Jump to content

Reading and Rivas


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#16
Voice of Reason II

Voice of Reason II

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,065 posts

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.

I'm gonna get me some of them 20-20 Hindsight glasses, I hear they work like a charm.

 

Bottom line is we are playing really good, entertaining soccer, so who cares if we had some misses, what team doesn't?

 

Number one goal was to  get younger and more dynamic and if anyone wasn't educated by the sad sight of a now toothless Dempsey centering the pitch for Seattle on Wednesday night, then the wisdom of the trade will always elude you.

 

The process of integrating a lot of young players doesn't happen overnight and not everyone will pan out, or at least not all will respond to our approach. What should encourage people is the fact that we can play with a 3rd string converted striker draft pick at RB and still do ok. The system is working. 

 

Truth is no matter how good we will do there will always be a "weakest link" (a mathematical certainty)and somebody will revel in pointing it out. Our weakest links really aren't that bad.



#17
iced1776

iced1776

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,342 posts
  • Supports:NY Red Bulls, FC Barcelona

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.

 

Is that a real number or just your guess?



#18
jamison

jamison

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,506 posts
  • Supports:New York

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.

That is certainly true (whatever that number was), but if we do that, this exact thread still exists & it's called "Why did we give Sacha away for nothing, we could've at least traded for some bench players & tried to coach them up...?"

 

Anyway. Sacha is gone, the trade is gone, let's throw our voices behind Kaku & hope he turns into the greatest thing since sliced Bimbo. (Philly Indifference Week reference). 


 


#19
Indyanapolis

Indyanapolis

    Player/Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,113 posts
  • Supports:Metro

 

Is that a real number or just your guess?

Don't know why 500k was stuck in my mind, it was actually 150k:

https://www.mlssocce...y-rivas-redding

 

Makes it a bit better I guess.

 

But like other people have said, I'm not actively pissed about this trade or anything.  It's a bad deal, and that's that.  Nothing else to do about it now.


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.


#20
arisrules

arisrules

    Player/Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,372 posts

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. 
 

I think this is absolutely correct. But I will say I thought Rivas would have been more involved, at least in the 18, as he was here from the pre-season on (even if the pre-season was odd with CCL). I think Rivas will be a very good part of the team eventually, but the short-term results of JUST the trade assets themselves (again isolated from the other elements, kaku, salary, etc), haven't been as much as expected. I only say this because right now the team has one critical weakness: BWP's health. He's been durable, but he's not getting any younger. Last year with Veron, I knew if BWP became injured, the Argentine would be able to step in and we wouldn't miss a beat. DE7 obviously has grown into the sub role, but he's not polished on the field in terms of runs, and what not. Rivas has disappeared from the 18. For me this  is where my concerns are with Rivas. 



#21
Metrohoboken

Metrohoboken

    Dir. of Football Operations

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,581 posts

Rivas - Came in out of shape, had some personal issues he was dealing with and flying back and forth to Colombia. Team feels he is 100% committed now so once he gets his fitness under him, I think he will be a regular sub.

Redding - has the physical tools and even positions himself well off the ball. Mentally, however, he is checked out. He owns a gaming business and seems to be more into that world. In his USL and MLS games (2 and 1, respectively) he makes poor choices when called into action and can't keep up with the teams high press. There is a reason he is training with the team every day yet does not make the 18 on either the MLS or USL roster. Andrew Lombard just returned from a 3 month injury and made the 18 for the USL team over him.
I'd venture to guess they let him know he doesn't have a role with the club other than being a cone during practice and are waiting to release him.

Sad that we had other options from Orland other than Redding, yet pushed hard for him and we ended up with someone who doesn't seem to want to be here.


Good comments.

Bradley Wright-Phillips "I prefer it at Red Bull Arena, but it was OK. I could imagine it being good for a baseball crowd.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users