It occurred to me as I look at the lineups- we traded Kljestan for space but Rivas is making 444k this year... to do what? Be behind Etienne on the depth chart?
Guy needs to do something soon.
It occurred to me as I look at the lineups- we traded Kljestan for space but Rivas is making 444k this year... to do what? Be behind Etienne on the depth chart?
Guy needs to do something soon.
It occurred to me as I look at the lineups- we traded Kljestan for space but Rivas is making 444k this year... to do what? Be behind Etienne on the depth chart?
Guy needs to do something soon.
Not everyone pans out. Just because we want him to do something doesn't mean he will.
Totally fine with both Redding and Rivas being waived. Doesn't matter when.
RIP Guillermo Romulo, Alexander Francis Orig, Celenio Eleazar, and my Mom, Resurreccion Eleazar.
RIP Cesar Castello, Mike Vallo, Glenn Stampiglia, Bob Paquette, and Warren Lee
This is looking like one of those rare lose-lose trades.
It is interesting that our recent hit rate on developing and promoting talent from the USL is so high, as well as our scouting of international players from minor leagues, yet we completely whiffed on two dudes with MLS experience.
Tainted by Heath.
RIP Guillermo Romulo, Alexander Francis Orig, Celenio Eleazar, and my Mom, Resurreccion Eleazar.
RIP Cesar Castello, Mike Vallo, Glenn Stampiglia, Bob Paquette, and Warren Lee
It is interesting that our recent hit rate on developing and promoting talent from the USL is so high, as well as our scouting of international players from minor leagues, yet we completely whiffed on two dudes with MLS experience.
I don't believe- and we have had this argument before- that people value this trade the right way.
We wanted Sacha off of our roster. There may have been a better time to deal the reigning two-time assist leader, but, we (the message board) don't know what other offers were out there. It's easy to say "We should've traded him to Team X for a bag of gold and $1M in allocation money, but what if everyone knew we were trying to off-load him cheap, and there were no other takers? He was coming off of a really ugly playoff exit, and a really great regular season. It seems like, without BWP finishing his chances & a system helping him defensively, he isn't as effective in Orlando as he was here.
So, saying 'Rivas & Reading suck' is kind of an incomplete argument. Kaku seems pretty dope. There isn't a Kaku with Sacha still here. It would've been bad to trade him to TFC or NYCFC for nothing, so we traded him to Orlando for nothing. Where he's been going downhill, which we assumed would happen at some point, which is why we traded him.
There's an old HR joke that goes "What happens if we invest in our employees, and they leave? The response: What if we don't, and they stay?" So, yes, the trade looks bad in a vacuum, but what if we didn't make the trade, didn't get Kaku, and Sacha started declining here, now, this season? Is that better than having Rivas & Reading producing nothing? Probably not, since we're able to enjoy the upgrade of a younger Kaku in Sacha's place.
I think there's a 10-15% chance that either Reading or Rivas end up being useful role players at some point. I think there's a 85-90% chance that they just continue to fade into oblivion and the trade looks awful as a straight up trade in hindsight.
But, if we're lifting a cup in December, then the "but what about getting nothing for Sacha" argument doesn't really matter. Only, it's July, so we can't answer December questions yet.
Yes, the trade looks bad now. Yes, it will likely always look bad. But, that's really only if you know that we were offered something better by Dallas or LA (etc.) for him, and turned that down (an unknown), and it possibly ignores that losing Sacha was addition by subtraction. Dan made the argument before that "Well, we could've gotten good role players instead of shitty ones." I totally agree with that- as long as someone was willing to trade us two good players instead of two shitty ones. But, I don't know that, so I can't kill the team for making the trade just yet.
*Alls* I'm saying is, consider more than 1 side to this trade.
If you scan YouTube looking for Bradley Wright-Phillips, youll find numerous goal compilations, a few interviews and, eventually, an excerpt from the grime mixtape series Lord of the Mics.
I don't believe- and we have had this argument before- that people value this trade the right way.
We wanted Sacha off of our roster. There may have been a better time to deal the reigning two-time assist leader, but, we (the message board) don't know what other offers were out there. It's easy to say "We should've traded him to Team X for a bag of gold and $1M in allocation money, but what if everyone knew we were trying to off-load him cheap, and there were no other takers? He was coming off of a really ugly playoff exit, and a really great regular season. It seems like, without BWP finishing his chances & a system helping him defensively, he isn't as effective in Orlando as he was here.
So, saying 'Rivas & Reading suck' is kind of an incomplete argument. Kaku seems pretty dope. There isn't a Kaku with Sacha still here. It would've been bad to trade him to TFC or NYCFC for nothing, so we traded him to Orlando for nothing. Where he's been going downhill, which we assumed would happen at some point, which is why we traded him.
There's an old HR joke that goes "What happens if we invest in our employees, and they leave? The response: What if we don't, and they stay?" So, yes, the trade looks bad in a vacuum, but what if we didn't make the trade, didn't get Kaku, and Sacha started declining here, now, this season? Is that better than having Rivas & Reading producing nothing? Probably not, since we're able to enjoy the upgrade of a younger Kaku in Sacha's place.
I think there's a 10-15% chance that either Reading or Rivas end up being useful role players at some point. I think there's a 85-90% chance that they just continue to fade into oblivion and the trade looks awful as a straight up trade in hindsight.
But, if we're lifting a cup in December, then the "but what about getting nothing for Sacha" argument doesn't really matter. Only, it's July, so we can't answer December questions yet.
Yes, the trade looks bad now. Yes, it will likely always look bad. But, that's really only if you know that we were offered something better by Dallas or LA (etc.) for him, and turned that down (an unknown), and it possibly ignores that losing Sacha was addition by subtraction. Dan made the argument before that "Well, we could've gotten good role players instead of shitty ones." I totally agree with that- as long as someone was willing to trade us two good players instead of two shitty ones. But, I don't know that, so I can't kill the team for making the trade just yet.
*Alls* I'm saying is, consider more than 1 side to this trade.
In Woly we trust to turn at least one of them into a useful squad player and/or trade value.
RED. BULL. OUT.
#SaveTheMetro
I don't believe- and we have had this argument before- that people value this trade the right way.
We wanted Sacha off of our roster. There may have been a better time to deal the reigning two-time assist leader, but, we (the message board) don't know what other offers were out there. It's easy to say "We should've traded him to Team X for a bag of gold and $1M in allocation money, but what if everyone knew we were trying to off-load him cheap, and there were no other takers? He was coming off of a really ugly playoff exit, and a really great regular season. It seems like, without BWP finishing his chances & a system helping him defensively, he isn't as effective in Orlando as he was here.
So, saying 'Rivas & Reading suck' is kind of an incomplete argument. Kaku seems pretty dope. There isn't a Kaku with Sacha still here. It would've been bad to trade him to TFC or NYCFC for nothing, so we traded him to Orlando for nothing. Where he's been going downhill, which we assumed would happen at some point, which is why we traded him.
There's an old HR joke that goes "What happens if we invest in our employees, and they leave? The response: What if we don't, and they stay?" So, yes, the trade looks bad in a vacuum, but what if we didn't make the trade, didn't get Kaku, and Sacha started declining here, now, this season? Is that better than having Rivas & Reading producing nothing? Probably not, since we're able to enjoy the upgrade of a younger Kaku in Sacha's place.
I think there's a 10-15% chance that either Reading or Rivas end up being useful role players at some point. I think there's a 85-90% chance that they just continue to fade into oblivion and the trade looks awful as a straight up trade in hindsight.
But, if we're lifting a cup in December, then the "but what about getting nothing for Sacha" argument doesn't really matter. Only, it's July, so we can't answer December questions yet.
Yes, the trade looks bad now. Yes, it will likely always look bad. But, that's really only if you know that we were offered something better by Dallas or LA (etc.) for him, and turned that down (an unknown), and it possibly ignores that losing Sacha was addition by subtraction. Dan made the argument before that "Well, we could've gotten good role players instead of shitty ones." I totally agree with that- as long as someone was willing to trade us two good players instead of two shitty ones. But, I don't know that, so I can't kill the team for making the trade just yet.
*Alls* I'm saying is, consider more than 1 side to this trade.
We could have just released Sacha, saved 500k in allocation, and saved on the cash were wasting on Rivas and Redding. Dont get me wrong, were a better team without Sacha, but this deal was horrible.
We are good enough to beat the best teams, and bad enough to lose to the worst teams.
Did you post this pre-season?
If you scan YouTube looking for Bradley Wright-Phillips, youll find numerous goal compilations, a few interviews and, eventually, an excerpt from the grime mixtape series Lord of the Mics.
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users