Are Sounders Rebalancing Defensive Roster For Different Competitions?
The losses of James Riley and Tyson Wahl have Seattle Sounders FC adding allocation money only at this point. It is also rather apparent that their biggest low-budget success of 2011, Mauro Rosales, will be extended at a significantly higher figure, which should be announced very soon. There will also be a new keeper, likely with a budget number that is fairly large considering that the current leading candidate is Michael Gspurning, another situation we expect to be resolved shortly.
At that time Seattle is basically cap neutral, yet lacking a right back that should start 70% of matches or more, as well as placing young Michael Tetteh into a much more significant role in competitions like the US Open Cup and CONCACAF Champions League Group matches. Yes, the allocation dollars gained help, but the team is still fairly limited in options so far.
"The reality, when you get to a place like we’ve been for first three years, and you use allocation to get better and when players’ salaries go up, unfortunately you get to point where it has to be addition by subtraction and that increases level of complexity," Sounders GM Adrian Hanauer told Sounder at Heart. "No longer can you just spend money and add a player to the roster. Someone has to go."
That can change with option decline day as team prepare for the Re-Entry Draft. With a few players that don't initially seem part of the core lineup that have more than minimum salary contracts Seattle can free up some more cap space, but with consequences. Freeing up 300,000 dollars or so by declining options on the following players not protected in the Expansion Draft limits the ability of Seattle to compete for as many trophies as possible - Taylor Graham, Patrick Ianni, Nate Jaqua, and Pat Noonan.
The team would also be getting a lot younger with only one of those players in a peak age period (Ianni). What it loses though is some of the depth that was used to great effect in 2011. More than 4000 all competitions minutes were logged by that group. Sometimes they played quite well, others they lacked. The two priciest (Ianni and Jaqua) were also the two most used. Just dropping Graham and Noonan would not free up significant cap space, so would be a move about age and roster space, not finances.
Seattle can cut even deeper by dropping Leo Gonzalez (another 100k+ of cap space, 1998 minutes) but that cuts the starting quality depth even more. Again this would be a move to get younger and free up more space. If Seattle loses all five of these players it reaches a reasonable maximum in cap space. For the most part the core of the team returns, except of course the fullbacks.
Those moves do make the starting XI likely to be much better, and better through acquired players. With 5 opened slots and if 3 are minimum salary that leaves the other 2 at roughly 200k each. That should increase Seattle's chances in the CCL knockouts and the MLS Cup Playoffs. While Seattle has plenty of frontline, inexpensive depth that should be able to pick-up minutes left open if a Jaqua and Noonan are left out in the re-entry draft (Fucito, Ochoa, White, Estrada and other midfielders slotting in), the place where depth suffers is the backline.
Jeff Parke and Jhon Kennedy Hurtado are nearly certain to be back. Tetteh as well. Scott is at a good value. With seven roster slots open, but only replaced with two high-end expensive talents Seattle defense shifts towards youth as some amount of time is grabbed by a draftee, or two, or three. If the team is expected to compete in the same amount of games going deep in the Open Cup and making it past the first round of both the CCL and MLS Playoffs that leaves the following "space" for the new players without running them into the ground similar to Riley in 2011.
|
New LB |
|
|
New RB |
|
3000 |
Parke |
Hurtado |
3000 |
|
Tetteh |
3000 |
3000 |
Converted RB |
|
1300 |
Scott |
New CB |
1300 |
|
1800 |
700 |
If Parke and Hurtado both grab 3000 minutes (about 70% of likely playing time) and increasing Scott's time to 1800 minutes picking up some of Ianni's time there is a large amount of time for players in new roles from what they did in 2011. Tetteh at 1300 or so minutes would be a large change. The possible midfielder to right back conversion product would also be at 1300 or so back-up minutes. Both of those are if each of the new signings also get 3000 minutes or so. It also leaves the 4th centerback needing to play about 700 minutes.
A maximum rebuild project has Seattle with plenty of depth in the attacking end, but it should be clear that doing such would leave Seattle banking on performances and health along a largely untried backline. Keeping one or both of Gonzalez and Ianni limits the possible additions and limits the depth performances of Scott and the converted right back as well as eliminating the need for a 4th CB. The lesser rebuild limits the youth minutes, but requires strong performances by Leo and Ianni.
|
Gonzalez |
|
|
New RB |
|
2500 |
Parke |
Hurtado |
3000 |
|
Tetteh |
3000 |
3000 |
Converted RB |
|
1500 |
Scott |
Ianni |
1000 |
|
1800 |
1300 |
|
Either a maximum rebuild or a smaller one still requires a large amount of success from players new to MLS, or Seattle, or even to pro soccer entirely. Both rebuilds require health from players not normally healthy, as well as a large step forward by a 2nd year pro. Either vision doesn't include trading from strengths, both show mere possibilities that will be confirmed in the next few days. That may dent chances of regular season and Open Cup success, but if done Adrian and Sigi would be banking that it helps them in the two trophies that matter most for 2012 - the Champions League and MLS Cup.
48 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Okay, serious question
I’ve not really seen him play much, but I keep getting spotty reports that Tetteh isn’t just bad on defense, he’s terrible. Apt to bite and get beat often. Tends to wander far out of position and then gets burned on the counter. You guys have gotten a much better look…. is he ready to put in any kind of major minutes in MLS, etc. play?
I only saw him play once last year...
…and I was somewhat into the beer (Get ready for a sketchy scouting report). I was not impressed. Fast but really unpolished – passing and touch seemed lackluster. Shaky on defense. I remember being distinctly disappointed in his performance. I am sure he has improved and everyone has a bad day so maybe some folks who caught some late season reserve games have a better idea.
He played once as a sub and once as a starter when I watched a few reserves games at Starfire
He was a decent dribbler (warning sign for me) and didn’t appear willing to pass the ball early. He was definitely fast and a tendency to drift out of position (a little bit too far up the field and then a turnover happens and he has to hustle back).
I remember he had the ball on the attacking side, the ball was tackled away from him and taken the other way. He chased it down and stopped the attack but it was reactive play rather than a constructive one. I would be happy to see him play 900 to 1200 minutes this season with the first team. But I would not count on him in the starting XI for the first half of 2012.
Nos audietis in somniis, Nos audietis in altum: You will hear us!
I agree with this for the most part
though I am wondering why being a decent (I would say good) dribbler is a warning sign?
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
I think the implication is...if you'll excuse a baseball analogy..
If the first thing you have to say about an NL pitcher is “he swings the bat well”…it’s a warning sign. Defense is about positioning, anticipation, discipline, quickness, passing and strength/size first….dribbling, shooting, raw speed secondarily. Dribbling is a valuable skill in a defender … but perhaps only in addition to other more primary skills. With that said, Tetteh is very young, and he has some excellent coaches and mentors. Positioning, disciple and even passing can be taught. He’s a project, but a worthwhile project. Going to the lowlands of Europe for a while is going do wonders for him.
Tetteh's a Fullback, not a Centerback
It’s good to have a dribbler who can join the attack, free up space for himself to make a cross, or cut into the box on occasion. I almost think holding midfielders have to have more defensive prowess than fullbacks these days. Tetteh doesn’t need to necessarily be the best tackler to be an effective fullback as long as his positioning is good enough, can jockey players out of bounds when needed, and make the occasional slide tackle.
-Ben R.
Warning signs versus tendencies
I guess I mean warning sign because it is too small a sample size for a trend or bad habit. I really am hopeful about Tetteh. And as reesebow mentioned, as a wingback he needs to have the dribbling skill to be an effective one. Being a good or decent dribbler by itself is not a bad thing but there were times he should have passed it sooner or freed someone with a good leading pass instead of holding the ball at his feet. I could say that about every soccer player I have only watched for a game and a half. If his solution to being closed down is try to dribble through it, then the warning sign becomes a big siren with flashing red lights. As exSlacker mentioned, the two brightest positives from the small sample size I have seen have been decent (good) dribbling and good speed. The rest of the report is an incomplete. I want to see quick decision making, cleaner passing/crossing/clearing, good shielding of the ball and channeling attackers. I haven’t seen enough to grade any of those. I am really hopeful he is our future left wingback.
Nos audietis in somniis, Nos audietis in altum: You will hear us!
My wife is a surprisingly good judge
of skill. She gave up on Montano and Ljungberg far before I did. She kept yelling a Tetteh to give up the ball earlier.
by sammysounder on Nov 29, 2011 5:56 PM PST up reply actions
USOC
Based on the scenarios you laid out, and implied in your concluding line:
Adrian and Sigi would be banking that it helps them in the two trophies that matter most for 2012 – the Champions League and MLS Cup
It sounds like USOC may not be AS much of a priority next season. I know Sigi will say that we play to win everything, but I wonder if after a three-peat, it will be used more as an opportunity to bring up these younger players.
Thoughts?
Sounders Fanatic | Engineer/Editor Nos Audietis Podcast | Follow me on Twitter
My theory is that if Tetteh, Scott, Ianni and a converted mid
are getting regular US OC minutes the chances of four-peating aren’t great.
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
by Dave Clark on Nov 29, 2011 5:16 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Re: the converted mid ... are you thinking primarily of ...
King Roger or Evans or both or someone else entirely (Carrasco?…I could see him being excellent now that I think of it). I heard recently that Evans has been capped at right back. It think I’ve only seen him play for the US, it was as a sub at outside mid.
He subbed on in Seattle as a RB
Also carded for early entry…
I think Evans could be a decent RB if he played there regularly. He’s a decent passer with strong tactical knowledge and as he’d be the tackler rather than tacklee his health may be better
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Sanyang?
Defensive mids’ skill sets often align pretty well with outside backs’ skill sets. (At least that’s how it works on FIFA, so it’s gotta be real, right?)
FRIMPONG ought always be written in full caps #DEEEEEEENCH
A couple of thoughts
1. Another possibility is that the team exposes some of these players to the Re-Entry draft, not with a view toward dropping them, but rather with the hope that they will slide through and the team will be able to renogiate some or all of their contracts. I see this potentially happening with Leo, Jaqua and Ianni. The team may be willing to risk the loss without actively wanting to replace the players.
If the team can restructure these contracts into less cap hit, the benefits of having players with experience in the system may be of benefit.
2. This also points to an underlying difficulty with the team’s early roster makeup. There isn’t any youth in development on defense beyond Tetteh. The team hasn’t been able to find or develop any young defensemen yet. Scott has improved significantly, but he isn’t really a complete package on defense. He’s a tactical substitution. All of the team’s remaining defensemen came from other rosters as more developed players.
We can always hope for a young player to follow in Lamar Neagle’s footsteps. Perhaps one of the young defenders that Seattle controls has gone elsewhere and gained some experience and maturity and will compete next Spring, but until that young man steps forward, we won’t know.
Long term, the team will need to structure itself so that it can create a balance of young developemental players throughout it’s positional depth. I view the current situation less as an organizational oversight and more as a function of the Sounders entering their fourth year of league competition. A team like LA has the advantage of being in the league long enough to have a more balanced roster and the advantage of home grown players. In a league with this tight salary cap, these two advantages are amplified.
3. The Sounders FO moves this offseason may have a longer view than just this season. The team needs to create balance both positionally and cost wise throughout the roster in order to have long term success. They need to take full advantage of the Reserve league and the economical spots on their roster to develop the future core of the team. Many of the current moves not only address the team’s short term weaknesses, but they also lay the foundation for the long term balance of the roster.
If Seattle is putting
anyone on the Re-entry draft, they are being quiet about it. I don’t see Seattle putting Leo on the re-entry draft especially since Seattle traded Wahl away.
Seattle always waits as long as possible to make announcements
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
There are chances that someone steps up
or that Seattle does sign a defensive HGP. I may have more on this.
But yes, there is a distinct imbalance in development on the backline..
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
OK, Give
A defensive HGP or someone stepping up? Sounds like you have some interesting idea that begs to be heard. Throw the Sounders faithful a bone here. This offseason has been brutal so far.
I can see that the team is laying the groundwork, but we could all use an early Xmas present or at least some hope to chew on.
by Abbott Smith on Nov 30, 2011 1:19 PM PST up reply actions
Couple thoughts/questions
- why would we NOT decline Graham’s option, purely from a business perspective? He plays zero minutes in any competition. I could be wrong but the only minutes I recall him playing last season were vs ManU. I get he’s a legacy Sounder and I like the guy as an ancillary figure, but that’s $50k that could really be used elsewhere
- Not to bash on Noonan, and even with his salary as low as it is, seems like it could also be used more effectively. Maybe a trade for a supplemental pick or decline the option and just have that bit of space available.
- Regarding Tetteh’s seemingly wide critical panning…a trade seems like it may be in order? GA status alone has to have some good value attached. I know he is young and with upside, but we kinda need someone now.
by chrisperry1983 on Nov 29, 2011 5:39 PM PST via mobile reply actions
I believe
Graham played in the Open cup match against Pumas. I might be wrong on that.
Declining Noonan and Graham gives the team roster space
but very little cap room. You’re basically getting replacement level talent at those prices.
I’m saying Tetteh isn’t ready NOW, not ever
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
But Noonan/Graham combined is about 100k
I think we could score a couple younger, similarly skilled contributors, or a good single person.
Regarding Tetteh…i didn’t clarify very well. I think we could trade him for somebody good now rather than good later. Or trade up for a better first round pick or something to a cash strapped team who could use the GA relief.
by chrisperry1983 on Nov 29, 2011 6:36 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
or...
Rather than the basically 50/50 split on the combined salary, sign a decent 70k player and a 32k dev player?
by chrisperry1983 on Nov 29, 2011 6:37 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Would still
have 30k to spare since 32k salary player is off-budget.
Noonan at 48k
Graham at 60k
But their replacements will make ~45k at a minimum. So where’s all that cap space?
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
what I am trying to say
Is that we have two players… One of which has played I’d wager less than 300 minutes across all competitions in three seasons, the other is an oft injured vet, who has clearly passed his prime. By declining their options, we free up about $100k. That $100k could be used to sign a couple replacements that are younger and have upside (later round picks? Give jamel Wallace another shot? Who knows) or sign a solid contributor at 80-100k and have a roster spot open for a dev contract, since gstomylee pointed out above that dev contracts don’t count. basically…purely from a business perspective we have some dead weight and it might be a good move to trade in for a newer model.
by chrisperry1983 on Nov 29, 2011 7:24 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
Senior spots and developmental are not interchangable
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
well then that leaves things open for an 80-100k guy?
Forgot dev spots are limited. But maybe beagle gets a senior spot? I’m fuzzy obviously on how those work.
Maybe we trade for Kimura or something..
by chrisperry1983 on Nov 29, 2011 7:41 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
It's a fuzzy system
Looking at the salaries; Boss, Ochoa, Fucito, Seamon, Carrasco, are all listed as minimum (42,000) salary players. Additionally, Neagle and Ford turn 25 in 2012 meaning they can no longer remain on the 25-30 roster spots (for 24 & under as well as GA players) Of those 7 players who (assuming they don’t get a raise) only 4 can occupy the 21-24 off budget roster spots. From the MLS roster rules it doesn’t appear to be important whether these 4 roster spots be senior players or developmental players. It actually seems like senior and developmental distinctions are no longer important to MLS roster building at all.
Senior and developmental annotations seem to only influence if a player should get a raise or not for each year they are in the league.
Senior spots
As I understand it a team can have 18-20 Senior players and ten off cap players. If a team isn’t going to play a senior player, then leaving his roster spot empty would free up one base salary. The Sounders basically carried 19 senior players last season, with Graham basically not playing. Leaving his spot open is an option though not necessarily ideal with the Sounders fixture congestion.
by Abbott Smith on Nov 29, 2011 9:55 PM PST up reply actions
I would say
that dropping Graham for that little bit of cap space would be as beneficial as anything, since he does not play. I do stand corrected as mentioned above he played in the Pumas game. So…that’s one competitive match for the entire 2011 season.
Now, I would not be saying this if he was a player that actually played in some capacity or another, or if he was young with upside. Seamon is a good example of that scenario. He did get lucky with some competetive matches last season, but for 2011 he was buried in the depth chart, but certainly has the potential to blow up as he gets into peak years.
by chrisperry1983 on Nov 29, 2011 10:24 PM PST up reply actions
pretty sure this will be a nonissue
Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.
by Jeremiah Oshan on Nov 29, 2011 10:45 PM PST via iPhone app up reply actions
There's actually a min salary cap hit
for not using those slots
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Actually they don't
Went back to the league site to read the roster rules again. They clearly state that a team can spread its cap hit across 18 players and that the minimum is only charged for unfilled slots below 18.
by Abbott Smith on Nov 30, 2011 11:53 AM PST up reply actions
right
slots 19 & 20 have a minimum cap hit
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
Read it again.
Only charged for unfilled slots below 18.
by Abbott Smith on Nov 30, 2011 3:01 PM PST up reply actions
In other words,
A team can elect to only have 16 or 17 senior roster players, but they will take a minimum salary hit for each empty slot up to 18. Teams may also elect to have 19 or 20 senior roster players, but if they do, these player’s salaries must fit under the salary cap. The 19th and 20th slots are team options but do not carry a cap penalty if a team elects not to fill them.
by Abbott Smith on Nov 30, 2011 3:06 PM PST up reply actions
It's not necessarily a one-for-one thing though.
Yeah, those guys don’t make much but the extra room means you might be able to spend more on an upgrade at another position rather than directly replacing them.
by Aaron Campeau on Nov 30, 2011 10:16 AM PST up reply actions
That's what I was getting at
And…looks like they declined both. $50k isn’t much, but when you put it in perspective, it’s about 2% of the cap. Kinda crazy thinking about it that way.
by chrisperry1983 on Nov 30, 2011 10:39 AM PST up reply actions
I like Noonan at his current salary
I think he brings a bit of calm composure that can be missing and good passing (let’s just not bet on him finishing anything, please). He was the one who slid in that spectacular pass to Fernandez for the goal in Monterrey, and I don’t think it was a fluke. He is definitely worth what he’s making IMO.
Is there any reason why Tetteh can't also be used as right back?
Inverted fullbacks aren’t unheard of, but it would probably change our shape and the way the right midfielder would play. I’m not suggesting he start, but would it be a good way to get Tetteh more use off the bench if needed if he could fill in on either side. But then again we don’t sub our fullbacks very often if I recall.
-Ben R.
by reesebw on Nov 29, 2011 8:26 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Estrada
personally, from what at saw in his (admittedly) small time with the first team seemed to play a decent right half. If roger can try RB, why not try moving back a younger, faster (estrada)?
They tried him there in training
And it may continue. I actually think the converted mid will be either Evans or Estrada
I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart
It would make sense for Evans if he has national team aspirations
I’m not sure if that’s really on his radar, or where it fits in his priorities, but it’s pretty clear that the USMNT is weaker at fullback than at CM.
I wouldn't be surprised if the coaches make the following proposal
We’re looking for a few good fullbacks and we’ll give anyone who wants to try it a fair chance. There are only so many minutes to go around. How badly do you want to see the pitch?
by Abbott Smith on Nov 30, 2011 4:32 PM PST up reply actions

by 

















