What do you think it would take to get Steve Ralston?

Often negative, but more often quite humorous. That makes it easier to put up with his aggro.

 

No, Mike...I doubt I'm the only one that has noticed. I don't deny Ralston's talent. However, I hardly think you can call Kamler and Cullen "heavyweights." I'd say they fall somewhere in the Ian Russell ranks. The only one of that trio I respect is Rooney.

My central point (that YOU evidently didn't notice) was that there isn't the NEED for Ralston here. We're racking up plenty of points and have arguably the steadiest midfield in MLS with Mulrooney and Ekelund. If the Quakes were looking to turn a deal for a "big name," I'd rather see them address a weakness at right fullback--a weakness that could be plugged nicely in coming seasons with Eddie Robinson. It doesn't make sense to mortgage the future and screw with current chemistry in the interest of producing even more gaudy offensive numbers. (Huge goal totals really did wonders for Miami last year, didn't it?!)

Ah...a small victory, that is!! Balance that with the goals-against column, then check the goal differential. I doubt that the percentage points advantage in goals per game offsets the Quakes' current +14 differential.

 

That was sarcasm, I believe. Same goes for Rooney.

I have to say that Ralston in a Quakes uni would be interesting. He's familiar with Yallop and could really help make our attack more dangerous up the right, especially on bigger pitches where he'd have room to operate (read: ROAD GAMES).

One thing people are forgetting on both sides of that argument is that the Quakes are in the "gorilla position." Typically, late season trades immediately benefit championship contenders (with good players like Ralston changing uniforms) in return for futures (young players, draft picks, cap relief). And these trades almost always frustrate and disappoint the fans of the weaker team.

Russell by no means sucks. He really improved last year, and while I'd like to see him continue to improve here, I think his future's bright for a few years in this league. He's definitely a player whose game improves on bigger pitches, due to his speed, so calling somewhere else home might even be appealing to him.

I also wouldn't mind some help at right back, but cannot think of a right back--on another team who might be willing to trade him to us--better than what we already have.

As to the Revs fan (MikeMarshall) who asks why the Revs would want one of our young defenders when they can draft a college guy like Stokes, the deal is that the guy out of college will probably not be starter-quality for about two years. Like Eddie Robinson here, who is just coming into his own (playing because of injuries) in the middle of his second season. He's a former All-American, too.

That'll never happen. Probably more like Russell and a HIGH draft pick and the rights to a younger player. Or Ian and another roster player and a pick.

 

Nah, _ded_...what I mean is that I wouldn't want to give up Russell AND all that would have to go along with him to get Ralston.

But your theory??? Straight across??? (These ARE the Krafts we're talking about.) Mmmmmmm! I'd love to make that deal. D'ya suppose the Krafts would pay Ralston's salary for this year and next too??

How 'bout we trade the draft pick back to them for Ralston, then they could use that pick to get Stokes and they could wait a few more years? Any takers??

 

A-ha. Gonna have to be careful about when and where I play the sarcasm card from now on.

Ha. For what it's worth, I've been assured by someone in the Revs' organization that the draft pick is conditional, but will not be the Revs' first round pick. Stokes won't last past the second pick, if he signs with the league.

And it's not THAT uncommon for defenders to make an immediate impact. Just from the last few drafts, Califf, Bocanegra, Pierce, and Curtin all played significant minutes in their first seasons. Even this year, Jeff Stewart contributes for Colorado, and had he not been hurt, Chris Gbandi would be playing for Dallas.

 

Fair enough about the sarcasm card, Mike. (I've always sucked at cards.) Not having seen your posts before (and considering you are a Revs fan on our board--they usually come in breathing fire, not poking fun) I thought your remarks were serious. My apologies.

Good insights about the draft pick. I hadn't heard it was conditional but that makes sense. As for the defender making an immediate impact...some impressive names you throw out there. I feel a lot of that comes from the environment they enter, too (i.e.--teammates to mentor them and coaches willing to give them minutes.) You make an excellent point...


...but I'd still rather have Llamosa than Ralston. ;-)