Which ONE US Player Can We Least Afford to Lose?

I think it has to be donovan. I'm not necessarily saying he is our best player, as I think Reyna is still holding onto that distinction for a bit, but all of the offense essentially flows from our attacking mid right now. The other players all have solid backups in an ideal situation. In a few years when someone like Gaven develops we will rely less on donovan to drive the attack, but for now...

 

Word. Reyna is a great controlling midfielder and calming influence. But the Brash Young Americans' spiritual and technical leader is LD. His attention allows DMB more room on the wing. It lets Convey slash in behind his screens. And it will let Freddy Adu what he Adoes best.

 

Landon. Who else can run through the other team and threaten in the final third?

 

I'm torn between Donovan and O'brien. I just got home from an extended trip, and I was too tired to sleep, so I popped in some WC02 footage I've burnt to DVD. And instantly I am reminded why John O'brien is what the US has been missing over the past year.

No other player in the US pool gives us the complete game JOB has going for him. He brings a "bite" from central midfield that no other player has either the ability or mindset to emulate. Given a split second, he can read the entire field and make the pinpoint pass that opens up the opponent. Of course the passes to Mathis and Lewis come to mind, but I saw him make similar passes in my quick and dirty reviews of Portugal, Mexico, and Germany. He's also very good defensively, and he can beat players off the dribble, too. Reyna comes closest to JOB's complete game, but even he falls short of what O'brien delivered in the 2002 World Cup.

Not that the US cannot win without O'brien, but he single-handedly makes us a better team the second he steps onto the field and in my opinion was the best field player for us in that tournament. I hope to see him back in a US uniform soon.

 

Good points. I brought the same thing up in some formation thread, where people weren't including O'Brien in the starting lineup. People forget how good he is. He, Reyna, and Donovan are a cut above the rest in skill level.

However, at this point, I voted for Donovan. This is one of those "interpret the meaning of MVP" type questions that could be answered many ways. I did it this way -- I took my ideal US starting 11, then did one without Donovan, and then one without O'Brien. I think we lose more by trying to replace Donovan's role on the team than we do O'Brien's. They are both such skilled players it becomes a question of depth.

 

i voted for Other. Other has really come on of late and proves time and again to the the indispensible cog for the US. Donovan is great an' all but Other does so many Other things. If one we anOther Other, we would really be someone else. Still, we couldn't compete with top countries that are able to distinguish themselves from Others.

 

well, it certainly isn't o'brien since we seem to play more games without him than with him.
not saying he isn't valuable ... but this team has had a lot of practice in adjusting to life without him.

 

as of right now, i'd say pope... but that naturally has a shrinking shelf life

 

I can't really knock the arguments for Donovan. He is a key player, has played well recently thanks to the switch to midfield, and he is young enough to be a key player and leader for a decade to come. Voting for Donovan, as most people are doing, is completely logical. Until Gavin or Adu are ready, depth behind Donovan is thin.

I also thought about Bocanegra, who provides a reliable, physical presence either at central defense or left back. Few players give the team that kind of dependability at TWO positions. But we have solid guys who can replace him (Gibbs, Berhalter, Vanney, Hedjuk) in a pinch.

The O'Brien line of reasoning is also persuasive. He had a terrific WC2002 and the Nat's could really use him back. BUT, we have been without JOB for nearly 2 years now. So, as talented as he is, he obviously isn't indespensable. Until he is healthy again, the team simply can't count on him.

So, in the end, I voted for Reyna. Yesterday's match against Poland's B-team showed why he is so important. Mastro and Zavag simply couldn't control the game from their limited defensive midfield roles. Until Mathis entered the field, our offensive flow consisted of DMB/Convey trying to speed down the left, or Donovan going down the right. We conceeded the middle offensively. Heck, I even saw POPE dribbling through the middle once, trying to create. Shivers. Also, the team played numerous wasted long passes that sailed past everyone, perhaps because Reyna's smarter play was missing.

The US team's two biggest weaknesses at the moment are: Striker (can anyone finish regularly?), and central midfield aside from Reyna. If Reyna is missing, we are left with Armas/Mastro/Zavag. We CAN'T hope to play well in a WC with two of those three as our central midfielders.

As long as JOB is AWOL, Reyna is the indespensable one.

Once JOB is back and provides cover for Reyna, then I think Donovan becomes the indespensable one.

 

Not that I'm superstitious, but threads like these always make me nervous. I certainly remember times when this team was not fully healthy and in form: WC1998 (Wynalda, Ramos, etc.) and September 2001 WCQ against Honduras and CR come immediately to mind.

So here's a great big **knock on wood** for all these guys.

 

Speaking of ramos, could you imagine if he was born 10 years later so that he actually got to play with guys who could keep up?

 

Eddie Gaven (maybe in a few years hehe)

In all seriousness... JOB hands down... Donovan is the most overrated player bar none... Sure he is a major assest to the US team, but he can't control a game like JOB. I think Nutmeg summed it up well.

 

while not arguing that pope is a stud (and one of my absolute favorite nats of all time) a pairing of boca-gibbs would get the job done just fine. as IASocFan said, you can also toss Berhalter in there.



re: Reyna. I remember reading a stat somewhere comparing out win-loss record with him to our win-loss record without him. it was startling the difference ... which makes a pretty good case for him being most irreplacable. of course, I could be remembering the stat wrong ... which wouldn't make him less valuable. it would just make me more forgetful.

 

You gotta put Freidel up here, as long as age doesnt count. He was the teams MVP in 2002. You can also argue that we have the depth to replace him, but there isnt another goalie that would have played as well as he did for the US in the world cup.

 

Damn you for making me think. OK - going back to 1999, I made a one-pass attempt at comparing the US' record with and without Claudio under Bruce Arena.

Here's what I came away with:

With Claudio (W-L-D)
20-10-8
Winning Percentage = 63%
Major Highlights:
3rd place in 99 Confederations Cup
Beating Mexico w/ Claudio as a right wingback in WC02
Beating Argentina at RFK in 99
Excellent performance against Germany in WC02

Without Claudio (W-L-D)
31-13-10
Winning Percentage = 66%
Major Highlights:
2-0-0 record in WC02
2002 Gold Cup champions
Beating Mexico at home in WCQ (Yes I know Claudio started, but the US finished when he left)
Beating Honduras on the road in WCQ


You'll have to excuse me. I don't see the big deal if Claudio isn't available. At one time, he may have been more irreplaceable. Not anymore. The US has learned how to make due quite nicely without him.

 

looks like the forgetful option is the winner.

 

I have to go with JOB.
Nutmeg summed it up pretty well.

I might add we could probably get by the quals without him but certainly not in Germany.

 

My favorite player is O'Brien, but I voted for Beasley. He's the only guy we have who consistently breaks defenses down by himself. Donovan has the ability to do so as well, but he doesn't share Beasley's instinctual ability to wrong-foot people and get past them. People say Beasley only has one move, but who needs more when nobody stops it? With him it's more than the move. He has the innate sense of timing to use it to the best effect.

Defenses in chaos lead to goals, and we don't have anyone else who can cause chaos like Beasley.

 

well if we are down to the nitty gritty, i DEFINITELY want pope being one of the two CBs checking the other teams attack

 

btw IIRC mastro has the best "with" winning pct. - at least he did a while back

 

78% - Nobody else is even close.

 

Good research, Nutmeg. Could you do the same for JOB?

I would add, however, that the 2-0-0 WC02 record without Claudio had one crucial aspect that cannot be ignored -- O'Brien was healthy. IF JOB is healthy and playing, then I totally agree that Reyna isn't so crucial. BUT O'Brien has been AWOL for two years, since the WC. We can't count on him at all. Because of O'Brien's absence, the Nat's have no acceptable replacement for Reyna. Central midfield is too important for any team to count on 2nd tier players.

Now, I suppose I'm "cheating" a little bit by assuming JOB's absence as a given. But, that's all we have been "given" by JOB since the WC. I think that is a realistic assumption. So, assuming reality continues and JOB remains AWOL, I'll stick with the idea that Reyna is the irreplaceable player. I just hate the idea of playing crucial matches with two of these three players as the Nat's central mid's: Armas, Mastro, or Zavaganin.

Once JOB can be relied apon, something I dearly hope for, then the US central midfield has another first tier talent and neither JOB nor Reyna would be as crucial.

 

The previous two posts show why I don't like soccer statistics. I think the most important player is a fully fit Armas, and the drop off to Mastroeni is drastic. Don't get me wrong, I like Mastoeni alot, but I think Armas is more dogged on defense, and more skilled at starting the offense. D-mid is crucial to this team with the absence of anyone better than Reyna at creative mid. Even if you have the most skilled creative midfielder in the world you got to get the ball to him, and the best at doing that is Armas. Hands down.