joey to protect an extra SI if we don't bring him back.
     
  10. ToMhIlL

    ToMhIlL Member+

    Feb 18, 1999
    Boxborough, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    OK, I will have to amend that list. It turns out that what Sunil says is correct, according to MLSnet:

    Expansion Draft
    The League will conduct an Expansion Draft prior to the regularly scheduled postseason Waiver Draft (likely in late November)
    - The 2005 Expansion draft will be 10 rounds
    - Each MLS team shall be allowed to protect 12 Senior Roster players
    - Each MLS team may leave unprotected only one Senior International
    - An MLS team may lose no more than three (3) players during the Expansion Draft
    - After a player has been selected from an existing team, such team shall have the right to protect an additional player


    I was under the impression that they had to protect at least one SI, and not the other way around. Now that I think about it, in 1997 they had to protect some guys who were clearly not among the best players. Anyone remember Leo "The Turtle" Squadrone?

    If they only can leave one exposed, the only guys anyone would really want are Avery John and Pepe Cancela. To hear Sunil phrase it, it would appear that Brillant and Baker are already considered SIs, so there is little point in keeping both on the roster if it means losing a better domestic player. Howey should have been jettisonned the minute the champagne corks popped in the DCU locker room. Keep one of Baker or Brillant on the roster for the sake of leaving him exposed, cut Howey and protect John and Cancela, and ten others.

    Tom
     
  11. ftruscot

    ftruscot Member

    Feb 20, 2002
    Franklin, MA
    From MLSnet.com (emphasis added):

    Either Sunil doesn't understand the Expansion Draft rules (heaven help us) or for draft purposes, SI status is determined as for the 2005 season. This would be tough because we would be forced to protect Brillant and Baker even if we don't intend to keep them next year as SIs.

    A wild-card here is that I think I've heard they will be graduating P-40s before the expansion draft. So Dempsey may need to be protected, if the committee that makes those decisions deems that Clint has played enough to demonstrate that he can compete for a regular roster spot (or whatever the criteria is). Let's assume he loses P-40 status...

    So the players might break down into these categories:

    Developmental: (Exempt from draft)
    Andy Dorman
    Luke Vercollone
    Bobby Thompson
    Kyle Singer
    Perek Belleh

    Senior International: (Select 4)
    Jose Cancela
    Avery John
    Steve Howie
    Richie Baker
    Felix Brillant

    The Rest: (Select 8)
    Matt Reis
    Adin Brown
    Rusty Pierce
    Shalrie Joseph
    Taylor Twellman
    Pat Noonan
    Steve Ralston
    Marshall Leonard
    Jay Heaps
    Brian Kamler
    Clint Dempsey
    Joe Franchino
    Joe Max Moore
    Carlos Llamosa

    While selecting which SI to leave exposed seems very obvious to us, selecting only 8 from the rest will be difficult. Any guesses?
     
  12. Jeremy Goodwin

    Feb 16, 1999
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I get down to the following 9 real fast.

    Matt Reis
    Rusty Pierce
    Shalrie Joseph
    Taylor Twellman
    Pat Noonan
    Steve Ralston
    Jay Heaps
    Clint Dempsey
    Joe Franchino

    After that...I'd probably throw Shalrie to the wolves.
     
  13. ToMhIlL

    ToMhIlL Member+

    Feb 18, 1999
    Boxborough, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    OK, here are my guys in bold:
    The Rest: (Select 8)
    1) Matt Reis
    Adin Brown
    2) Rusty Pierce
    3) Shalrie Joseph
    4) Taylor Twellman
    5) Pat Noonan
    6) Steve Ralston

    Marshall Leonard
    Jay Heaps
    Brian Kamler
    7) Clint Dempsey
    Joe Franchino
    Joe Max Moore
    Carlos Llamosa

    Hmmmm, that last one is a tough one... Here are the contenders:
    Marshall Leonard
    Joe Franchino
    Jay Heaps
    Brian Kamler
    Adin Brown

    If I were running the Revs, I would keep Leonard and then add players to the protected list in that order if anyone else gets selected

    Tom
     
  14. brianzappa

    brianzappa Member

    Oct 21, 2003
    In a big country
    Tom, 100% agreement.

    Jeremy, would you really keep Heaps and Franchino over Shalrie Joseph? I'm not criticizing, just asking.
     
  15. Beez

    Beez Member

    Dec 20, 1999
    The fishy thing about Sunil's statement is this: How can you protect four senior internationals if the league limit is three? Wouldn't it make sense that the Revs would have to make a decision on Brilliant and Baker before announcing their protected list?

    Then again, why am I injecting the word "sense" into an MLS conversation?
     
  16. ftruscot

    ftruscot Member

    Feb 20, 2002
    Franklin, MA
    Tom,

    That's probably how I would do it as well.

    1) Matt Reis
    2) Rusty Pierce
    3) Shalrie Joseph
    4) Taylor Twellman
    5) Pat Noonan
    6) Steve Ralston
    7) Clint Dempsey
    8) Marshall Leonard

    Leonard is more attractive (young/fast/cheap) than Franchino, so I would keep him and expose Franchino hoping noone bites. Kamler is likely to retire before moving to the West, and that is probably clear, so I doubt he will be taken if exposed. Pierce will be out of contract at end of year, if Rusty is determined to try europe (as has been suggested), I might leave him exposed and protect Heaps in his place.
     
  17. JMMUSA8

    JMMUSA8 New Member

    Nov 3, 2001
    Webster
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Dempsey is already protected because he is Pro40
     
  18. brianzappa

    brianzappa Member

    Oct 21, 2003
    In a big country
    Yeah, but they may graduate him before the draft.

    BTW, have you decided on your season tix for next year? I decided to forego my nice seats and I went with GA.
     
  19. Jeremy Goodwin

    Feb 16, 1999
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Well, that was my last three really.

    I'd definitely keep Heaps. Franchino vs Shalrie, I don't know for sure. If I was in charge, I'd be considering trades for all of them and seeking options in terms of improving those positions. At some point you choose to protect player A and not player B though, and I do believe that seniority ought to count for something.
     
  20. Jon Martin

    Jon Martin Member+

    Apr 25, 2000
    SE Mass
    I find it hard to believe that SG is right. That would put the Revs at an unfair competitive disadvantage relative to the other teams, particularly if the Revs aren't allowed to make cuts/waivers before the draft. Perhaps SG is using this as a sneaky way of unloading domestic Rev players to whom he made promises which he now doesn't want to keep.

    Other teams are in the same boat, if to a lesser degree. Metros have to protect three of Taylor, Rey, Bonseu, and Guevara. (Bye, SGR.) Fire has to protect three of Herron, Ralph, Selolwane and Williams. (Bye, Dipsy)

    On a related topic. KC as a very deep team, and will be hit early and hard by the expansion buzzards. If P-40's are graduated, DCU could be in a squeeze also. In fact the more you look, the thinner the Revs appear.
     
  21. Rev-eler

    Rev-eler Member

    Feb 13, 2000
    San Francisco
    a few things, i think, that need to be clarified before people can have real discussions about the expansion draft:

    1. when are mls' player contracts up?
    i was under the impression that they end basically with mls cup or at the latestest....end of nov. related.....which rev players don't have a contract in place for next season?

    2. P-40....the draft is supposed to be at the end of this month. is the committee going to meet prior to that? if so, i guess it would suggest that contracts run from nov-nov generally.

    3. remember, as soon as 1 player goes in the expansion draft...you get to pull 1 player 'back' into your protected list.

    4. hey, don't know if this is a plus or a minus....but, with little, to nothing, in the way of 'attractive' hispanic players on this team that would be left unprotected.....there's only 1 team that's going to be raiding our fridge
    :rolleyes:
     
  22. SJB

    SJB BigSoccer Supporter

    Feb 8, 2001
    Steve Howey (SI)

    When the Revs brought him in near the end of the season Steve Howey didn't seem like a big risk to me. If he could have played his way into shape he would have added ball skill and depth to a back line with very little (assuming that "in shape" == doesn't play as if he had cement shoes on). If he didnn't work out, I assumed all we lost was last bit of pocket change under the cap and a discovery pick we couldn't keep for next season anyway. Cut him and move on.

    If it turns out that we have to lose a Jay Heaps or Brian Kamler because we picked him up in the hope of getting a bit of help over the last six weeks, that was a BAD gamble, hard to belive the Revs would have done that knowing there was an expansion draft to come.... <opening for BigFrank here>
     
  23. Jeremy Goodwin

    Feb 16, 1999
    Club:
    Montreal Impact
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think they are actually the same as the calendar year. Typically teams give players some time off after MLS Cup and don't call them back into camp until the new year though. I can't remember the last time a team had a mini camp even in December.
     
  24. Rodan

    Rodan New Member

    Feb 16, 1999
    Providence
    Yikes.

    I think there'd two real happy expansion teams if the Revs left Joseph exposed. And I think he'd be picked up very early. Shalrie Joseph is by general consent one of the better Dmids in the league (although this year his play might have fallen off a bit).

    Just my opinion, but Heaps figured prominently in 2 out of the 3 DC goals last week and is always a risk out on the right. Franchino has been Captain Joe all year, but like it or not, the team has played better recently without him. Also keep in mind that Franchino is a Nicol favorite. Either way, I'd say it would definitely have to be Heaps or Franchino over Joseph.
     
  25. Tobas

    Tobas Member

    Jul 22, 2004
    Littleton, MA
    This is the first I have heard of using the SI rule based on next years status instead of this years status. Does anyone have any proff of this other then what Sunil said? I have not been able to find anything on MLSnet to confirm or deny this (typical).

    Also, what are the rules concerning dropping players you have no plan on keeping anyways before the draft. If we can drop Baker who is planning on going overseas and Howie who should just go back over seas that takes us back down to a respectable 3. So we can protect just protect John and Cancela. Then we can add Leonard and Heaps(?) back to the protected status on top of what Tom Hill has put out.

    Will there ever be a full indepth breakdown of the expansions rules that will be made public before the draft. As these current rules are just to vague on some of the areas. Argg MLS, why must you make is so hard to follow you :(
     

Share This Page