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

Discussion in 'D.C. United' started by Knave, Nov 13, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    The MLS sites are a bit iffy on player classifications. For instance, they list Kuffour as a TI/Disc, but he's actually signed to a developmental contract and counts as a roster protected player. You'd think he'd count towards the senior squad judging from the MLSNet classifaction.

    Here's a thought about your question. Perhaps Roberts was put on IR, but Colorado didn't really get any roster relief because they still had open spots on their roster. (That would mean the 7/2 press release is wrong, or at least misleading.) As I understand it you can only get roster relief when you've filled your whole roster. If Colorado still had open spots on their roster then they'd need a way to acquire a player to replace Roberts, and for that a discovery would work. That said, I haven't followed Colorado's roster at all. But it's a theory ... Maybe it fits. Did Colorado have open spots on the roster at that time?
     
  2. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    Poked around and answered my own question ... I think. Maybe.

    It appears that Colorado did have a full roster at the start of the day on 6/29. That's the day Delgado was signed as a replacement for forward Zizi Roberts. There's no mention of him being a discovery player anywhere. And the idea that DC United would retroactively trade a discovery pick to another team seems more than iffy. My sense is that the "roster relief" is basically permission to sign any player you can within cap resources that remain, and that's how Delgado was acquired. Also, it says right in the release that it was a multi-year deal. That suggests to me that roster relief isn't just a stop-gap measure until the season ends. It's permission to sign another player to whatever kind of contract the team can afford.

    Here's the confusing thing. That same day Colorado waived Adrian Cann. That's noted in the same press release as Delgado's signing and in some news reports I saw things got confused and it was thought that Cann was waived to make room for Delgado. That I believe was false, however.

    Here's the even more confusing thing. On 7/13 there was a press release stating that DC United had traded a discovery pick in exchange for Colorado's highest second round pick in the 2005 SuperDraft. Nothing in that release suggests the discovery pick has anything to do with Delgado. However, Steven Goff (who may know something we don't) did write in his 7/14 article that "United has acquired a second-round pick in the 2005 draft from Colorado for a discovery pick, which the Rapids used to sign Cuban forward Alberto Delgado." Honestly, I suspect that Goff just got it flat out wrong there.

    In short, I think Delgado was acquired through roster relief, that Cann's waiving had nothing to do with Delgado, and that Hankinson is scheming to get another person (to fill Cann's vacated spot) with that discovery pick.
     
  3. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    I think waiving Cann may have cleared some cap room. Just an idea. Also he'd be a SI next year I think and it maybe was clear there was no chance of him making next years team. I think Goff was right and the whole retroactive trading may now be allowed (more like retroactive announcing of the transaction). Didn't the Metrostars have to use a discovery to get Juskowiak as a replacement player? They had to trade SJ for it. This was last year so the rule should have applied to Martins that he needed a discovery too. DC had discoveries available I think and it was a free transfer so there's no issue except whether he counts against the limit of 4 now. I doubt he does. Discoveries sometimes lose their status when signed multi-year I'm guessing, like Onstad and several others. I have all MLS transactions basically logged and will analyze each discovery a little more in the future. Am really trying to figure out the system right now (without being institutionalized). Anyone who has inside sources in front offices may have better luck.
     
  4. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    http://mlsnet.com/content/03/met0916juskowiak.html
    old link

    Juskowiak

    "a Discovery Player and a replacement for Bolivian forward Jaime Moreno, who is on season ending injured reserve due to a herniated disc in his back. Juskowiak becomes the league maximum third senior international for the Metros, joining midfielder Amado Guevara and defender/midfielder Edgar Bartolomeu"
     
  5. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    OK, then that's messed up. Perhaps there's no settled rule here. Maybe some replacement players require discoveries, and others don't. Maybe I'll email Steven Goff about this, and see if he knows anything more about his 7/14 claim that Delgado was a discovery. I'd like to figure all this stuff out too. If you find anything more please post it here. (And if you haven't already, could I persuade you to check my big post - linked here - to make sure everything is correct and up to date according to your information?)
     
  6. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    I double checked everything with my list of transactions.

    MLSNET doesn't list Nelsen as SI anymore, not sure if this is for a reason. If a team has the 18 senior full (but not the 6 developmental), are you sure they can't place someone on IR? Roner in SJ has been on IR all season and the team has 18 senior, 5 protected. Everything looks in place otherwise. Good find on the conditional pick for Thompson.

    I have an Excel sheet breaking down every DC transaction of all time including some not listed on the mlsnet dc section. I've tried to cover contracts though that's not fully up to date especially 2003&2004 since web.archive.org doesn't cover these years fully yet. I'm doing this for all mls teams and my first draft of each team is done, some are really messy. DC & CHI have a second pass through (using lexis/old newspaper articles) and are about done. If anyone here wants to take a look, I can email you the xls file for DC. I'll try sending it from my hotmail address which is my username without the #'s. I also break down how each DC draft went, how the teams got each pick. I think my only holes involving draft picks involves how DC got KC's 2nd round pick in 2003 then sent it back. I'm guessing it was received to resolve considerations for Talley and was sent back in the Quintanilla discovery deal though this is an unsourced guess. Also I might be missing how DC got NE's 6th round pick in 2003. Private message or email me if you want the file.
     
  7. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    In case anyone read over it in my post above, I'll send anyone my list of DC transactiosn for review. More complete than the mlsnet list.

    By combining what Fire GM Wilt says in this thread
    https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2907347#post2907347

    about having 2 discoveries left

    and what was said in COL signing Rey Angel Martinez
    http://www.coloradorapids.com/news/newsdetails.asp?ID=381
    where Chicago discovered him first and then traded him.

    I've just about confirmed for myself that teams actually did have 3 discoveries this year (also explains COL signing Peguero, Castellanos, and de la Torre without trading anything).

    Why the current expansion rules say 2 discoveries for each non-expansion team, I don't know. Either incorrect or MLS may be reducing the number back to two. There were about 4-5 different sources saying 3 discoveries earlier this year.
     
  8. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    Updated a bit, but I don't know how Gomez was acquired. Once that becomes clearer I'll do another update.
     
  9. Diceson

    Diceson Member

    Dec 21, 1999
    Discovery option, according to DK at the introduction press conference after the game. He was a free agent, so I'm assuming he didn't "cost" anything.
     
  10. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    I did another update: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2696803#post2696803

    But take it with a grain of salt because I don't yet understand the Lawson acquisition. If someone who has all the facts can tell me point by point how he was acquired I'd really appreciate it. It's not a discovery as far as I can tell (Gomez got the last one), so I'm led to believe it's some sort of IR roster relief for Martins. But I'm told the IR system is no more ... and all that leaves me scratching my head.

    Can someone untangle this mess?
     
  11. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    on the ask peter wilt thread over at the chicago subforum he explains how this has to work. Season-ending IR replacements require an allocation or discovery as far as he knows (my research into league transactions hadn't cleared that up for me since many teams seemed to have added such players without announcing "discovery" though Juskowiak for MET was a discovery/trade). Clearly this is not an allocation so I think it has to be a discovery. Wilt also confirmed that there are three discoveries this year. So DC discovered Delgado (trade to COL), Gomez, and Lawson. How this qualifies for a discovery I'm not sure since he's a US citizen that's been tracked overseas by many for some time. I doubt the "returning USMNT" rule was used here (basically a dispersal draft based on the team's ranking in the last 30 games). Kuffor as a developmental player doesn't count against the discovery limit. Maybe Goff knows for sure?
     
  12. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    What really doesn't make sense here is the need to place Martins on SEIR unless DC plans to acquire another player. My count has 17 on the senior roster before the Lawson signing. I don't believe the team freed up any cap space by putting Martins on IR. Why couldn't they have waited to put him on IR until when they sign the next player (?Yi). Terris shouldn't count against the roster now since MET and DAL went over 18 when using him.
     
  13. Sundevil9

    Sundevil9 New Member

    Nov 23, 1999
    Reston, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Re: Roster, Draft Picks, Allocations, Discoveries: What we know, how we know it. [N&A

    I was thinking the same thing. The team started the season with one opening. Cerritos, and Convey left, leaving three openings. EZ, Lawson, and Gomez were added. We're now at the maximum.
     
  14. Diceson

    Diceson Member

    Dec 21, 1999
    I'm not going to try to figure it out, but talking with DK today here's some stuff.

    - Lawson was picked up because Martins was declared out with a Season Ending Injury. Lawson did not cost a discovery option because he was a domestic player replacing a domestic player - dog tilting head sideways, staring at the gramaphone. I think some of the confusion is fans are using the term IR, but the league is saying there is no such thing, but both sides are talking about the same thing - roster spot, but no salary budget relief, which is the case here.

    - The league did give all teams three discovery options. I'm assuming the third was given during the year because at the beginning of the year the team said it only had two to spend. I'm also assuming the league did it because of expansion and the need to beef up the current teams going into the off season.

    - Again according to DK, DCUnited has one discovery option left, and it has one Senior roster spot open. Looking at the roster on the official website it looks to be correct, with the exception that GK Terris is still there.
     
  15. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    Terris will stay there until another team takes him!

    The 3 discoveries was reported before the season in the Columbus team releases and I believe the local Dallas media.

    So as an American player he didn't take a discovery, allocation, or weighted lottery. Why did DC get him and not another team? I suppose it has to do with other teams interest level and cap availability. Going 30 games back anyone know where DC ranks versus other teams? I'm not going to count backwards now but looking at the 2004 draft order:

    DAL
    CLB
    LA
    DC
    COL
    MET
    KC
    NE
    CHI
    SJ

    DC now only has more points than CHI and NE so I don't know if that's enough for them to lose ground there. KC, MET, and LA have more than 4 points on DC so LA might have dropped relative to DC in this order. I believe CLB used a dispersal/returning US player pick on Matt Jordan earlier this year so they might be at the end of the order for all drafts this year - ?. So DC was probably about second in order to DAL and they might not want Lawson with their roster full at 18 and possibly no cap space and most contracts guaranteed for the rest of the season.
     
  16. owendylan

    owendylan Member

    May 30, 2001
    Virginia
    Club:
    DC United
    Well it's not like the guy was a USMNT stalwart or anything, and there weren't several teams interested in his services, or an up and coming youth team player. He is a serviceable journeyman player so why should he need
    an allocation, lottery or anything else? Every now and then players are acquired because they're available and don't need some special mechanism to do it. Personally I would like to see more this type of acquisition in MLS starting with John Thorrington.
     
  17. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    But what if 2 teams are interested? Who is it fair for the player to go to? Smaller market teams will suffer if something like this - free agency - occurs often. I think MLS needs to clear up the rules for these acquisitions.
     
  18. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    OK, I don't get the line I put in bold. Terris aside (he's an MLS pool player so he doesn't really belong to us), we still have 18 players on our senior roster. UNLESS ... does Lawson count against the senior roster? Perhaps, because he was acquired to replace Martins, he doesn't count, i.e. he and Martins count as one person on the roster. That makes some sense to me, but if that's not the case then I don't understand how it is that we still have one senior spot left.

    Anybody got an answer?

    And I updated things again: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2696803#post2696803
     
  19. Diceson

    Diceson Member

    Dec 21, 1999
    You've still got Martins down on the roster. He is SEI, or what has been called IR - there was a official difference, but IR is gone.

    The official reason for Lawson to come in without a draft or allocation, blah, blah, blah . . .

    Replacement Player
    "Should the League determine that a player has, beyond a reasonable doubt, suffered a season ending injury, that player's team may be provided with roster relief. However, in such cases, the club in question will only receive only roster relief and remain responsible for the full amount of the injured player's salary. When this occurs, the injured player will not be allowed to compete for his team for the remainder of the season in question (including MLS Cup Playoff or Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup matches). The above shall apply to both Senior Roster and Developmental players."
     
  20. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    OK. So effectively Lawson occupies Martins's roster spot as I suggested above. That makes sense.

    Updated again accordingly.
     
  21. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    Re: Roster, Draft Picks, Allocations, Discoveries: What we know, how we know it. [N&A

    I confirmed through Fire GM Wilt that Lawson is not a discovery. As a domestic replacement player he doesn't require a discovery. Apparently (upon checking with the league office), Lawson would have went to whatever team asked for him first (through a discovery or replacement policy).
     
  22. Knave

    Knave Member+

    May 25, 1999
    Re: Roster, Draft Picks, Allocations, Discoveries: What we know, how we know it. [N&A

    Yes, I saw that and linked to those answers in the big post.

    (I wish Kevin Payne would be so internet nut friendly!)
     
  23. POdinCowtown

    POdinCowtown Member+

    Jan 15, 2002
    Columbus
    I believe Dallas retained Jordan's rights since he was only out of MLS for the 2003 season. I haven't heard that any compensation is due to Dallas but since they didn't want him and we gave them Bonseu and Dunseth, it was probably a returned favor. The official line is probably a trade for a conditional 6th round pick with the pick being due if he starts half our matches or somesuch.
     
  24. swedcrip34

    swedcrip34 New Member

    Mar 17, 2004
    Re: Roster, Draft Picks, Allocations, Discoveries: What we know, how we know it. [N&A

    I'm pretty sure there will be no compensation (though it's silly for DAL not to get something if they truly retained the rights). I think I read no compensation, but not sure.
     
  25. garbaggio

    garbaggio Member

    Jan 3, 2001
    Arlington
    I'm bumping this to ask what may be an easy question. I'm sure I've heard the answer before but I don't remember it.

    How does the just-ended August international transfer period apply to MLS teams?

    Is the transfer window only for transactions involving European teams or does it apply to all transnational player movements? (IE - could a MLS team still pick up a Salvadoran Nat that impresses them on Saturday)

    Also, what is the MLS deadline (if any) for player movements within the US - either between MLS teams or A-League to MLS, etc...
     

Share This Page