No but an underperforming DP that makes you a boatload of money is more attractive to an organization than an underperforming DP that doesn't.
If there salaries were comparable maybe, but there is almost a 5 million dollar gap between the two. Do you really think the Galaxy net 5 million on Gerrard related merchandice sales.
I just ran the numbers from the game tonight, so I'm going to leave them right here: His stats from tonight: 1) Passing game not so great as he has several boot balls up the pitch that didn't work out. 2) 1 tackle, 0 tackles lost 3) 14 interceptions 4) 6 clearances 5) 2 recoveries 6) Bonehead yellow card That's actually a somewhat decent game. He got burned on a stupid play with Ricketts where he was partial culprit. So, let's go to whoscored, shall we: Gyasi Zardes - MOTM 8.7 Omar Gonzalez - 8.5 Juninho - 8.0 Rogers - 7.3 Leonardo - 7.2 Lletget - 7.2 Dos Santos - 6.8 Gerrard - 6.8 DeLaGarza - 6.6 Keane - 6.5 Ricketts - 5.2 *******!******** Surprising and eye opening, eh? (Whoscored puts the blame on the 1st goal on Ricketts by the way, hence the bad score for him.) Other top two (actually, top 5...after that it's a bunch of meh minus the dumpster fire that is Ricketts) pretty consistent with our ratings during the match which makes me wonder if we're overly hard on Omar. Who cares if he leads to us losing? That will make us drop $$$ in a hurry.
Just to make a note-- I saw a couple posts that seem to be misunderstanding the use of allocation money. I'm sure most posters here know how it works but for those who might be confused by the league's crazy rules: Allocation money is not real money, it is just symbolic Monopoly money that is used to reduce a player's salary cost against the cap. I saw that someone mentioned something about Omar next year costing 450k plus a million of allocation money, which is not the case. His salary is 1.45 mil, which means he gets paid that much in real money. In addition to that, under the current rules, the club must also acquire and use about 1 mil of allocation money to symbolically reduce his salary to the maximum non-DP level. That allocation money could otherwise be used for other purposes if it were not used to pay down Omar's contract (as opposed to Targeted allocation money, which isn't used for other purposes and of which we already used our entire 5-year allotment). Thus the cost of his contract is real money of 1.45 mil + about 1 mil of allocation money. (Credit to @GalaxyKoa for clarifying that regular allocation money can be used on Omar next year.) Thought Omar was ok/good enough tonight. Going into the game it felt like there was no way this team could beat Seattle at Clink. I think this club is in a shambles, which really isn't surprising given the state of the squad in March. I never claimed that Omar's deal next year was the club's *biggest* or *only* problem, but it looks like there are definitely even more problems, compared to just a month ago, for the offseason in addition to Omar that also probably won't be adequately fixed, and those problems are pretty much all self-inflicted (including Omar's deal). I think there's a decent chance Arena actually may leave and take a sabbatical before his next gig (US?).
Yeah it's nowhere near 5 mil. It's more the "prestige" and mindshare that comes with him in the club. One could argue that keeping him enhances the club's reputation worldwide, which aids in attracting the next big name player and attracting new fans. However one might also argue for dumping him to show the world that the club has high standards and won't settle for mediocrity. In the end I think the club will keep him for next year, betting that the results won't be disastrous, unless he really wants to leave/retire.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say that buying down Omar's salary results in only costing the DP minimum. Yes for salary cap purposes a DP, like Robbie Keane, makes the non-DP max, but he still costs his full 4-5 mil to the club. Re: buying Omar down, Omar still costs his full salary pre-buy down, all 1.45 mil must be paid to him. Buying him down only allows that salary to symbolically fit under the cap. He still gets paid that amount from the club. The allocation money is fake money to symbolically "reduce" his salary to fit under the rules. This year he costed 1.45 mil plus 500k of TAM that was all given for free by the league and could only be used for that purpose, and was also our whole 5-year allotment. The 500k (prorated for half the year) does not change the amount of money Omar actually takes home. However, next year he costs $1.45 mil, plus a million of allocation money (full year) to satisfy the rules, allocation money which could be used for other things (unless we acquire more Targeted allocation money). That's not double counting, it's the actual total cost of his deal as the current rules stand. And acquiring/using allocation money unwisely absolutely has an impact on the field! It affects what players can be in the squad. Imagine if we had spare Garber bucks to pay down Marcelo this year and keep him, with a raise. Then the decision isn't *whether* we could keep him under the cap, instead it just comes down to, does AEG/Bruce Arena want Marcelo to make that money and affect their wage structure.
Yeah they may use raw data from something like Opta, but have their own methodology for using raw data to evaluate players, instead of something like squawka or whoscored, which simply exist for fan interest. This is where we differ, I guess. I don't need to use iffy stats to confirm or deny what I watch and judge with my own knowledge of the game. Like I said before, stats don't account for defensive mistakes like ball watching, not passing your man to another marker properly, being out of position and leaving a teammate out to dry to make his own mistake, etc. If I see those mistakes watching a game, a stat of how many sideways passes a defender made or how many headers he won (not accounting for where it went) don't mean much to me. For example, does Gerrard get the statistical blame for the second goal conceded vs KC? It wont show up, but he was really the biggest problem in that play. 30/30 sideways passes afterward wouldn't make up for that, unless he created a goal to equalize. Also as I said before, that's the life and burden of a defender, particularly a center back-- to be judged that way. A bad error that really hurts the team will cancel out good play for the rest of the game. Omar has had more games with those bad plays this year than last. When you say "the stats show that you are under rating him" I would say no, *the actual mistakes I posted are evidence of me claiming that he makes those mistakes.* I think he's a guy who can be and has been previously a great CB at this level, but who also has made more bad mistakes this year and thus is worse as a defender right now. Seriously, the vast majority of responses I've gotten in this thread are made as if I never posted those video clips to back up what I said, which is that he makes more important mistakes this year. This is why I'm as stubborn about it as I've been. Only one person has really addressed the evidence I posted-- I did not feel his assessment was accurate, and anyway he stopped after three clips I never said I don't like Omar's pass completion percentage or his number of interceptions, because to me that's secondary once you make a huge mistake and it's avoiding the issue. If someone can show me he made that many important mistakes last year I would say, ok I'm wrong to say he's declined, but then all that means is his level last year would be simply lower than I would have thought. It's not that stats and soccer don't mix, it's just that good stats and specifically, useful analysis of those stats that match up to what you see with your eyes is hard to find at a fan level, which is in good part a reflection of the fluid nature of gameplay.
These statements themselves are meaningless to the problem. Of course you would like to keep Omar as a player from a "soccer perspective" *if the cost is negligible* but real life has to involve the financial aspect of it, which is the exact point of my post. And I dont know why you keep suggesting the club overpay for allocation money with real money (if that's even allowed) but then claim that it's good business. How is it good business to pay Omar 1.45 mil, assuming you think he's worth that, and then overpay for 1 mil of allocation money with real money (assume close to what you said, 1.5 to 2 mil real money or more), and then turn around and use that allocation money on Omar to keep him here? Like I said before, now you're paying what, over 3 million, all in REAL money to have Omar in our squad. You've doubled his price in real money! Forget about 4 DPs and TAM and everything else-- Who would sign him right now to a deal where we pay that much for him?! *** So with regard to this thread as a whole-- I've pretty much said all I can say at this point, and it looks like almost no one wants to/is able to discuss the actual clips I posted, or acknowledge that the cost of keeping Omar next year, in addition to his 1.45 million that we do have to pay all of, along with even more allocation money that is an actual useful resource that we need to use wisely, is *undeniably higher* than it was this year, given current rules. And it's now offseason and I doubt there will be anything worth discussing in this thread until something happens with our roster or the rules are changed. So, so long till then (I know, I know: "Hallelujah! Leave Omar alone!")
No, I'm just realistic about how MLS works. Ideally Gerrard looks in the mirror and retires, but really Gerrard is a straw man here anyway. The point is while Omar is a very good defender, he's in the final season of his contract and I do not think his play warrants a second go as a DP. A solid solution to all problems would be offering him a long non-DP contract that gets him close to what a short DP contract would.
You have said this many times and in different ways. I strongly disagree that this is the way you judge a center back. If you wait for that perfect center back that never makes an error, you'll be waiting awhile. You judge them on the entirety of their play. I don't expect to change your mind, though.
I don't think that's how it works. My interpretation is that there are three separate "accounts". Omar as a DP implies: MLS Account MLS pays $450k to Omar since that's the cap hit. Galaxy Cash Account The Galaxy pays $1m to Omar since they pick up the rest of the contract. DP Account Omar counts as 1. Omar bought down implies: MLS Account MLS pays 1,450k to Omar which is the cap hit plus the allocation cash Galaxy Cash Account The Galaxy don't pay anything since allocation money is MLS's money and when the Galaxy uses an allocation, they're basically using an account they have with MLS. DP Account Omar counts as 0 since, by rule, the part of the salary paid by allocation money does not apply to the determination of DP status. However, there is an "opportunity cost" to using the allocation on Omar since you could use it on another player and/or you wouldn't need to give up resources to get it in the first place, but you need to measure that in terms of what is being given up.
The issue with that is the concept of single entity and the "owner-operator". It's not like AEG really gets a team for free if they have no DPs. And the concept of single-entity and specific forms of revenue-sharing make it even more important to be vigilant about wage inefficiencies in your squad. And yes, that's my point-- allocation money represents opportunity cost, instead of thinking of it as real money. It's a designation given to "money", that indirectly represents real money, controlled and distributed by the single entity basically amongst itself that is used for specific purposes. You don't want to have to trade even more real money to designate an amount of salary as "allocation", when allocation is given out for other reasons that don't involve paying real money for it. Alright now I'm tapping out.
It is free in a sense. The on-budget salary costs are separate from the payments from the Galaxy to MLS. The Galaxy sends in a fraction of its ticket revenue in exchange for MLS paying for its (on-budget) players. If the cap is $3m and the Galaxy only sign players worth $2m, their cost isn't any lower (aside from the $1m savings for MLS as a whole which 1/20th of "belongs" to the Galaxy). If they sign more players to bring the budget up to $3m, the difference is not paid by the Galaxy, it's paid for by MLS, so effectively it's free money. Obviously, expansion fees and the committed fraction of ticket revenues are the costs of having a team as a whole, but when looking at individual player decisions, you need to look at what the incremental costs are of each decision.
As far as I know, Omar is under contract through 2016 having signed a extension to his contract after the mid way point in 2013. Given that MLS contracts typically work 3 full years, plus an option (and I concede that DP contracts can be different), I can't find any evidence that he is now out of contract, but given all of the information out there perhaps I missed it.
Yeah but I'm saying it's not free if you go from having DPs to having no DPs (ie at or under the cap). Going from having space under the cap to having a max budget at the cap is different, as you say, but only that small increment would be free. If we were under the cap and signing Omar brought us just to the max, *and we're also not paying him above the cap as a DP*, then that's a completely different story, and that would not need to involve allocation money, of course. Ok for real now
My wording was confusing, I considered 2015 to be over around 10pm last night. 2016 is the final year of his current contract, so he’s about to negotiate for his next contract. I don’t think he’s made the case that he deserves another DP contract, and I was one of the people all for his first DP contract. I certainly don’t think he’s done enough to warrant a raise. I think a guaranteed longer term contract that nets him a comparable amount of income over 5 years instead of a new 2 year DP contract makes sense for all parties. If Omar wants a raise or to maintain his current salary of $1.5 million I’m fine with letting him go. I don’t think any team in MLS would grant him a DP contract and he’s done himself no favors this year in terms of playing abroad.
Not asking for perfect, just fewer bad mistakes, like the Omar pre-2015, now that his contract has become more complicated.
I've got a question. Does anyone REALLY believe that in the end we won't find a way to jerry-rig the allocation, buy Omar down, and keep 4 DP's? Does anyone seriously believe that that won't happen somehow, someway? Rule changes, working under the current rules, whatever----they league is not going to leave us hanging, right? I can't see this going any other way.
I think the league would be very happy with us ending up with Keane, Gerrard, Gio and Omar but having to pay such a high price that it damages us competitively for the next several years. They want the players in the league but I think they'd rather have other teams win. Maybe it's wishful thinking but I expect Gerrard to leave before next year. What Liverpool should have done is offer him a position on the coaching staff with the understanding that for the last year he would be a player/coach and come off the bench late in games (or if they did offer that, he should have accepted). Now I think both parties realize that they would be better if he was back in Liverpool. This would put off the Omar decision until at least the middle of the season.
Actually, I don't disagree with a most of what you have to say with that clarification. However, I am not wild about the Galaxy letting him go on a free transfer. It will be interesting to see if Omar's play improves in a contract year (in terms of mistakes) and returns to his 2013 form. It would be interesting to know if the Galaxy have an option for the 4th year and the terms of that option. Unfortunately, this does this answer met999's original concern about 2016. I think the smartest action for 2016 and best way to improve the team is to part ways with Gerrard (no surprise). That gets the Galaxy through 2016 and frees up cap room as well as leaving the teams options open for a smaller scale DP or even better by the rules a young DP.
I don't think the league needs to do much. The team unfortunately seems to be taking care of this league "objective" on their own. Nor do I see, despite all the ballyhoo about Los Dos and the Academy, any fixes coming from that direction for the Galaxy's problems. FWIW, I think the league wants/needs for the Galaxy to remain competitive (i.e. a playoff participant) so they don't want them to fall too much further then where they took themselves last night.
They are all based on the same fundamentals. And I think using the stats + eyeballs are better than just eyeballs. This is the quote that drives me NUTS. It is often said by people when the stats deny their opinions, and they pull it as a knee jerk reaction to the stats that should cause them to question their beliefs. Not just you, I see it all the time on the Nats board. It also drives me nuts because it implies that people who use stats don't know what they are watching. It is also the hardest thing to debate because it boils down to, "what I see with MY eyes." Then what's the point of debating it? I use stats PLUS my eyeballs and knowledge of the game. I try to do that to provide a well rounded perspective. Stats from the chalkboard itself aren't "iffy." Fine don't use the other sites. But based on interceptions, aerial duels etc that I've posted all year, Omar hasn't been as bad as you think he has been. He has had a lack of consistency in the back half of the year (actually, two months) that I think he will address. But he has not been continually bad. Those plays often lead to goals when they are egregious. So I think you saying they are never counted is kinda lame. If they happen all game that would be a defensive shitshow. I'm with @Geneva here. As I've now mentioned repeatedly, trying to find YT clips of good defensive plays is not going to happen. They are typically not put in highlight reels. So your asking for these clips to argue against your position is just not right. And that's why I've been stubborn about it. I've also taken the time to repeatedly put stats in here from various sources (to be fair, you did give me credit for that in an earlier post) to debunk your theory, but you've chosen to hand wave them off. If you're choosing to do that, and say that it's about what you see with your EYEBALLS, then you should let other people address you back with their evidence stated with their EYEBALLS. This is bunk. Good passes, interceptions, recoveries, etc are good indications of defensive play because they are fundamentally good defense. I don't he's nearly had the catastrophic failures as you think he has. Essentially you've chosen to only focus on his poor games in a two month period. That's cherry picking. Everyone has shitty games. And I'm willing to say his form has declined over the last two months due to consistency. I'm fine with that statement. But to say he's been poor all year? No. I highly recommend reading Matt Doyle, Sean Steffen and frankly, this board. This board does what you're looking for every week in the gameday threads (where I haven't seen you post). It's one of the BEST boards on big soccer where people (not just me) take the time to mix statistics and the fluid nature of gameplay.