Roster, Draft Picks, Allocations, Discoveries: What we know, how we know it. [N&A]

Martins and Stoitchkov should be "SEN (GC)" rather than "SEN" -- and thanks for working up the list!

http://www.dcunited.com/index.cfm?section=main&cont_id=204155
("Martins holds a Green Card and will not fill the Senior International spot vacated earlier this season when Hristo Stoitchkov received his Green Card from the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services.")

 

Warren is a full-roster, counts towards the 18 and the cap, type player.

Baumstark is roster-exempt.

 

Here is the reg on discovery players.

"A team may request that the league sign a U.S. or international player who is not currently under contract to MLS and assign the player to the requesting team. A team may add no more than two senior roster Discovery players by request in any calendar year, and shall have no more than four Discovery players on its senior roster at any time. Teams may trade Discovery players but may not trade Discovery player “spots.”

Teams will have unlimited discovery opportunities for Developmental players."

So it looks like we can add 2 discovery players to our roster.

Here's the reg. for Transitional players:
"For the 2003 season, MLS will allow up to 20 league-wide places for young international players, who need not be distributed equally among all MLS teams. These youth international players will be considered Transitional Internationals. "

So we can have as many as we want but there can only be 20 in the league. This may change for the 2004 season and we don't know if any current TI's will not be back next season (like the Argies in Ny or Chino or Quintanilla) which would open up league wide spots. It also looks like the TI's count against the cap and the Senior roster.

Here's the roster reg.

"Rosters
For the 2003 season MLS Rosters will include 24 players, six of which must be signed to either a Nike Project-40 or Developmental contract. Up to three Senior Internationals can occupy one of the 18 remaining roster positions."

 

Baumstark has a weird deal with the league that any team that needs help in goal (ie. short on backups due to injury) can have him.

So, whether P-40 or not, he is considered roster exempt.

 

Why would we necessarily have to use an allocation on Adu? Is it b/c that'd be the only reasonable/feasible way for us to acquire him? Not that I doubt Adu has talent and potential, but using a full allocation on an unproven 15 year-old doesn't sound like the best idea.

 

I don't think it will be up to us. If we get Adu without using up our allocation, the rest of hte league will cry foul.


Nellie doesn't have a GC? Hasn't he been here for something like 7 years? I'm just kinda surprised.

 

As much as he's supposed to be the Nats' savior down the road, why the hell do we have to use an allocation on him unless wer'e sure he's gonna play and have an impact?

If I were Hudson and Payne and I didn't think Adu was going to have much of an impact, and MLS was going to make us trade players to Dallas to get him, I'd raise a proverbial middle finger.

 

Or is he on our roster now (now that our season is over)? The quotes from the United press release simply talk about him being with us until the end of the season and they called it a "call up" not an acquisition.

"Baumstark will serve as Doug Warren’s backup for the remainder of the post-season." and "'Clint is a young, solid keeper and he will be utilized for the remainder of the season on our squad,' said United Technical Director Dave Kasper."

http://www.dcunited.com/index.cfm?section=main&cont_id=212084

None of that directly says he's ours "for keeps."

And, yes, Geddes was Developmental (confirmed in that same story) and since we need six P-40/Developmental guys, Baumstark would seemingly have to be, too.

 

I believe they count as one of our 18 "senior" (non-P-40/Developmental) players -- the TI tag just stops them from taking up an SI slot.

Having read the full rules at the "/about/regulations" link, I don't see any reason a TI wouldn't count as one of the 18 senior players, unless they are signed to a Developmental contract (Developmental players can be domestic or international). Developmental players are limited at age 23, however, while TIs go up to 25.

We're just one over the 18-man "senior" limit because we were allowed to take on Martins in relief of Reyes. Counting TIs, we'd be at 19 senior players and 6 P40/Developmental (counting Baumstark).

 

Also, 2004 will apparently be the last year Chino can be classified as a TI. If he wants to play in MLS beyond '04, he'd better get that Green Card.

"Any young international player will count as a Transitional International until the beginning of the year in which they are due to reach the age of 25, at which time they will be re-classified as a Senior International."

Chino turns 24 on 10/4/04, so he'll turn 25 near the end of, but during, the '05 season.

Quintanilla was born in early '83, so he won't be an SI until the '08 season.

 

1. My understanding is that Baumstark is a P-40. Whether he is our's now for next year or not, I don't know.

2. We still have a high spot in the lottery.

3. I believe that the league rules on discovery's have now been repeatedly changed. For instance: the rules you say you can't trade a discovery slot and I thought that was allowed this year (tho my mind is drawing a blank on the case). Also, the league then added the "special discovery" slot (which is how we were able to get Reyes) where the combined transfer fee and salary couldn't be beyond a certain amount (and league sources have quoted two different figures for the amount).

 

As I was driving home, two things kept pissing me off.

The first was rush hour traffic and no matter how I tried, I couldn't come up with a way to blame that on Ray Hudson or Kevin Payne.

But the other thing was that we have no draft picks next year and what we have to show for that.

Now, I could live with trading away our picks if we had built a solid team. But, the current administration has basically mortgaged the team's future for the dysfunctional, inconsistent group we currently call a team.

For our top three picks we have a washed up forward, a really washed up forward who also ruins chemistry, and a promsing but maddeningly inconsistent and athletically limited midfielder.

I just thought if you traded away all your picks for veterans, you were supposed to win now. So, where'd the wins go?

And, why isn't anyone seemingly being held accountable for this?

 

Baumstark was a "30 day Wonder". He is not on DCUnited's roster. He will be in next year's draft. He was in the 2003 draft . . . go figure.

 

First, I think we have quite a few players with trade value. The question is who are we willing to trade for whatever player we're after. Prideaux, Namoff, Convey, Stewart, and Q1 among others can net some talent if we are willing to part with them in order to improve our team.

The second thing is that Discovery Picks can be highly useful if you go after the right player. They are valuable in that we can address specific needs and not have to pay an arm and a leg for them. We can look at young foreign talent and pick up players who can help us now and in the future.

Third, we have an open SI, which is also worth a lot. If we lose Nelsen, we gain an SI spot. If we cut Ivanov, we gain an SI spot. Those are also worth quite a bit in getting valuable international experience. We can address specific needs without limiting our search to young players.

Fourth, our team isn't in nearly as bad shape as many would belive. Our problem was that we played players out of position and lacked a team mentality. Both can be improved in the offseason.
The question is whether we have a coach that can formulate a plan on and off the field. That too can be improved.

Fifth, we still have draft picks and while they are not high, we can still find quality or utility players to help our team. Or we can trade up if we feel the need to. I don't think it's necessary, but we may see a player that we would like to get and pay the price for it.

I really don't think we are in terrible shape. We may have looked bad towards the end of the season, but you have to remember that we also had a stretch where we were one of the best in the league. That was our team at its best and we know that we are capable of playing at that level. I see no reason why we aren't capable of doing that same type of performance next season.

 

Ummm, an Adu lottery? Like there was a Johnny Walker lottery that the Mutts conveniently won, and then even more conveniently, didn't happen? Just a guess.

Well, there's the potential for two roster spots and $325,000 or so in cap space, assuming Marco and Hristo are ever so gently shown to the front door. There's also the potential for new training facilities, which might just keep the players healthier--certainly in a better frame of mind.

Or the aforementioned retirement/outright waiver of various and sundry.

Two words. Johnny Walker. MLS is capable of anything.

I disagree. I think this team, as currently constituted, could actually be significantly better if it could just stay a little healthier. Better training facilities has got to help with that. Couple that with significant retirements and a few well-placed cuts, and you've got a lot of room to work with.

Set your mind at rest. Kevin Payne won't do that under any circumstances. He didn't can Arena midseason in '96, he didn't can Rongen midseason in '01, he didn't can Hudson midseason this year. He's not going to do it next year. If he cans him, it's going to be at the end of a contract--either now, or at the end of whatever extension is negotiated.

Well, no, we do have some flexibility, and you do have to cut SOMEBODY if you're going to bring anyone in at all. In fact, we have to cut somebody NOW. Or rather, whenever the roster limit applies. Yes, no and maybe, in other words. Somebody somewhere has a plan. We can only hope it's the folks in charge, and that it's a good one. Or we're back to square one.

BUT. We weren't dead last this year.

 

Maybe I'm missing something too, but you said at the top of this thread that we had picks in the 4th and 5th round. Ok, they're low picks, but based on the discussions in other threads about the draft, the consensus seems to be that the draft is either

1. a crapshoot
OR
2. not a crapshoot, but the positions in the draft are meaningless shite and don't reflect a players real worth

According to theory #1, if its all a crapshoot anyway, having low picks is no worse than having high ones (assuming the other teams draft high with their first choices)

According to theory #2, all you need is some good scouts to cunningly draft players of real worth who everyone else was too dumb to pick. Of course, we don't have any such thing, but then again we haven't done too well with high picks, so maybe the off-season would be the time to find said scouts.

In any event I don't quite share your pessimism about our options. As others have pointed out we have a number of players that we could trade for draft picks, especially in our midfield.

As to the Adu question, I'm in two minds about it. On the one hand if he is all he is cracked up to be it would be exciting to have him on the team. Looked at another way though, Adu could hurt us more than he could help us, particularly if he takes a while to adjust to the game at this level, or doesn't pan out at all.

Firstly, it is highly unlikely we would get him without giving up something serious like an allocation. So we lose the chance to get someone who can contribute right away for someone with unproven, though considerable, potential. Secondly, I"m not sure all the hype and hoop-la surrounding Adu is going to help the team rebuild and find its new identity after the departure of Marco. Thirdly, we give up all this for someone who is almost certain to leave within 2-3 years. I'm not sure its worth it, frankly. From Freddies point of view, he would be much better off going to somewhere like Chicago or San Jose where they could ease him into the squad and he would not be expected to carry the whole team on his back like he would be at DC.