Should we trade O'brien?

Interesting proposal, but I just can't see that happening. It's more likely that the allocation would be traded for another quality player within the league or saved until next year when expansion will take its toll around the League.

 

Is it possible to "cash in" both allocations for one player acquisition. From all that I've read on here, allocations are basically XX amount of money to be used to sign a player. So, if Clarke indentifies a solid D Mid in Europe or South America and wants to bring him in, but said player has a sizable transfer fee attatched, can they use BOTH allocations on him?? That would kind of solve the problem, wouldn't it?

 

I think if healthy and used properly, he is one the most exciting players in this league. This is what we have lacked and by trading him we are making the same mistake we made with Ryan.

 

My feelings on Ronnie depend on how close he will be to the pre-injury O'Brien he can get. I was ambivalent about his end of the season appearances. It was good to see him back out there, but at the same time it was sad to see him playing at about 40% of what we were accustomed to seeing.

If O'Brien can get back to 80 or 90% of where he was, then I would rather see the Burn move Nhelcko to make room for that Major Allocation otherwise, adios O'Brien.

 

While I don't disagree with what Chamo said, one thing that needs to be remembered is when ROB came back and the minutes he got. He lacked 90 match fitness and was getting roughly 30 minutes a game when he came back and that was just trying to rehab fast enough to get a few games.

I would assume and expect that ROB has been getting his fitness up since then, but until training and the season starts, then the jury is still out.

 

I don't know if you can combine two allocations. However, I think you're being just a little naive about how effectively they (allocations) can be used. For instance, you can save them (they aren't like discoveries). Also, you can acquire a player on a free transfer and then use them to defray cap amounts (which basically extends your cap--gives you a bigger cap than other players). They also give you first crack at any returning USMNT players.

 

With the injury he had and the question about whether he can return tooo 100 percent who would want him and who would give you much for him. We know about what he COULD get back to, other teams might not want to take that chance....

 

Going by that kind of logic, neither allocation is worth anything. Dallas has no SI spots available and short of getting a TI or a Discovery player, there's not much that can be done with it. So keep both of them until you can use them effectively. No one knows what will happen next year with expansion or what, if any, league changes will occur. The smart thing is to keep them, even though some of you judge them to have no value and see how they can be used in the future.

However, if Dallas wanted to make some use out of them right now, they can shop it to teams that have open SI slots, but have no allocations to use on them. I'm sure Dallas could pick up at least one good player by trading one allocation and would still have cap space either this season or next season to look at other players as they become available.

 

Jambon, I think your analysis on the allocation value is wrong.

The NE-Chicago situation is screwy. Chicago had to dump Nowak to NE. Nowak then retires. To sort it all out (since an allocation would come to the last team Nowak was part of when he retired), NE gives Chicago a first round pick and NE gets the allocation. That's b/c Chicago wanted Nowak to retire as a member of the Fire. B/c of the combination of (a) Chicago wanted Nowak to retire as a member of the Fire, not another organization and (b) the VALUE of the allocation, NE was willing to let Nowak go back to the Fire, give up a first round pick but only under the condition that they got the allocation. On face value, it looks like a trade of an allocation for a pick. In reality, it's NE arguing that the trade was still valid (even though Nowak never reported to NE) in order to keep the allocation and the #1 pick is the price they paid to keep Chicago from arguing the deal never happened (b/c Nowak never reported).

Besides, there are two other instances of allocations being the #1 pick in the entire draft: the Kubik allocation to Dallas used to choose Gbandi and the future considerations from DCU (which will be an allocation).

The Dallas team has been poorly run the past couple of years and the Burn fans have gotten the shaft. While other teams have been looking for ways to get the maximum out of the cap (which is too low as it is), the Burn has traded away cap space the past 2 years. That's like saying you're going to compete against someone else while you wear ankle weights or with one hand tied behind your back. One of the things that an allocation can do is extend your cap if your player comes on a free transfer. Discoveries don't do that. It also gives you first shot at any USMNT player who enters MLS (the combination of your record and having an allocation). And there are plenty of good players outside of the US who have green cards (Milton Reyes of the Honduran national team came to DCU with a green card).

 

DC used 3 years worth of Discovery money to get him, so it can still be a little tricky.

 

At this point, I would combine both allocations for Convey. I'm sure, since the league has put the Burn out on a limb again, that it could be manuevered so Convey gets 300k + bonus and incentives.

Foolish to move an exciting player like O'Brien if you don't have to.

 

Ronnie stays!

For various reasons, not the least of which is the injury he suffered for the Red and Black, Ronnie stays as long as he wants to.

Can you honestly say he doesn't have the potential to be as good as any right midfielder in the league? Granted, we haven't seen a full season from him yet, but I would be willing to take a chance that he makes the likes of Steve Ralston look like Mr. Nobody instead of one of the best right wingers the league has seen.

As for the allocation - hold it. If you can't use it now, hold it.

San Jose held onto their allocation for over a year to get Landon, and did it ever pay off. Who says we can't do the same thing?

And who knows - we could get halfway into the season and see that Toni really can't get it together, no matter how much he tries; or that the great central midfielder turns out to be the next Giles Grimandi instead of the next Leonel Alvarez; or that Jason isn't 100% back (yet, or ever) and EJ can't step up?

Lots of questions, and remember that 2004 is a building year. The key for the Burn is 2005 - we just want to get the taste of '03 out of our mouths first. (Personally, I'd like Colin to make the USOC our goal this year - from minute one - and see where we are with the rest of the league as it progresses.)

It isn't as if we lose the allocation if we don't use it this year. I mean, the last thing we need to do is rush into the next Chris Sullivan. (Who? you ask? Exactly.)

 

I agree. We have already heard the reports that a few oversea players would like to come back but not for anther year or so. It would make sense to save it for them unless a no brainer comes along.

 

Ummm...no - the Burn has ONE SI slot OPEN

There are 3 SI slots per team. Currently the Burn have

1. Ronnie O'Brien (ROB)
2. Toni Nkleco

(is this truly official yet? It's been said by his agent, suggested by the DMN)

3. OPEN

I think that's a great idea. IF we can not get value for an allocation we should keep it until next year.

 

I thought Dallas had all of them filled. Forgot about Bonsweu leaving.

So, why would there be a need to trade O'Brien then? An open SI spot + a major allocation (either of them) + cap space should equal a quality pickup. I don't know if I'd hold the League accountable for what Dallas finds or does, but Dallas has a much better opportunity than other teams. Use one (if necessary) and hold onto the other one until the team needs to use it.

 

Keep Ronnie O.

 

I disagree. Basically, this team is adding a healthy Ronnie O'Brien (which is huge), hopefully a healthy and fit Toni Nhlecko (which could be huge), a more experienced, younger and healthier back line (Talley and Jolley instead of T-Bone and either the hurt Morrow or the green Thomas) and one of the most solid keepers in MLS. Replace Chad with a real holding/defensive midfielder, and you have just gotten a lot stronger.

Note on Garlick v. DJ - the kid has great skills, but try as hard as he wants, he doesn't have the skins. Garlick does. That will make a difference in organizing the defense. Odds are, if Morrow had stayed healthy and not lost a step because of Southlake/plastic, AND if Jeffries hadn't done the 'higher' defense AND the switch with Suarez and T-Bone, DJ might have had a fighting chance. As is, though, he didn't.

Granted, another defender would be good, but who is to say we don't package one of our too-many forwards and a second round pick or something for a proven if unspectacular defender? Rhine and a pick to New England for one of their defenders? It could happen.

This team has already made significant changes - and with the exception of what appears to be the loss of Oscar [;-(], the vast majority are significant upgrades. And I get the sense that this team is going to be motivated to do better than last season - and you might actually see the attitude of the team change, esp. if the allocation is 'all that.' Between the allocation and Colin, you might not get Chad Deering's "I'd rather be on the back nine - Oh, you mean were playing a soccer game?" attitude...

 

Jambon, your argument about the value of allocations is based in part on the argument that if other teams have allocations, than they are worth less.

That's like arguing that b/c every team has a first round pick in the superdraft than they aren't worth anything. Or b/c every team has 2 discoveries than Dallas might as well throw their's away.

There is a world of soccer talent out there outside of MLS. Almost ALL of that talent is out of the reach of MLS. The primary reason is cost: pro salaries are atronomical compared to MLS. Even poorer nations--give an Argentine or Brazilian a choice between money here or money in the UK or Germany or Spain and those Euro clubs have more glory and prestige associated with them.

About the only way MLS teams can aquire foreign talent is:
--guys who bombed with foreign leagues and have been written off (Dalglish, O'Brien);
--guys from the Carribean or Central America who find the USA a preferable place to play and actually find MLS wages to be pretty darn good thank you (Marshall, Ruiz, Reyes, Zarco);
--guys who have retired or been released from their clubs and are available on a free transfer (or nearly free) like Morrow, Bishop, Podbrozny, Kosecki. Some of them come with high pedigree but most have at best 1 or 2 years of competitive play left in them and some think they're coming here for vacation.

Or, you can use discoveries (which include a modest amount for transfer fees) or allocations--which can reduce cap allocations or pay for larger transfer fees.

Yep, many allocations don't work out. And it's not as if the money with allocations allows you to buy Beckham or even McManaman. But the success rate for draft picks is even less. And the difference between discoveries and allocations is that allocations expand the eligible pool of candidates.

By arguing other teams have allocations so Dallas' are trivial misses the real value of allocations. There are probably several thousand professional footballers outside the USA who either aren't available on a free transfer or won't come for discovery wages. Out of those several thousand, only about 5-9 (the number of allocations) have any chance of coming to MLS. Your 2 allocations give you a shot at that pool. Their worth (the allocations) isn't determined by how many there are in MLS. It's determined by the range of players you now get access to that wouldn't sign via discovery. Discoveries and draft picks can only take you so far.

 

I understand the desire to want to improve the team...but Ronnie O is not the weak link. There are plenty of places we can improve but I don't think you can do that by trading arguably our best player.

RONNIE O'BRIEN FOREVER

 

I think Quill is better than he's been getting credit for. Left mid is his natural position, or at least where he's been used most often in MLS.