Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Win or Lose, Boston Celtics' New Big 3 Era A Success

Betting On Yourself

The Sounders Brain Trust is betting on their skills and abilities to complete the potential of the Eddie Johnson trade. (Photo by Otto Greule Jr/Getty Images)

What a difference a week makes. A week ago I wrote about the young heart of the Sounders and this week, two of those players are now Impactioneers. (Hey, it sounds better than Impacters.) Much has been said in the aftermath of The Trade. But one comment in particular struck a chord for me. Arbeck77 made a strong analogy about grading the trade using poker terminology. Any move in a poker game can be assessed through statistical analysis. But there is another side to professional poker that is equally apropos. In addition to the element of chance, poker is a psychological contest. At the end of the day, all players are subject to the same odds within poker. Yet not all poker players win consistently. Professional players know the odds, but play their opponents. A lowly pair of twos is a winning hand if your opponent has a busted flush and you know it. Reading your opponent is often more important than knowing the odds.

It all comes down to betting on yourself and not just the odds. Making it in the world of professional sports is a long shot. Lamar Neagle wasn't drafted and Mike Fucito was a 4th Round pick out of Harvard. Both men defied the odds and are now solid professional soccer players. Their professional life fulfills a childhood dream. How many of us would have bet our livelihood on their success three years ago reading the odds? These men bet on themselves and worked until their dream became reality. Part of our attachment to them as fans lies in this aspect of their success. I will miss seeing both of them on the pitch wearing Rave Green. But a part of me knows that they have a better chance to grow this year in Montreal. They are apt to get more time on the field playing in the roles that suit them. I hope they flourish.

One year ago Mauro Rosales bet on himself. He signed a contract to play in a league he didn't know and in spite of his pedigree, he agreed to play for the MLS league minimum salary. His performance earned him $42,000 and the MLS Newcomer of the Year award for 2011. It also earned him a DP caliber contract for 2012.

Betting on yourself as a player is easy to understand. Betting on yourself as a coach or sports administrator carries a different level of risk. Creating a tactical system or locating talent both depend on whether the talent actually performs. The MLS salary cap creates a situation akin to the odds in poker. All of the teams are subject to the same basic odds. Statistically this should result in no team building a dynasty. But dynastic aspirations are alive and well in the world of MLS because not all coaching staffs and front offices make intelligent decisions when they bet on themselves.

Sometimes the job is easy. A player like Steve Zakuani or Andrew Wenger is a relatively safe pick as a first round draft choice. Using your spot in the allocation order to bring in Kasey Keller to finish his career in front of his hometown fans constitutes a reasonably sure bet. But administrators who only get the easy decisions right do not succeed overall. They are paid to make the tricky decisions and they must rely on more than just the odds. They are paid to see the gems that everyone else thinks are merely coprolites.

Star-divide

The Sounders' Front Office and Coaching staff have grown to trust each other. They are a team within the team. Just as Mauro Rosales can feather a pass to where Fredy Montero will be without looking; Adrian Hanauer, Sigi Schmid and Chris Henderson have learned to rely upon each other. Chris Henderson, Dave Tenney and Ezra Hendrickson have a personal history with Eddie Johnson. They convinced the rest of the Sounders' management team that betting on Eddie Johnson resurrecting his career in Seattle is a sound investment. They didn't bet on the odds. The odds state that the cost of this trade versus its reward is a long shot at best. They bet on themselves and their skills as a coaching unit. They see something in Eddie Johnson at this unique point in his career that they believe gives them an edge that no one else possesses. They think they have spotted a 'tell'.

Odds are funny thing in sports. It's hard to look inside another person's head and heart. Eddie Johnson went to Europe with high expectations and they didn't pan out. He spent time away from his wife and child. He spent time away from the cultural foundation that he grew up in. Many players thrive within similar scenarios but some flounder. The Sounders Brain Trust thinks that there is a soccer player lurking inside of Eddie Johnson that will benefit their team and that they have the keys that can unlock his potential. They have put up the collateral of their reputation and their livelihoods while betting on their skills.

It's easy to sit in the stands or the comfort of our homes and shake our heads in wonder at the statistics of this trade. But the statistics speak of the past, not the future. Past performance never includes tomorrow. I don't watch sports to wallow in statistics. I watch sports to see the drama of people trying to realize their dreams as a unit.

I don't have a crystal ball that tells me how this will play out. But I do know that I watch the Sounders because I like the confidence and skills that these men possess. If they fail, they will not fail out of timidity. I am not interested in the drama of mediocrity. I want to see men striving to accomplish the things that other men say are impossibly stupid. I want a front office that is willing to tilt at windmills. I am a Sounder and this team of men speaks to my heart.

Comment 290 comments  |  11 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Great post

This is exactly what I (and many others) needed to read. It’s a great prism through which to view the trade, and a great attitude to approach the season with.

by Mike_Standish on Feb 22, 2012 7:23 AM PST reply actions  

Blind faith

I think that’s what you’re saying here right? Have faith in Sigi and Chris? I think the better poker analogy is we were holding two pair but went all in on hopes of hitting a flush on the river. I just hope we get our card.

My concern with this trade is that our goal is to add a strike partner for Montero. To me that guy has to be a blue collar work horse who’s going to work like crazy away from the ball to put pressure on the opposing CB’s. We already have a diva (Montero) who only wants to work with the ball at his feet, my fear is we just got a similar player, not sure how well that will work. Hope I’m wrong.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 7:51 AM PST reply actions  

Not saying I don't agree

I think that is a danger. But it’s a good problem to have to try and worry about. I think you always want to trade up for better problems than the ones you have – we traded up from being unsure whether there was more than one consistently quality 2nd striker on the team to having a potentially great 2nd striker who needs some work and might not fit the on-field chemistry. I think that’s a better problem to have and I believe the staff and players would work to overcome it if it becomes a problem.

To say it another way, not to harp on this, but, for example, when the Galaxy got Buddle back or VWFC got Le Toux, no one (or no one I heard) was worried about if these guys would fit the team chemistry/work with the other forward(s). They were just pumped they got another talented forward.

by Nevtelen on Feb 22, 2012 8:09 AM PST up reply actions  

Buddle and LeToux

Did they give up anyone to get those guys? I though VWFC gave allocation money for Le Toux, did LA give anything for Buddle? Kind of different scenario I thought. If we got EJ from the allocation draft I would be super pumped. But I really liked Fucito and thought he was going to break out soon, loved his skillset, and Neagle just had a knack for scoring goals.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 8:19 AM PST up reply actions  

What they gave up...

Whitecaps traded allocation and Galaxy didn’t have to give up anything for Buddle. That said, it’s somewhat irrelevant as they improved, and that’s what the Sounders were reacting to (assuming you believe it was a reaction and not something they would have done anyway).

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 22, 2012 8:39 AM PST up reply actions  

The reason...

I would think the reason would be less about reaction and more about winning MLS Cup. I think the Sounders think (or know) they need to in order to keep the fans happy, when in fact that may not be true. Everyone says they have to do this or that at the beg. of the season in order to be successful, but I think what we’ve accomplished the last 3 years has been better than MOST teams. 1 MLS cup with nothing else would actually seem worse to me than what we’ve done as we continually compete in other competitions like CONCACAF and USOC. I think the FO can keep the fan base happy by scoring goals and keeping in other tourney’s as well as making the playoffs….even without winning it all (considering only 1 team can win MLS Cup each year, so 18 other teams are going to be disappointed no matter what).

by Toxtr3m34u on Feb 22, 2012 11:12 AM PST up reply actions  

This is a good point

I hope this trade wasn’t an overreaction to our MLS playoff failures. As a fan I think they’re doing great – we just haven’t been hot at the right time, losing Mauro was a huge blow last year, I don’t put that on the FO, they’ve done a great job adding depth and this offseason has shown that they will continue to find depth and have no problem getting the best talent top to bottom on the roster even if it means massive player cuts. I hope this trade fits in with what they’re doing and isn’t a reaction to the playoff losses.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 11:24 AM PST up reply actions  

Your point about winning the Cup

Maybe you meant this but I don’t believe we need to out-and-out win the Cup to keep everyone happy, we just have to be in with a fighting chance. As you say, only one team wins it annually and knockout tournaments are typically littered with upsets. We needed a change/upgrade not because we didn’t win the Cup but because we were far from winning the Cup: we got beat fairly by RSL, who got beat fairly in the next round. I know, you can’t apply the transitive theory directly but we clearly weren’t the favorites to win the whole enchilada. (And I’ll take heat for this but the USOC is a bit devalued to me because the intensity doesn’t kick in until very late, with many teams choosing to focus on other competitions instead.)

Again, I do think we’ve done great in our brief existence. The move seems to be a response that acknowledges we can do better. Per se.

by CityDrew on Feb 22, 2012 1:08 PM PST up reply actions  

Not blind faith

There’s a difference between betting based on the odds and betting based on your skill at doing your job. It’s OK for fans to evaluate this trade from a statistical perspective and be skeptical. But Chris Henderson has to approach a deal like this with more than just stats. He has to look at the player, the Sounders’s needs and the Sounders’ system and evaluate whether making the deal makes sense from his perspective based on his knowledge and skill.

Rather than viewing this article as a statement that fan’s should have blind faith, think of it as an attempt to understand the trade from the perspective of a professional soccer technical director. He’s betting on more than just odds. He’s betting on the entire professional skill set of the Sounders’ organization.

by Abbott Smith on Feb 22, 2012 8:25 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I understand what you're saying

And I appreciate you pointing out that the Sounders organization has the ability to utilize players and their talents and get the best out of them. My concern is that it hasn’t always worked out (e.g. Ljundberg and Nkufo). And as I pointed out above I really thought Fucito was coming into his own. It’s not that I’m entirely upset that they were traded it’s that if we were going to trade them I would rather see a guy come in who’s a bit less of a gamble. But maybe there were no other players available. I will be rooting for EJ to come back to form but reading that Sigi thinks he’s not fit enough to play against Santos just reinforces my concerns.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 8:38 AM PST up reply actions  

Thanks, I alway hate when peopple say those did not work out

Especially Ljunberg, He was the reason why the Sounders did as well as he did that first year. He was the best player down the stretch. He was also blamed for the inconsistency of Montero back then. But, we all found out Montero is a streaky player who when he is on is special. But, he does go through scoring droughts.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 10:21 AM PST up reply actions  

Ljungberg and Nkufo

People keep saying those deals didn’t work out but the tend to forget that they kinda did. Imagine where the Sounders would have been in Year 1 w/o Ljungberg. Also keep in mind that the Sounders started like 10-0-0 with him. That both ended bad does not mean they were bad moves.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 22, 2012 8:49 AM PST up reply actions   2 recs

Completely agree

Some people seem to think that for a deal to be a good deal the player has to become a lifetime Sounder and be carried off the field on the shoulders of their teammates in their last game with the team. Ljungberg and Nkufo helped the team in the time they were here then were cut loose when no longer contributing, at no cost to the team. Those are wins in my book.

"The fans are excited. And the stadium, well, it ignites with explosion."

by DarthGreedo on Feb 22, 2012 8:52 AM PST up reply actions  

"At no cost to the team"

Those guys we signed as DP’s did not trade any up and comers for them. This is different.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 8:58 AM PST up reply actions  

so why are you comparing them, then?

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 22, 2012 8:59 AM PST up reply actions  

As per above post

Mr. Smith was pointing out that the gamble is that we can throw a guy into this organization and he will improve and fit in and his talent will re-emerge. I was just pointing out that not all guys the Sounders have added have always fit in as well as maybe Rosales or Alonso. But apparently everyone disagree’s with me on that. And I was saying that at least those other guys (good or no good) did not cost us two young talented players. All I’m saying is if EJ has a Nkufo or Ljundberg like career here I will be disappointed.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 9:08 AM PST up reply actions  

I understand your point

But I’m not sure if you’re making like for like comparisonis between Ljunberg/Nkufo and EJ. I believe Johnson will fit in here because, quite frankly, he has to fit in. I’d like to think that being loaned out and unemployed would have humbled him and shown him to not take things for granted whereas FL and BN were here for their swan song.

@Emerald_Sounder

by Disco_Stew on Feb 22, 2012 9:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Also, EJ knows MLS, whereas FL and BN didn't seem to know what they were getting into

I think I see the point that atu81 is making, but FL and BN are loaded examples.

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 9:49 AM PST up reply actions  

I hear what you're saying

But EJ has been humbled for 4 years now and it hasn’t forced him to fit in anywhere else. I sure hope you’re right though.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 10:43 AM PST up reply actions  

"I believe Johnson will fit in here because, quite frankly, he has to fit in"

This is a classic statement of the “necessary is possible” fallacy. We need Johnson to fit in, and Johnson needs to fit in, but whether in actual fact it will happen remains to be seen.

And it’s not necessarily about a lack of will, or good intentions or anything like that. All parties involved might try their hardest, but it could still not work out, despite everyone wanting and needing it to.

by CarlosT on Feb 22, 2012 11:15 AM PST up reply actions  

It's more involved than that

I should have included that for the first time in a while he is in a familiar setting (the United States) and with familiar people (Henderson, Tenney, Ezra) in addition to being four years older that leads me to believe he will fit in; meaning he wont be locker room cancer.

I understand the pessimism but I think when everything is taken into consideration it’s overblown.

@Emerald_Sounder

by Disco_Stew on Feb 22, 2012 11:21 AM PST up reply actions  

All true, but it still doesn't mean it will be guaranteed to happen

It makes it more likely, but not guaranteed.

I’m more concerned about whether he’ll score goals, personally. His record over the past few years hasn’t been encouraging.

by CarlosT on Feb 22, 2012 11:26 AM PST up reply actions  

I thought that was the topic of the article was educated guessing

I’m not saying it a guarantee, but that when taking everything into consideration I think it’s more likely he’ll be a “team guy” than a jackass.

Looking at Mauro’s stats from 2007-2010 I would have had no clue he could’ve come here and played the way he did. In short: stranger things have happened. Call me optimistic, I guess.

@Emerald_Sounder

by Disco_Stew on Feb 22, 2012 11:30 AM PST up reply actions  

The Sounders traded two young players

But, talented is a relative word. If you make it in MLS, you are by definition talented. But, neither of them are unreplaceable. The closest think that Fucito reminds me of is former Mariner Willie Bloomquist. Fan favorite that his fandom outweighs his production.

Sigi has always tried to replace him with N’Kufo, White, Ochoa and now Johnson. Sigi made a point of saying that teams will have to respect Johnson and open it up more for Montero now. Teams never had to worry about Fucito.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 9:47 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

it was a 3-0-0 start

And Ljungberg didn’t play the first game, and was a late sub in the second. (He started the third in T.O. and scored).

I recall this as I remember what a shock it was when Kansas City scored on us in the fourth game…before that I not only honestly thought we were going to win every game, but I also thought we’d do it easily and never get scored on. I’ve learned a lot since then. :)

by PeterJH on Feb 22, 2012 10:32 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I think he was referencing

Kufo’s beginning. And he’s pretty close something like 11 unbeaten in a row.

by python6114 on Feb 22, 2012 11:46 AM PST via mobile up reply actions  

Less of a gamble

Part of the reason the Sounders were able to acquire EJ was that he’s only making $100K this year. If he was less of a gamble, he’d have gotten a bigger contract and we couldn’t afford to fit him under the cap. Also, his low salary and one-year contract means that while it may be a talent gamble, it’s not much of a roster gamble. If he doesn’t work out, we shouldn’t really be hindered in finding a replacement.

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 9:47 AM PST up reply actions  

Faith and Reason

I would only add that, much like poker, this move could completely backfire and yet it would still have been the right play.

As much as I like Fucito as a player, our hopes for him were still in his continued development. I loved his skill set but he has never done what EJ has in this league or any other. Maybe he will be that guy, maybe not.

With EJ in the fold we upgraded our top-line talent. Considering our goals this year I think it was the right play whether it turns out or not.

Sometimes you don’t draw the right card no matter the odds.

by brokejumper on Feb 22, 2012 8:40 AM PST via mobile up reply actions  

Upgraded our top-line talent? Are you sure?

The guy hasn’t scored a goal since 2009-2010, is he above and beyond talent level of Fucito right now? Puebla didn’t even want him and claimed he wasn’t in shape, Sigi is already saying he’s not in shape. Is he faster and does he work harder than Fucito? I will assume he is better in the air then Fucito but we traded a guy who seems to be getting better for a guy who seems to be getting worse.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 8:57 AM PST up reply actions  

Not sure what happened there

Somehow didn’t record my entire post – was trying to point out that Fucito scored 11 goals in all competitions last year, EJ scored 0, and only scored 5 the year before. Seems like Fucito is just getting better while EJ is getting worse. Hope that changes fast. Not to mention Puebla thought he wasn’t fit and now Sigi is saying he isn’t fit.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 9:01 AM PST up reply actions  

What all competitions are you looking at?

Fucito scored six goals in all comps last year.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 22, 2012 9:03 AM PST up reply actions  

I'm sorry - meant Neagle and Fucito scored 11

That’s what happens when you have to re-type a post.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 9:09 AM PST up reply actions  

true...but would it change the evaluation if ...

EJ underperforms and turns in a season roughly equal to what Fucito does in Montreal, but Sivebæk scores 12 on the wing during minutes that were Neagle last year? In moving Neagle, we make room for guys like Sivebæk. This trade does more than just bring in EJ up top…the gamble also involves the staff’s believe that they have found productive options on the wing that are at least acceptable…maybe preferable…to Neagle. It’s hard to say without being in the heads of the decision makers.

by exSlacker on Feb 22, 2012 9:16 AM PST up reply actions  

I totally agree

That is one of the main reason’s I’m ok with this gamble because I get the feeling that Sivabaek, Cato, Tettah, Ochoa and maybe Estrada all get a chance to show what they can do now and we might really be surprised which is why they were ok with letting those two go. But I still think it’s a huge gamble, we know what we had in Fucito and Neagle, and we know they might have had a chance to break out this season, we don’t know what we have in EJ and we hope that he can return to form from 5 years ago, that is a lot of hope.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 9:26 AM PST up reply actions  

We think we know what we had in Fucito and Neagle

I like both players, and yes, as Sounders fans we have more information about those two players than we have about Eddie Johnson, but no player is a sure thing to improve or even maintain their level of performance. It’s possible those two each just had the best season of their career. I’m not saying it’s likely, but there were risks associated with keeping them just like there are risks associated with trading them away. To some degree, I feel that trade naysayers are overstating the certainty with which Neagle and Fucito will improve. They might not.

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 9:33 AM PST up reply actions  

Sell high

Neagle has had a half a good year. Actually, one outstanding game and several other good ones. His value is high right now. But, he is not a sure thing to have a good career.

Do not forget, that the marginal cost of victory is higher the further up the table you go.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 9:58 AM PST up reply actions  

I think that sells Neagle short a bit

He had a great year with the Battery in 2010 and he had a good short spell in Finland. Still not a sure thing for a good career in MLS, though.

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 11:31 AM PST up reply actions  

True, but I was spefically talking about MLS

Not all players that come from a different league will have success in MLS. He has done well in MLS, but the sample size is very small is all I was saying.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 11:47 AM PST up reply actions  

Great point about Sivebaek and others

I don’t think this trade would happen if the front office didn’t think had adequate replacements already on the roster. Sivebaek almost definitely had shown enough to get ahead of Neagle on the Roster and Additions like Cato and the draft pick i can’t remember the name of right now, as well as Estrada’s great preseason made Fucito’s loss less pronounced.

"The fans are excited. And the stadium, well, it ignites with explosion."

by DarthGreedo on Feb 22, 2012 9:35 AM PST up reply actions  

on EJ's fitness

Johnson convincingly (in my opinion) tells a different story about his level of fitness when he was with Puebla. And unless I missed it, Sigi didn’t say he wasn’t fit to play against Santos, i believe the quote was more along the lines of “fans shouldn’t expect him to play 90 min. In these
matches”

by GnomeJake on Feb 22, 2012 9:34 AM PST via iPhone app up reply actions  

A story that is even more convincing to me in light of Mauro’s very similar situation last year. It seems like that’s the baseline story that Mexican clubs use if they decide not to hold onto a player. “Oh yeah, he failed a physical, sure why not?” Doesn’t mean that’s what happened, but it does lend more credence to EJ’s version of things.

Boo! Tomorrow AM. I want all things now!

by Perrinbar on Feb 22, 2012 9:58 AM PST up reply actions  

Actually, it's somewhat LESS convincing to me...

It sounds more like “people are going to complain about this, so we’ll just hold up Rosales’s experience as an example, and imply that it happens all the time.”

Personally, I think it less likely that it is SOP in Mexico, and more likely that it happened once in El Lince’s case, but that EJ really did come in out of shape. The fact that he had to be pulled early in his first exhibition match due to a hamstring injury, however minor, only reinforces my suspicions.

by regnaD kciN on Feb 22, 2012 1:05 PM PST up reply actions  

I read this more as a precautionary move than an injury, they don't want him to push too hard too fast

So hard to tell when most of our information comes via bits and blurts.
Brad Evans said EJ looked sharp so far, but believe what you want.

Also the difference between being 90 minute fit and out of shape is much greater than being in shape but not in 90 minute fitness level shape.

Ochoa’s fitness level concerns me considering he was told in the off season to step it up and recent comments from Sigi were saying he isn’t there yet.

As for SOP in Mexico, the story I heard from EJ seems more plausible than the one from the team, time will tell about EJ’s fitness level and effort to reach said fitness level.

by chrisso on Feb 22, 2012 2:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Hamstring injury = not in shape

Sorry, but to me this is not a good sign, means he went full speed but was not fit enough to do so. Once you pull a hammy you continue to re-pull it until you take a few weeks off and really do some conditioning. They wouldn’t pull him unless it bothered him.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 2:33 PM PST up reply actions  

He didn't pull his hamstring.

it was probably just a cramp that went away. He said he could have continued playing but they wanted to be cautious.

by agtk on Feb 22, 2012 2:38 PM PST up reply actions  

A great read - well-said!

Definitely true that this team won’t fail based on timidity.

by Nevtelen on Feb 22, 2012 8:04 AM PST reply actions  

Fantastic writing.

Great Piece.

"The fans are excited. And the stadium, well, it ignites with explosion."

by DarthGreedo on Feb 22, 2012 8:05 AM PST reply actions  

Impactians?

No, I guess that sounds like “impactions” when said out loud. Just a bad name all around. They’re Quebecois, so maybe Impactois?

by foolsgambit on Feb 22, 2012 12:33 PM PST via Android app up reply actions  

I like this

Sounds like Decepticons. Although I would consider Colorado the Decepticons of MLS, it is fitting too for Montreal, since they are Canadian and all.

by chrisperry1983 on Feb 22, 2012 2:06 PM PST up reply actions  

Seeing the goods

1. Ditto on the praise for this article. Well done.

2. The technical staff had a long look at EJ prior to making this deal. They know what kind of shape he is in and they, presumably, sat down and talked to the guy. I think they have done their due diligence and have a good idea as to what to expect from this guy. We are basing impressions on media reports and stat lines. I am hoping the FO is right on this one.

3. I am a sucker for redemption in sport. I would love nothing better than EJ putting in a bunch of goals and coming back out of the soccer wilderness. As a 28 year old, this is realistically his last chance. I would love to see him take advantage.

by @Thomas513 on Feb 22, 2012 9:07 AM PST reply actions  

Nice Article

I couldn’t help but think of Schneider and Carroll. Similar philosophy – willingness to go after players who fit their style and plan, regardless of whether others think it’s a reach. Similar criticisms as well – giving too much to get certain guys. More to be written on both stories.

by seabryan on Feb 22, 2012 9:11 AM PST reply actions  

But at what cost?

Signing Brandon Browner or drafting a guy slightly differnet then trading something of value (Fucito and Neagle) for a bit of an unknown. If this reminds me of anything PC and Shneider has done it is moving back and trading a 3rd round pick for Charlie Whitehurst – because they saw something in him that the Chargers didn’t. That didn’t quite pan out now did it? I would be more excited if we traded two 1st round draft picks for EJ then trading two guys who we know can play and will contribute.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 9:20 AM PST up reply actions  

NFL and MLS in different situations

The overall global pool of NFL-level talent is much smaller than the overall global pool of MLS-level talent. Fucito and Neagle are both good players, but are they special players? Fucito was the 46th pick in the draft and Neagle was an undrafted trialist. Sure, they turned out to be better than a typical 46th pick or miscellaneous trialist, but the Sounders are going to have plenty of opportunities to replace their expected future contributions if the current roster doesn’t pan out.

The MLS talent pool is more like college football—where there are hundreds of capable players out there you’ve never heard of—than it is like the NFL, where it can be really difficult to replace a quality player that you’ve lost.

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 9:41 AM PST up reply actions  

Not so sure I agree with that

Finding guys like Mauro for dirt cheap is hard to do in MLS just like finding Brandon Browner for dirt cheap is hard to do in NFL. There are plenty of UDFA’s (Tony Romo, Arian Foster) that do well in the NFL if teams are willing to dig a little. There may be more guys available in MLS but you generally have to pay a little if you want a really good player (same as NFL), Neagle and Fucito were cheap and talented, and to have great depth like we’ve had you need guys like that, they are not a dime a dozen.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 10:04 AM PST up reply actions  

Ok that is weird, it blanked out my post and posted the header twice

I don’t agree with that because I don’t believe cheap talent is a dime a dozen in MLS, it is hard to find Mauro’s for dirt cheap just like it’s hard to find Brandon Browners for dirt cheap, in the NFL it is hard to find 7th rounders or UDFA’s just like you wouldn’t expect a 4th rounder(Fucito) or Neagle to do well, but if you do find them you’re doing great. (Arian Foster, Tony Romo, Doug Baldwin) You can find replacements in MLS but it will cost you, finding two guys with Fucito and Neagle’s talent for as cheap as they were will be hard to do.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 10:11 AM PST up reply actions  

So you are comparing Neagle and Fucito

to a possible MLS starting 11 player and and NFL Pro Bowler? Yes, those are hard to find.

Neither Fucito or Neagle are in that category.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 10:17 AM PST up reply actions  

Not at all

I am comparing Rosales to Browner – I would compare Neagle and Fucito to Doug Baldwin and Richard Sherman, would you trade those two for a 27 year old veteran who hasn’t made the pro bowl in say 3 or 4 seasons? No one expected them to do anything this year just like no one expected Fucito or Neagle to do anything last year.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 10:32 AM PST up reply actions  

Sure, finding guys like Mauro is hard

Mauro is a DP-level talent. We’re not talking about losing DP-level talent here, though. At least, I find it a stretch to think that Fucito or Neagle are particularly close to being DP-level quality. Never say never, of course, but they’ve got some proving to do to get to that point.

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 11:35 AM PST up reply actions  

Totally agree

People act like both are unreplaceable. Losing Friberg over the offseason was a bigger loss than both of these players in my opinion and the Sounders got little for him. They didn’t even do anything to replace him besides drafting Rose.

The Sounders have shown a great ability to replace and/or develop players. They will do the same with Neagle and Fucito, if they haven’t already.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 10:06 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't think anyone is acting that way

I think people are acting like Johnson is a guy who’s score seven goals since 2008, and for that we’ve given up two decent players. That seems like a bad trade.

by CarlosT on Feb 22, 2012 11:19 AM PST up reply actions  

I don't think anyone is acting like they are unreplaceable...

…but I do think that some people are reacting as though we traded away, say, Jesus Montero and Michael Pineda for Johan Santana. In baseball, having those young, cost-controlled players is a huge advantage because you can’t just go shopping around the globe to find replacements. In MLS, it’s not as hard to find a couple of decent players on the cheap (as compared to, say, MLB or the NFL or the NBA.)

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 11:43 AM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, I don't follow baseball at all and I have no idea who those guys are

So that analogy means nothing at all to me. But I think what the people who don’t like this trade aren’t liking is Johnson’s long dry spell. If he’d been consistently scoring, say 8-10 goals a season wherever he played, then I think everyone would be much more comfortable that this would be a good deal. Him not having scored eight goals total since 2007 is worrying.

To use a non-sports analogy, it’s not necessarily that you can’t replace the two bikes that you traded away. It’s that you might have traded them away for a crappy, broken-down one that will never ride like it did five years ago, no matter how much work you put into it.

by CarlosT on Feb 22, 2012 5:51 PM PST up reply actions  

Yes - cost is the main criticism both organizations get

And I agree, unfortunately, that the Whitehurst deal might be the closest analogy. Although this move looks more like a “final piece of the puzzle” move (i.e., more like the Slocumb deal, to give another failed example).

But to Abbott’s point, the losing bets don’t prove the point. A bet is a bet – some work out, some don’t. Ideally you give a little and get a lot. Sometimes you give a lot to get a lot. His point is that the poker players who can exert more control over the game – make it something more than a pure game of chance – can win. Both our football organizations think they can do that, and are willing to make some bigger bets on it.

by seabryan on Feb 22, 2012 9:47 AM PST up reply actions  

Yuck, don't bring Slocumb into this

This actually is eerily just like that deal, giving away two great young talents for a veteran that hasn’t been good in hopes he’ll return to some previous form. But at least I have to agree with Mr. Smith that the Sounders do more with their players which is part of the gamble, as we know the M’s just turn players into crap.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 10:08 AM PST up reply actions  

Sorry about that!

Hated to open that old wound.

by seabryan on Feb 22, 2012 10:12 AM PST up reply actions  

Whitehurst?

Don’t see the comparison. Whitehurst had never done anything in the NFL. Johnson has, with all the caveats everyone has mentioned.

EJ is a reclamation project of a former star, not hoping someone else’s scrub pays off.

by brokejumper on Feb 22, 2012 12:35 PM PST via mobile up reply actions  

I've heard a lot of "poison in the locker room" talk re: EJ...

But I’m inclined to think that it’s really overblown. I base this on a few things. First off, our staff has some pretty extensive experience with him…Chris Henderson coached him and Dave Tenney was his fitness guru in KC. Ezra actually played with him in Dallas (during the stint where he was supposedly a problem child). Yet, these three guys all seem to be on-board with, if not the impetus behind, making this move. In addition, you see DeMarcus Beasley actively advocating for an EJ move to Puebla. Obviously, that ended in disaster…but not because of Beasley. And it says to me that he found EJ to be a teammate he wanted around. You also see lots of tweets from national team guys wishing him luck. Sure, it’s just a tweet…but how many guys were actively saying good luck when Milton Bradley was shipped from the Cubs to the Ms?

by exSlacker on Feb 22, 2012 9:25 AM PST reply actions  

I try to not worry about locker room stuff

Winning almost always makes everyone happy. If the majority of the team is filled with “good” teammates and the team is winning chemistry will develop. Not saying we should fill the team with Bengals castoffs but one or two sour grapes won’t hurt if they are good enough to contribute.

"The fans are excited. And the stadium, well, it ignites with explosion."

by DarthGreedo on Feb 22, 2012 9:38 AM PST up reply actions  

I agree

the Sounders have strong leadership. Just like Randy Moss got in line when he joined the NE Patriots, if Johnson was a problem, he will not be in Seattle.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 10:10 AM PST up reply actions  

locker room stuff

was alleviated with removal of montano and inclusion of rosales. More of the latter then the former, but still both have contributed

by Realio on Feb 22, 2012 12:12 PM PST up reply actions  

I always got the impression immaturity was Johnson's problem rather than being a jerk

Hopefully his travels around Europe have helped mature him since his last cycle through MLS.

by Dizzo on Feb 22, 2012 9:45 AM PST up reply actions  

Yep...nothing like a few humbling years...

to take the ass out of Grown-ass Man! If you’re reading EJ, I hope you have a good sense of humor and a thick skin! Welcome to the Sounders.

by exSlacker on Feb 22, 2012 11:11 AM PST up reply actions  

mobile rec

I am not a Supporter | I am not a Fan | I am a Sounder
Sounder At Heart | Follow Dave on Twitter @bedirthan

by Dave Clark on Feb 22, 2012 11:56 AM PST via Android app up reply actions  

Print it now.

It’s going to happen.

He’s got the talent, the athleticism, the support, and the will. Plus, he’s doing it on the cheap. This was a good thing for the team.

by silver00 on Feb 22, 2012 2:08 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm kinda starting to wonder about Fernandez's future with the club

I thought he signed a two year deal when he came. So, he would be free this summer. I don’t really think he has been happy here. Nor do you hear about contract extension talks. Sivaebak doesn’t seem to be the kind of player to sit on the bench all year watching people in front of him. Sigi has always had a short leash on Fernandez and not always been kind to him in the post game conference.

All this says to me, that Fernandez is gone at the summer break.

To tie this back to the EJ trade. Maybe this isn’t as big a gamble as everyone is thinking. If Fucito wasn’t going to be the long term answer, we trade him for a roll of the dice on EJ. If that doesn’t work, summer transfer window opens early and we might have space clearing up.

by blakec on Feb 22, 2012 9:50 AM PST reply actions  

I hope your theory is wrong, but it has a ring of truth

Fernandez’ name barely comes up when Sigi & co talk about training and plans for this season. They clearly have not made the move of Flaco to CM, which would have been a commitment to the future.

Trading some depth at LW might be a counter-signal, but with Z and Sive waiting in the wings, can’t read much there either.

I hope we get some value in a transfer and use the DP slot well, if you’re right. Hate to lost the chemistry that Rosales-Montero-Fernandez showed last year. Seemed like the high point of our attack when those 3 had it going.

by seabryan on Feb 22, 2012 11:13 AM PST up reply actions  

Hasn't there been some indication that Flaco would rather stay out wide?

While he could be a successful CM in MLS, it might be better for his career path to keep getting time as an outside mid.

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 11:47 AM PST up reply actions  

Fernandez is signed through this year

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 22, 2012 11:19 AM PST up reply actions  

DP status....

It’ll be good for him to no longer be DP status and just be another Sounder again after the contract is over…..we can resign him without making him a DP at that point correct?

by Toxtr3m34u on Feb 22, 2012 11:22 AM PST up reply actions  

Really?

He got paid….$366,667 last year….meaning JUST above the DP level….and I would think a large part of this was transfer related….Just thinking, is he worth that much more than Zak @ 188k?

by Toxtr3m34u on Feb 22, 2012 11:31 AM PST up reply actions  

Maybe not...

I believe I was reading it wrong….If $367 is guaranteed, they could buy down under DP level, but I think the $367k is not including transfer fee.

by Toxtr3m34u on Feb 22, 2012 11:32 AM PST up reply actions  

If Rosales and Montero get DP money, Flaco probably does too

Plus, he should have options in leagues that pay more $, which was less of an issue with the Rosales contract.

His pedigree with the Uruguayan natl team has got to help too – I would bet that he has the highest world market value of any current Sounder, but you could certainly argue that Fredy is on par.

by seabryan on Feb 22, 2012 11:53 AM PST up reply actions  

That is just his wages.

The transfer fee takes him far above that. He will definitely want a raise to re-sign (all good players do, or they can try free agency).

by Iam333 on Feb 22, 2012 1:34 PM PST via Android app up reply actions  

And wouldn't we want to trade him

before his contract was up, if we could? A transfer fee could help us with the cap, for a while.

by foolsgambit on Feb 22, 2012 12:47 PM PST via Android app up reply actions  

I have a hard time believing the Sounders will allow him to leave on a free.

Even if there’s a handshake agreement that the team will move them if they can, I’d guess he signs a new contract before this one is up.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 12:48 PM PST up reply actions  

All this concern about losing depth is way overblown

I just can’t buy the arguement that the Sounders are less deep than they were a week ago. Fucito had all of two goals in MLS last season. Neagle was better, with five, but as a wide midfielder he has a set of skills that are easily replaceable. Sivebaek is at least his equal, if not a better player already. Zakuani will return in the summer. Much of Neagle’s value is a sentimental attachment to the local kid made good. If anything, they are better balanced by making room for young players like Cato, Estrada, Seamon, Rose and possibly even Caskey.

And as a long-time coach, I disagree with what seems to be an accepted fact – that Fucito’s work rate made him a good forward. I don’t know how many times I’ve seen him run out of good positions, drag defenders into spaces that clog other’s runs or passing lanes – lots of running that does nothing to help the team. I think Johnson’s international experience can rectify much of that and serve as a better cohort to Montero, Rosales and Fernandez.

by Martin Blank on Feb 22, 2012 9:59 AM PST reply actions  

I do think that the depth is not as deep as a week ago

However, it is stronger than it was a season ago. Sivebaek and Zakuani more than make up for Neagle. Johnson makes up for Fucito.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 10:13 AM PST up reply actions  

Don't forget

This clears up time and space for Estrada and Babayele Sodade.

by blakec on Feb 22, 2012 7:51 PM PST up reply actions  

I think this is the main argument

If you think Fucito sucked then this was a great gamble. I really like Fucito and question whether EJ is an instant upgrade to him at the other striker spot. I thought he made great runs and kept the pressure on the CB’s so well that it gave Montero space to work, he also had a rocket left foot shot that was quite accurate, he had a good amounts of shots on target that were blocked by defenders or saved. He was instant energy, he created red cards for opponents, and he was strong and could hold the ball up against defenders due to his low center of gravity and balance. I do not remember many games where he ran defenders into spaces and clogged things up for others and I have watched all but maybe two games in the last two season out of all competitions. So I tend to disagree, but that is just my opinion, maybe I am way off on that. On the flip side I do not know a lot about EJ other than his career has declined over the past 4 years. I hope he’s a beast.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 10:22 AM PST up reply actions  

Agreed on Fucito

People who look at the MLS goals and point to that as why Fucito wasn’t very good simply didn’t watch the games well enough to see that the production was there, it just won’t always show up in the box score. Assuming he starts in Montreal, he could outscore Montero this season and I wouldn’t be surprised.

by BDobbs on Feb 22, 2012 10:25 AM PST up reply actions  

Here are the forwards listed on the Montreal roster

Justin Braun
Mike Fucito
Carl Hayworth
Evan James
Steven Miller
Miguel Montano

As far as I can tell Hayworth, James and Miller are all recently drafted rookies. Montano couldn’t break past Fucito for reserve league games here in Seattle. I think there’s a very high probability that Fucito is starting with Justin Braun baring some unforeseen injuries.

by Dizzo on Feb 22, 2012 10:58 AM PST up reply actions  

Didn't realize they had Braun

Chivas traded him and another guy for James Riley and allocation money? Wish we could have done that deal. 6-3 young forward with 9 goals and 3 asst last year, that sounds like a good pairing with Montero.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 11:11 AM PST up reply actions  

Yes.

I would have given up Fucito and Neagle for that most likely.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 11:13 AM PST up reply actions  

Disagree.

Not to be contrary, but I don’t think JB is nearly the caliber that EJ is.

by silver00 on Feb 22, 2012 2:13 PM PST up reply actions  

They are the forwards on February 22nd. That doesn't mean they will be the forwards when the season begins

That doesn’t mean they will be the forwards on the roster midseason. That does not mean they will be the forwards on the roster to begin next season.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 11:22 AM PST up reply actions  

I think Sigi trading away Fucito trumps your starting him

It think the fact that Sigi and the front office has acquired N’Kufo, White, Ochoa and Johnson to pair with Montero says he agrees with me.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 11:24 AM PST up reply actions  

Neither one of you have any idea what Sigi thinks other than what he's said in the media

which is basically “Fucito is a good player but we think Johnson is better.”

It’s possible for a player to be traded by someone that thinks they’re good, and it’s possible for a coach to start a player he doesn’t think is good.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 11:34 AM PST up reply actions  

What point are you trying to make besides stating the obvious?

I really don’t understand how these points helps your argument.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 11:39 AM PST up reply actions  

I'm not making an argument.

I was trying to tell you in a tactful manner that the argument you were having was a pointless one.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 12:06 PM PST up reply actions  

No it isn't, because there is no way for either of you to make the point you are trying to claim.

You’re playing the “no I’M mom’s favorite!” game, and it’s petty and counterproductive.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 12:52 PM PST up reply actions  

| Recessionproof since 2009 | Win all the trophies! | You will surely get the Karkand |

by 253Sounder on Feb 22, 2012 12:54 PM PST up reply actions   2 recs

I actually did make my point

He made his point as well. You have made a point. Whether we agree is in question, but that does not mean that any of our arguments are pointless. I am sure that there are other readers that have agreed with his, yours or my point.

So again, you are incorrect.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 1:07 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

If you listen to Sigi, he says that defenders will have to respect Johnson

and he intimated that was not true before. Why do you think they have been trying to find a partner for Montero constantly?

The talent on the team opened up space for Fucito, Fucito didn’t open up space for the team.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 10:26 AM PST up reply actions  

You miss the point

This whole discussion started because I asked if this article was telling us to have blind faith in Sigi- I am just saying I don’t think we should just have blind faith in Sigi (even though I think he’s a great coach) – so if all your responses start with “Sigi said” then there is nothing to discuss. I don’t think we all have to be super excited just because Sigi says Fucito is no good and EJ is. He also let Le Toux go and we still haven’t found that striker match for Montero.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 10:38 AM PST up reply actions  

I have often written that we should not have blind faith in anyone

But, there are those that have earned more “faith” than others. So far, the Sounders front office has earned a lot of faith. That doesn’t mean that they cannot be criticized when deserved.

But, as you have your opinion of the trade, my opinion is different.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 11:16 AM PST up reply actions  

It's all just opinions

clearly they’re paid to offer their opinions and make things happen… but Fucito was thought of highly enough by Sigi to start a majority of games at forward last season for the best scoring team in the league.

I’m not sure why there’s any need to downplay his value. I think the biggest thing is he just wasn’t a perfect fit next to Montero.. it’s best to have a TF up front and you could see that.

by BDobbs on Feb 22, 2012 11:21 AM PST up reply actions  

Fucito started largely out of necessity

If N’kufo doesnt retire right before the start of the season and OBW doesnt suffer a season ending injury Mike hardly sees the field. I like what he brought the our game but I ultimatley think people are making him out to be better than he was. I’m of the opinion that both Neagle and Fucito benefited largley from the players around them.

@Emerald_Sounder

by Disco_Stew on Feb 22, 2012 11:27 AM PST up reply actions  

Thank you for clarifying

Without your selfless contribution I’m not sure if anyone would have the slightest clue as to what I was referring to.

@Emerald_Sounder

by Disco_Stew on Feb 22, 2012 12:12 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't necessarily agree with your entire point

But, for the sake of argument, I will go forward to discuss that point. You say he was not a perfect fit with Montero. Then what is the real problem you have replacing him?

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 11:28 AM PST up reply actions  

It's not the "blind faith" issue

It’s that collectively, most don’t think it’s likely that EJ will return to form. And most posters here are not novices, and are often soccer zealots with valid opinions that are backed up with statistics and long-term observations. It’s reasonable to wonder here if the FO is simply a little too familiar with EJ to have an objective view, as opposed to having some special insight as to his current quality. It’s also puzzling to hear that he will have an “impact” in the Santos game, even though he is sporting and injury and Sigi admits he will have limited time in those games regardless. Really? Santos Laguna is not Florida Gulf Coast U. The FO and Sigi certainly don’t help themselves in hyping EJ. I also think this trade is a big risk, but we have time to fix it if the FO is wrong during the season.

by Brougham Hooligan on Feb 22, 2012 11:39 AM PST up reply actions  

Every player has a value

the tough part is deciding what that value is (to your team and to others). Not only does the poker analogy fall short when thinking about the FO betting on one’s self and measuring the productivity you might get from a player based on what you perceive is going on in their heart or mind, but I also think the poker analogy falls short when it compares the value of a pair of kings to Fucito or Neagle. I’m not a poker guy so bear with me…when you look at your Kings pre-flop they have an exact value right? After the flop, it might change, but you can still calculate the value exactly right. With players it’s not so exact. Some obviously see Fuctio’s value higher than others. I imagine the opinion of Fucito’s value would vary even among soccer experts and other MLS clubs. Fucito’s value might also be higher to Montreal than to the Sounders. Same would go for Neagle and EJ. Every Sounder’s player ever has a price (Kasey Keller being the one exception to this rule). I think when the FO looked at this trade they valued Fucito and Neagle much lower than we might think (current depth, future deals, talent, potential, etc.), realized that Montreal valued them higher, and holding much more information about Johnson than the average club/fan decided it was worth the risk.

Great article by the way.

by ComeOnSounders on Feb 22, 2012 10:01 AM PST reply actions  

You can calculate the odds of hitting certain hands, after the flop

But you can’t calculate your odds of winning. The only hand that will win 100% of the time is the nuts, and you are very unlikely to make that. You’re still dealing with a game of imperfect information. This is similar to dealing with outcomes of players. You never have all the information you need, but you can make statistical guesses on outcomes. The key is the strength of your models. I know a lot about baseball models, less so about soccer. I do have faith that the front office do have some sort of model they are using and that the EJ trade comes out ahead in it.

by arbeck77 on Feb 22, 2012 10:31 AM PST up reply actions  

I should probably stay

away from poker analogies. The point I was trying to make is that player values are highly variable, but maybe this point didn’t need to be made. I agree…the key is the strength of your models. Seems to me, the Sounder’s models have been performing pretty well so far. I have a good feeling about this trade working out too.

by ComeOnSounders on Feb 22, 2012 1:11 PM PST up reply actions  

If only we could turn this into a strip poker analogy

Where you get to choose what to discard after you lose the hand, and everyone gets a reward at the end.

by seabryan on Feb 22, 2012 1:53 PM PST up reply actions  

There are two wagers here, one good and one bad

1. Good-EJ is an excellent risk for the season as we have many months to see if he can dial in without too much downside, even before we start USOC, new CCL, and have significant games in MLS run. Potential upside is huge, with minimal downside risk. Here, Fucito and Neagle were not game-changers like EJ could be, so the trade makes great sense.
2.Bad-we are basically overly-risking the CCL QF by taking away the likely starter and a good player for depth. Now we admittedly have neither a fit Ochoa nor EJ, and one less decent and known-quantity veteran player off the bench. On its surface this looks like too much risk if we genuinely want the CCL trophy this year. Reading between the lines some, it seems like the collective belief at the FO was that it does not make a difference to make the trade or not vs our current outlook for Santos.
One huge dig though at the FO—here we are one year later after Nkufo departure and they still have not solved the second striker problem, and we are about to go into the biggest game in SSFC MLS history (so far) with it still unsettled and musical chairs at the position.

by Brougham Hooligan on Feb 22, 2012 10:20 AM PST reply actions  

Maybe a 3rd bet which Coug1990 alluded to

That the FO is “selling high” on Fucito and Neagle. They may view these two as overachievers who aren’t likely to get much better than their borderline starter status today. So, they get EJ back, a risky player with upside and downside. Could play out that Neagle and Fucito don’t get a lot better, and EJ yields mixed results. The trade may end up a wash for both sides, except for some “addition by subtraction” benefits as the Sounders move on with Sivebaek, Estrada, etc.

by seabryan on Feb 22, 2012 10:30 AM PST up reply actions  

The biggest failure...

…of the FO in the history of the MLS Sounders so far in my opinion was the Nkufo debacle at the start of last season. Followed by the inability to find the right player in the summer transfer window. Followed by the situation we’re in now with weeks to go to the CCL match and still playing duck, duck, goose at second FWD position.

That being said, I’m with the FO on taking this risk on EJ, even considering the timing.

by silver00 on Feb 22, 2012 2:22 PM PST up reply actions  

At least the FO is improving

This year our TF shock happened three weeks before first kick, instead of three hours before!

by Sevenless on Feb 22, 2012 2:40 PM PST up reply actions  

Depth, winning, etc.

Fucito and Neagle seem likely to outperform anything EJ does this season, however that’s not really the point. If Fucito goes on to have a better career than EJ from this point on, then that’d be losing in the trade.

But the point of the trade was the fact that EJ has had success in the MLS and given he’s 27, he should still be able to come back and do the same assuming he’s still physically just as capable. He’s definitely more of a sure bet to be a scoring machine than either Fucito or Neagle.

As for losing depth… sure we did. But if the depth we have now isn’t that bad of a drop off compared to the gains from improvement at a starting position, then we’ll be just fine. The fact is if Sivebeak, Zakuani, Fernandez, Rosales and Evans are all at least as good as Neagle and healthy all season, then the loss of Neagle shouldn’t hurt as at all.

If EJ can come in and out-perform Fucito, returning to the form he last had in the MLS, then it’s a huge boon for our team.

In all, every trade is a gamble, but this one can work out very well in favor of the Sounders. It’d be a different story if EJ was coming back from a major injury ala Peyton Manning.

by BDobbs on Feb 22, 2012 10:21 AM PST reply actions  

Why do people keep leaving Neagle out of this calculus

We gave up two players, not one. In my estimation, Johnson has to help us more than both those players combined to be worth it.

by CarlosT on Feb 22, 2012 11:23 AM PST up reply actions  

A lot of people are assuming a diminished role for Neagle if he stayed on the team

With him being pushed down the depth chart by new players and the return of Zak a lot of people are saying Neagle isn’t a big loss.

"The fans are excited. And the stadium, well, it ignites with explosion."

by DarthGreedo on Feb 22, 2012 11:27 AM PST up reply actions  

Yep, if he is passed on the depth chart by Sivebaek and later Zakuani

Neagle becomes less valuable as he sits on the bench. The time to trade him, if you are going to trade him, was now.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 11:32 AM PST up reply actions  

You are right

I have been comparing Fucito vs EJ but it’s really Neagle + Fucito vs EJ – I guess we just have more depth at wing so I have kind of left him out, but he was huge for us last year. He won games for us.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 11:28 AM PST up reply actions  

But we also gain roster flexibility

So whoever else gains from this (whoever gets minutes in place of Neagle, or whoever doesn’t get cut due to the extra spot) also need to be considered in this equation. That’s where this gamble becomes more difficult to evaluate in the short-term, because the person we keep isn’t likely to pay dividends this year, but could blossom into another excellent role player like Neagle in the years to come, or become valuable trade or transfer bait in the future. It has a cascading effect.

by Sevenless on Feb 22, 2012 11:30 AM PST up reply actions  

I was going to make this exact point

The Sounders 29th man (it has been said for Cap purposes the Sounders will likely carry 29 players), just became a different player. For all we know, the Sounders have evaluated that player to be as good or better than either of the traded players in the long run.

In the short term, they have those positions covered in Sivebaek, Johnson and Zakuani.

This is just what the Sounders system is supposed to do, develop players to use or trade to bring in better players or players that better fit the Sounders system.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 11:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Roster Flexibility?

We could have cut them if we wanted roster flexibility, not sure why that’s a point in favor of the trade. As for Zakuani, Johnson, and Sivebaek only Sivebaek is healthy.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 2:19 PM PST up reply actions  

Not a point in favor, but a point to remember

I, for one, wasn’t arguing that it was a necessarily point in favor, but it’s also disingenuous to argue that the math is MF + LN vs EJ when it’s really MF + LN vs. EJ + (29th person on the roster).

This trade has obviously brought out some vigorous and useful discussion about values, costs vs. benefits, process vs. results, and risk management, but the whole point of this article was that in the end it’s all just a bet. As such, it’s impossible to know the full odds, but it behooves anyone who wants to have an intelligent discussion of the situation to consider all of the facts available to them, even when they run counter to your preferred view on the trade. Most posts seem to ignore some aspects of this (probably not intentionally!), and it leads to needlessly inflamed passions and/or misinterpreting what others are trying to argue.

by Sevenless on Feb 22, 2012 2:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Bundling the players

I’m starting to get the impression that the hardest part of this trade for many posters is we lost two players whose combined talent is greater than the one we received in exchange. That’s fine, but it’s a bookkeeping issue and doesn’t translate to on-field performance. Obviously Sigi can’t play both Neagle and Fucito at the same time so we made a (probable) upgrade to one (eg- Fucito) and the hole left by the other is deep down the roster and won’t result in an empty spot on the pitch. Everyone below Neagle just moved up a notch, moving one player off the bubble and marginally affecting our quality at the tail end of the roster.

Also, we need to think not just of the players involved but the coaches. Sigi plays with a large target forward — it’s where he’s best, comfortable, and knowledgeable, per se. The shift is towards his strength and hopefully increases the chance of this being a success.

by CityDrew on Feb 22, 2012 1:46 PM PST up reply actions  

Why not include Sivebaek as well?

In the era of salary caps, Losing a guy, even in a lopsided trade can be good if it frees up money to be spent on free agents. So, to me it’s not Fucito + Neagle vs EJ. It’s Jaqaua + Fucito + Neagle vs Sivebaek + EJ + Babayele Sodade.

How they left does’t really matter. They fill approx the same salary and roster spots.

by blakec on Feb 22, 2012 7:21 PM PST up reply actions  

I personally didn’t like the trade i thought we gave up too much for him now I saw what he can do maybe it’s a good trade we will never know till the season starts

by alexyepz on Feb 22, 2012 11:43 AM PST via mobile reply actions  

Did we overpay, probably

Someone up the thread made the observation that the further up the table you go the more you pay for marginal wins. That’s a great point.

The 2012 Sounders are built to win it all this year. I doubt anyone would be too surprised if Montero, Flaco, and Alonso were gone before the end of this year. The FO rolled the dice, and maybe overpaid, on the hopes that EJ can put this team over the top. It is a gamble, but definitely a gamble they had to take. We simply didn’t have the room to hope that Fucito and Neagle could become what this team needs: a player like EJ can be at the top of his form.

As for whether or not we actually overpaid, I’m not sure that we did. But even if we did, the Sounders have the luxury of overpaying.

Fucito and Neagle were easy for the Sounders to part with because the FO has proven they can pull guys like them off one scrap heap or another at will. They are talents, for sure. Yet the Sounders’ revenue stream is large enough to enable them to scout far more extensively than nearly every other team in the MLS.

by Choskasoft on Feb 22, 2012 11:51 AM PST via mobile reply actions  

impactioneers

Impacteurs, perhaps?

by GnomeJake on Feb 22, 2012 12:02 PM PST via iPhone app reply actions  

i disagree with this part

“They didn’t bet on the odds. The odds state that the cost of this trade versus its reward is a long shot at best.”

“The odds state” doesn’t make any sense. There are no “odds” on this trade. I understand it’s a metaphor, but since it is a metaphor then you’ve created these metaphorical odds to be a long shot. You could have just as easily created those odds in your head to be a sure thing, but you choose to make them long.

So if you’re going to say that you feel the chances of Eddie Johnson equalling the value of Fucito and Neagle is a long shot, then just say it, don’t hide behind a metaphor, stand up and say it and end the article with and if he does succeed well then “I was wrong.” Otherwise you are just going to say “well he beat the odds” but the odds only exist in your mind. So him “beating the odds” is just another way of saying he did better then you thought relative to what the Sounders gave up for him. Which was a below average MLS forward and a upcoming left mid that wasn’t going to get much playing time after Zakuani’s return.

Both were players I loved to root for, but this will better for Neagle, who has been replaced with Sivebaek and Fucito who was replaced with Eddie Johnson.

by python6114 on Feb 22, 2012 12:40 PM PST via mobile reply actions  

I can't speak for Abbott, but...

If Johnson does well, I won’t stand up and say “I was wrong” because I’ve never said it is impossible for him to do well. He certainly could. my issue with this trade is entirely one of risk, and I don’t think the upside is worth the risk relative to what we gave up. You clearly disagree. That’s fine! But don’t pretend as though people that are opposed to the trade are uniformly insisting that Johnson will be terrible.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 12:46 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm trying to get an impression of your official stance...

but it’s hard because your wording is confusing to me. You think it’s possible for EJ to do well. You don’t like this trade…because we gave up a couple of known quantities for an unknown quantity. So, what would it take for you to consider this a successful trade? (sorry if you’ve said this elsewhere)

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 1:04 PM PST up reply actions  

Well, how are you defining success?

If Johnson comes in and scores 8-10 goals, that’s probably enough to make the result of this trade a good one. I could also see him doing more than that. But he could score 15 goals and I still don’t think it would have been the right trade to make.

I’m very much a process-over-results person when it comes to analyzing this kind of thing. And as I’ve said before, the only thing that would make me think the process that led to them pulling the trigger on this deal was a good one would be for him to show some significant development in the secondary aspects of his game. If that ends up being the case, it would change my opinion in a significant way.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 1:10 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree that process over results.

Here is a baseball article that talks about process. Many of you will recognize the matrix a little down the page.

http://itmightbedangerous.blogspot.com/2008/06/draft-review-about-process.html

Curious, have you questioned whether your own thought process is correct? How did come up with your own thought process? Why is yours correct and the teams incorrect? Why do you value or not value the pieces in the trade as you do?

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 1:17 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I question my thought process constantly.

I think that, given how much success the team had last season with Fucito and Ochoa as the second forward, that putting a tremendous amount of faith in a forward with Johnson’s recent track record is a risk that’s not at all worth taking. I have no trouble at all with the team trading Fucito and Neagle, but I have a hard time believing they were limited to “Johnson or nothing” and I’d have been far, far happier with a lower-risk move with less potential upside.

The equation would change quite a bit if the Sounders weren’t already one of the best teams in the league, or if their inability to score goals was a major problem last season. Neither of those things are true. I completely understand the desire to make an upgrade at the position, but given the risk I do not think Johnson is the right target for this team.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 1:23 PM PST up reply actions  

Only in Seattle

would fans prefer a process over a performance (not saying you’re wrong). If EJ scores a handful of goals that’s a success especially at his price point. I hesitate to compare his potential numbers to Fucito and Neagle’s potential numbers because there’s a chance they have the same chances of success or failure as anyone. But, if EJ scores a bunch I don’t care if he looks like Messi or Jaqua. If he only brings one dimension to the game but that dimension includes scoring or allowing other’s to score that’s alright with me. They don’t ask how, they ask how many.

I would probably be more upset at the process of this transaction if the FO made moves like this all the time. They are taking a risk, but it’s a calculated risk. They’ve wanted EJ since the summer and I believe they know exactly what they’re getting.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 1:19 PM PST up reply actions  

Preferring process over results

means that you’d like the team to implement a system that is right more often than not, rather than glorifying simply those that worked out even if there was no rhyme or reason for them to do so.

by agtk on Feb 22, 2012 1:21 PM PST up reply actions  

Right

which is exactly why this one single transaction doesn’t bother me as much as if they were making moves like the RedBulls. This is the only move like this that I’ve seen them make and I think even if it fails I’m still alright with this one single move. As long as it’s rare.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 1:27 PM PST up reply actions  

Adam, this is what Aaron had to say about the trade in the Nos Audietis Episode 40 interview

Jeremiah: At what point do you say the level at which you say OK, this was a good trade? Is there ever, Aaron, is there ever a level that you say that or do you think it’s like impossible to say that?

Aaron: The only way that I say that is if my knowledge changes, if I find out that they had reason to feel differently, you know, if they had knowledge that I don’t have, I’m not talking about scouting reports either, because I think those can be, I think that looking at a player at a training camp can be kind of a flawed method of evaluation. If I find out they have information that they, you know, really change one’s outlook in the situation, um yeah. Then I will never think of this, I think the risk analysis is off. It’s the kind of thing where I acknowledge that even though I think this is a bad decision, that there is upside potential. Eddie Johnson could come in and score 20 goals next year and he could put the team over the top and if he does that I’ll be thrilled.

Jeremiah: But, you still don’t think it was a good trade.

Aaron: No

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 1:24 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

its a good point though

about process over results…. if EJ scores 20 goals most will say its a good trade. Even Dave admitted that… but results oriented thinking seems like a crutch here.

by Realio on Feb 22, 2012 1:28 PM PST up reply actions  

If EJ scores 20 goals I will be overjoyed.

Make no mistake, I hope that A) the front office knows something I don’t and B) the best-case scenario comes to fruition.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 1:36 PM PST up reply actions  

Agree with Aaron on this

The process is important and we don’t know their entire thinking – I hate to bring the Seahawks anology but we discussed above the comparison between this trade and the Charlie Whitehurst trade. Even if Whitehurst turned out to be great – did they really need to trade a 3rd round pick and move their 2nd pick back 20 spots for a 3rd string QB? All I’m saying is was EJ really that expensive? Sounds like Colorado was interested but were not willing to give up much to get him. I am curious what other offers were on the table.

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 2:03 PM PST up reply actions  

another seahawks analogy

everyone said that aaron curry was THE GUY to draft.
then a year or two ago everyone thought that they REALLY MESSED UP not getting sanchez instead

neither looks that great now.

by Realio on Feb 22, 2012 2:08 PM PST up reply actions  

Personally...

…I think EJ’s contract is probably what drove up the asking price. I believe it is $100K with a $150K option for next year. That’s a pretty good price for a guy with 10+ goal potential. In an optimistic scenario, EJ scores, say, 12 goals next year and the Sounders can bring him back on a $150K contract, which is about what Le Toux made last year, but probably less than what Le Toux will make this year, for instance.

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 2:10 PM PST up reply actions  

10+ goal potential? On what timeline?

His recent performance would suggest that we could expect that 10th goal to roll in around 2017. I hope I’m wrong, but what evidence are you basing your assessment of a “10+ goal potential”?

by CarlosT on Feb 22, 2012 6:07 PM PST up reply actions  

How can he not have 10+ goal potential if he's scored that in MLS before?

Again, if we’re making a football analogy, this is a guy who did well in college, couldn’t hack it in the NFL, and is coming back to college. How could he not be considered to have the potential to do well in college again? Sure, he’s older, but not so old that all of his skills have vanished. Things didn’t work out for him at higher levels or different leagues, but that doesn’t mean he’s lost all potential.

His recent performance would suggest that we could expect that 10th goal to roll in around 2017.

That makes just as much sense as saying that based on his recent performance, Chris Wondolowski ought to contend for the EPL Golden Boot. I get it, Eddie Johnson didn’t score many goals in Europe. How that translates to MLS is far from straightforward.

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 10:41 PM PST up reply actions  

Recent MLS season?

I think your logic is flawed ubelmann – his most recent season was 5 years ago – I understand what you’re saying but you seem to be ignoring that major fact. The question is why hasn’t he been succesful? MLS has grown a lot in 5 years, it is much more competitive, and even so we don’t know what caused the drop off in EJ’s play, is he lazy? not smart enough? What are his weakness’, this comparison to college football is silly, a pro league and a college league are quite different. Did Kenny Cooper return to MLS and dominate? Did Charlie Davies return to MLS and dominate? Did Freddy Adu return to MLS and dominate? Did any of these guys come in and do what they did before they left?

by atu81 on Feb 23, 2012 8:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Potential

My comment was about potential not about expected performance. I’m not saying I expect EJ to score 10+ goals, but I’m saying he has the potential to do so. I really find it hard to believe that it’s so ridiculous to claim that a player has the potential to do something he’s already done once. Re: Cooper, how much service did he get with the Timbers last year? Re: Davies, he’s never played in MLS before last year. Re: Adu, 2 goals in 11 games is actually better than his goals per game rate in his first MLS stint.

by ubelmann on Feb 23, 2012 9:05 AM PST up reply actions  

Well...

Doesn’t Mike Fucito and/or Lamar Neagle have 10+ goal potential? They combined for 11 last season.

by atu81 on Feb 23, 2012 11:26 AM PST up reply actions  

Actually...

If you’re counting all-comps, which I assume you are since that’s the only way it could get that high, they scored 13 goals last year. Fucito 6, Neagle 7. I’d say both have 10-goal potential, but they are way more likely to get there with the Impact than they were with the Sounders.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 23, 2012 11:34 AM PST up reply actions  

You could argue that, sure...

One could also argue that they might not have even gotten the playing time to reach 10 goals in league play.

by ubelmann on Feb 23, 2012 11:49 AM PST up reply actions  

but

i think theres a real valid point that if he scores 20 goals doesnt mean this was a good gamble to take….just cause it worked doesnt mean it was the right thing to do, just as if it fails miserably doesnt mean it was the wrong thing to do

the poker people here will get the results oriented thinking parallel im failing miserably to use

by Realio on Feb 22, 2012 2:07 PM PST up reply actions  

I think we DON'T know something the front office does.

Who here is paid to evaluate and sign talent in a professional soccer league? You may watch and read a lot and discuss soccer, but who here has a career in finding and developing soccer players? If you didn’t the process, great. But all you really have right now is a difference of opinion.

There was a process…and it seems to me that since Ezra, Chris and Dave all know EJ and what he is capable of, they’re in a much better position to judge Fucito, Nagle and EJ’s relative merits.

The FO and coaching staff is where the rubber meets the road and they devote the time money and energy to do so. After all, they’ve put together one of the most successful teams in MLS, virtually from scratch.

I’ve read opinions questioning EJ’s mental state, the condition of his marriage to his fitness levels and it’s getting to be a bit much. How is any of that helpful?
None of our this is going to affect what goes on the field. We have to wait and see. Adrian said as much on the podcast.

Last year, certain folks got their panties in a twist ‘cause the Sounders didn’t go out and get a DP striker. Call it ‘gamble’ or ‘odds’ or what have you, but they scored more goals than the rest of the league without one. I guess someone knew what they were doing, right?

And if you toss out that LA still won everything, perhaps they would’ve anyway? Things either happen or they don’t. We’ll never know.

Terrible's what it is.
-Big George

by Stacius on Feb 22, 2012 3:03 PM PST up reply actions  

This isn't a Seattle thing at all.

Like agtk says above, I prefer good process because it leads to good results more often than not. I do not “prefer process over performance” I prefer a process that will lead to the best performance more often than bad process.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 1:26 PM PST up reply actions  

So, for you

there are only two real options. Low risk/high reward (expensive) or low risk low reward (cheap). Unfortunately with the FO’s track record you’re going to have to be satisfied with mediocrity. I don’t think Seattle has been anything that can be called mediocre but in the grand scheme of things, unless they win MLS Cup or CCL (both long shots) they will never be for lack of a better than a strong MLS team.

So, during this particular period in MLS’ history thier current business model is paying dividends, but it is unsustainable with the LAGs and NYRBs of the world. They’re either going to have to spend money on proven talent or be resigned to mediocrity.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 1:35 PM PST up reply actions  

No, not at all.

I am speaking only in the context of this trade. I think the Sounders could have gotten a better deal for themselves than they did.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 1:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Sorry for the confusion

This part of the metaphor actually harkens back to original comment I referenced at the start of the post. In that earlier discussion the risks associated with this trade were equated to odds. Basically the idea was that having to trade players to take on this risk makes this transaction less likely to be successful and therefore lowers the odds.

It’s obvious from the timbre and volume of responses that our community still is coming to terms with the trade. This doesn’t surprise me. What I find fascinating is that my original article actually doesn’t weigh the merits of the trade itself at all. I simply said that the original analogy got me thinking and I realized that we shouldn’t be surprised that the Sounders are making decisions based on more than just stats. If the people involved in professional sports only considered odds, then none of them would be working in the industry. All of the jobs in this field essentially defy astronomical odds.

The conclusion of my article actually has to do with what I wrote about a few weeks ago, there is theater in what happens in the FO moves. Regardless of the results of this trade, I realized that I am fascinated by the decision making process that appears to underpin the decision to pull the trigger. The spectacle alone was worth the price of admission. It’s just like watching an absolutely great game. It doesn’t matter which team won in the long run. It was still a great game. I follow this team because of the skills of both the players and the staff. They are both creating theater.

by Abbott Smith on Feb 22, 2012 2:41 PM PST up reply actions  

Why do we need a target forward again?

I think it is obvious to everybody that we played our best, most attractive, winning soccer with Fucito, Montero, Rosales, Fernandez, Friburg, and Alonso on the field. It took Sigi exhausting every other possiblity (Noonan/Montero, Levesque/Montero, Jaqua/Montero, throw Evans in whenever he could, put Carrasco and Alonso on together, etc.) before he finally settled on what was obvious to most of us immediately after Zak and OBW went out injured.

It takes a good coach to adapt like he did, and I believe Sigi is a good coach, but I worry he is a bit set in his ways. I don’t think it is an accident that we played incredibly when we were down a man, I think unique challenges bring out the best in Sigi’s coaching.

I think the challenge of not having a target forward actually made him a better coach. And not having Evans to win headers in the middle forced us to play to the feet. Not having his prefered choices forced Sigi to confront an over reliance on his customary attacking strategy, and our attack became more balanced and consequently we became highest scoring team in MLS.

We now have four questionable target forwards and Montero. The team has gone all in on 1 strategy, and I think the chance that Sigi will reformulate his strategy even if it is not working is now very remote. Hopefully one of those target forwards work out well, or we will be banging our heads against the wall for 2 months before he figures out the next step.

by D Mo on Feb 22, 2012 1:19 PM PST reply actions  

Because Sigi thinks

that we played that attractive, winning soccer despite Fucito being on the field, not because of it.

by agtk on Feb 22, 2012 1:22 PM PST up reply actions  

agtk

quickly becoming my favorite poster on here

by Realio on Feb 22, 2012 1:29 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't think we have a "target forward"

we have forwards. And unless we have good forwards who can score then Fredy will face constant defensive pressure.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 1:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Is EJ even really a target forward?

He doesn’t seem to fit the prototype as far as I can tell. Sure, he’s reasonably tall, but he’s also, say, smaller than Nkufo. A big knock on him seems to be that speed was the biggest reason for his success in MLS, and that’s not a typical target forward trait.

Personally, I think it’s possible that EJ plays a role closer to Fucito’s than to Nkufo’s role, but that EJ is probably a bigger threat to head a cross into goal (whether from the run of play or from a corner kick.)

by ubelmann on Feb 22, 2012 1:54 PM PST up reply actions  

Great post

Thats a unique way to look at it and I agree a lot with what you say – weren’t we one of the highest scoring teams in MLS last year? Was making a huge trade for a striker really necessary?

by atu81 on Feb 22, 2012 1:57 PM PST up reply actions  

Don't state our opinions.

I don’t personally like watching Fucito play, simply because, to me it is unattractive. I think he is a good player, but I prefer technical players over workman-like players. I just want to make it clear that that assertion is not obvious to everyone.

by Iam333 on Feb 22, 2012 2:34 PM PST via Android app up reply actions   1 recs

Excellent points all

agtk – Certainly Sigi did not value Fucito, and was constantly looking for alternatives. Iam333 – yes Fucito personally isn’t the prettiest player. Adam and ubelman – you are right that I am using “target forward” a little loosely.

That all said, my point was that our attack got more exciting the more we passed to the feet, and that happened because we had to adapt to losing Sigi’s preferred players. I haven’t run the numbers – but it seems like it got more effective too. Now we have a guy Sigi expects to head in goals, so we are going to see: “run to the corner, cross it in to the head, lose possession, Honey Badger tackle, pass, repeat.”

by D Mo on Feb 22, 2012 5:10 PM PST up reply actions  

Not if Mauro, Montero or Fernandez have anything to say about it.

The creativity of this offense is staggering sometimes. I have only seen us resort to ‘kick it to the tall guy’s head’ when the team is out of ideas. It may happen, but I doubt it will be common.

by Iam333 on Feb 22, 2012 5:18 PM PST via Android app up reply actions   1 recs

The idea that Eddie Johnson=nothing but crosses

Is just a tad hyperbolic and totally ignores the other nine outfield players the team will have on the field.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 22, 2012 5:57 PM PST up reply actions  

The more tools the more ways to unlock the defense

I like pass to the feet soccer as well, but I think we need all the tools we can get on the field to unlock opposing defenses. As saw against SLC, once they got ahead, they just bunkered up and cut off passing lanes. We need weapons that can unlock the bunkers and stand up to the phyisical style teams like LA and Houston have used so well against us.

I don’t want to see lollypop corner soccer all the time, but when we need it (IE corners and bunkered in defenses) I’ll be glad it’s an option on the table this year.

by blakec on Feb 22, 2012 7:49 PM PST up reply actions  

I think a lot of the XI changes

were about rotation of players. We were (and will be) in a lot of competitions, and Sigi did a great job of keeping us as fresh as possible. Look at how FCD wore out at the end of last year, for an example of what over-reliance on your “best” squad can do.

by foolsgambit on Feb 22, 2012 11:52 PM PST via Android app up reply actions  

I also think the Sounders made themselves better in this deal, despite not liking it.

None of these things are black and white, which I suppose is entirely the point you’re making.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 1:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Now you're blowing my mind Aaron.

How can you not like this trade if you think it makes us a better team!?!

Because you think the cost was too high? 24 hours before this trade hit the airwaves, I posted this (http://www.sounderatheart.com/2012/2/16/2801151/seattles-other-forward#92022434) begging for a trade of exactly this nature before the start of the season. And as much as I loved Fucito and Neagle as Sounders, I am ecstatic about this move by the FO.

I’ve been resisting yelling my thoughts on this trade into the tumultuous void, but I’ve got a minute, so here it goes.

1. From my perspective, the Sounders have a real need at forward to push them over the top (and have had since OBW went out). Fucito + Montero was not a first class striking configuration at the MLS level. Fucito is strong and fast and has a nice shot, but he lacks finishing touch, is not much of an aerial threat, and doesn’t present enough of a danger to opposing defenses.

2. You have to spend 2 B’s to get an A. It’s like golf. The talent pool in soccer is such that if you want to improve quality beyond a certain point (let’s say that point is a good MLS rotational player like Fuctio and Neagle who really are in decent supply as much as we might love them) it gets very expensive.

3. The Sounders are rich in depth, and poor in cap. One thing I think that folks tend to overlook is how freaking cheap we’re getting EJ for. Yeah, there’s risk there, but for 100K, he’s an absolutely steal.

4. Fucito + Neagle is a great haul for any top tier MLS team looking to build quality depth and possible rotation players, or for any expansion team looking for potential starters and regular rotation players. But Fucito wasn’t our answer up top, he’s been given enough of a look that the FO had good data on that being the case, and I agree. And Neagle, while continuing to develop, was way down on our depth chart. All of which adds up to their value to us was less than their value to lots of other teams. And we sold them while their stock was up!

Buy low, sell high, fill an obvious need on your team with a bargain striker with a huge upside. The very definition of a great trade within the constraints of the freakish MLS system.

I am NOT happy to see these two first class young men leave the Rave green, but I am happy to see the FO taking logical, shrewd, calculated risks in order to try to bring home more hardware.

by silver00 on Feb 22, 2012 2:57 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Not if you agree it makes the team "better".

By definition then, Value > Cost.

I suppose it depends on how you describe “better”. I define it as likelihood of winning one or more trophies in this and subsequent years.

GFYRC

by silver00 on Feb 22, 2012 3:09 PM PST up reply actions  

Not at all.

Adding Erik Bedard made the Mariners better, but that trade was still awful.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 3:18 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

I'm not good with other sports analogies

Soccer is all I follow. :-) Can you clarify?

GFYRC

by silver00 on Feb 22, 2012 3:20 PM PST up reply actions  

The Mariners gave up a ton of young minor-league talent for a really good starting pitcher.

Adding that starting pitcher made the Mariners a better team, but the cost was far, far too high.

I’ll admit that it’s not a perfect analogy, but the point remains; simply making the team better does not a make a trade good.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 3:23 PM PST up reply actions  

I think what you're trying to say is

The Sounders are better today, and maybe for this season.
But they will be weaker in the long-term.

by agtk on Feb 22, 2012 3:24 PM PST up reply actions  

Not even that.

They may have gotten better, but given the price they could have gotten, um, better-er.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 3:25 PM PST up reply actions  

Actually, this probably better illustrates my objection to this trade than anything I've said.

They seemed to have decided they wanted Johnson a long time ago and when he became available it became “we have to get Johnson” rather than “we’d like to upgrade at forward.”

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 3:30 PM PST up reply actions  

Well

thank god we’re stacked and can afford to deal players like we did.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 3:37 PM PST up reply actions  

I see exactly the opposite (maybe not surprisingly)

Potentially great upgrades at forward, at an affordable price, and at the right time don’t come along very often. To say they “locked on” to Johnson and then overpaid because he came available is disingenuous I think.

How many forwards to you think the FO has tracked over the last 14 months? I’d wager dozens, and yet the stars never aligned to do a deal.

It’s totally valid that we may have traded future potential talent for a more short term reward. I disagree, but that doesn’t mean I’m right. It’s an interesting thought exercise to have people with a broader viewpoint than mine propose what other class of player we could have picked up at a similar price point with the trade of Fucito and Neagle. This wasn’t the team’s only need (although the biggest IMHO).

GFYRC

by silver00 on Feb 22, 2012 3:41 PM PST up reply actions  

Frankly, from reading what you have written, I do not think it is process

It is player evaluation that you have a problem with in this instance. You have high value for Fucito and Neagle and not much for Johnson.

The process of trading an excess asset (left wing had Fernandez, Sivebaek, Tettah, Zakuani and Neagle) plus a part-time starter for a full time starter is actually good process.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 3:48 PM PST up reply actions  

That's not what process means in thise case.

It’s not the just the move, it’s everything leading up to the move-and that includes player valuation, the decision-making process, etc.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 3:53 PM PST up reply actions  

But

you have no clue what went into the decision-making process. How much time they spent evaluating EJ’s fitness, ability etc. I do know one thing, they’ve had a couple of years to evaluate Fucito and Neagle, and obviously they (lets remember they do this for a living) felt that they were worth trading away.

The only thing you know for sure is that they value all 3 players involved differently than you value them.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 3:59 PM PST up reply actions  

Also not necessarily true.

Even if his valuation of all three players is exactly equivalent to the FO’s valuation of those players — which I’m not saying is the case — he could still think that it was a bad deal in the sense that there could be another player out there better than EJ who the Sounders could have gotten for the same players, or for the same roster and cap hit. I don’t know who that player is, but that’s the claim, and the logic is internally sound.

A second point: I don’t think we’re going to make any further progress on this topic. Everyone has made their points and is convinced of the merits of their particular take. I vote we leave it alone.

by Kenneth Jung on Feb 22, 2012 4:04 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Please refer to point #2 above.

You are right, but it doesn’t make it a good deal either — it depends heavily on how you value the hypothetical third player — and either way, I’m not going to claim any special knowledge that would make my valuation (or yours, or Aaron’s) more or less valid here. I’m just sick of seeing people argue about it.

by Kenneth Jung on Feb 22, 2012 4:12 PM PST up reply actions  

I can only judge based off of what I know.

And I’m not comfortable saying I like a move solely because the people making the decision do what they do for a living. That, to me, is an appeal to authority fallacy.

There are times I am comfortable deferring to their expertise, but this isn’t one of them because I see very legitimate reasons to criticize the move. I still think they’re excellent at what they do and I have a tremendous amount of faith in them. That doesn’t mean I will like every decision they make.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 4:07 PM PST up reply actions   2 recs

I still stand by my original statement

because in this specific case, it is all related. But, you are correct that we can agree to disagree.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 4:06 PM PST up reply actions  

Final question

You’ve stated that you’d have accepted this trade if it were Justin Braun (I think it was you) in the place of Eddie Johnson. Would you have been satisfied in the process of that trade?

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 4:16 PM PST up reply actions  

Nevermind,

it would have likely been a different process…apples and oranges.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 4:16 PM PST up reply actions  

Yes.

I think Braun is a much better bet and fit for this team.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 4:16 PM PST up reply actions  

Ok

then, when boiled down, it really comes down to player valuation.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 4:17 PM PST up reply actions  

Well yeah.

That’s the case with all trades. But how players are valued can tell you a lot about a team’s decision making process.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 4:19 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm just trying to get you to realize

that to some of us, your argument sounds more like player valuation than process is your aversion. Of course player valuation is probably the biggest part of the process, but it really just sounds like you don’t like Eddie Johnson to me and probably others.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 4:24 PM PST up reply actions  

I really don't like this move for Eddie Johnson.

Had the Sounders signed Eddie Johnson without giving anything up, I’d be pretty happy.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 4:25 PM PST up reply actions  

Also, the term "process" was introduced into this conversation

because I think it’s important to draw a distinction between “process” (this move) and “results” (what happens now.) I feel like that’s gotten lost in this conversation since then.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 4:26 PM PST up reply actions  

Process

I am jumping in way late on this because I was not online after 3 yesterday but I think Aaron’s point (and I agree with this) is that the Sounders have proven they can find players at less cost so if you’re going to trade away very valuable players you’d better get a sure thing which EJ clearly is not. That is where the process is important. Adding EJ is a great move if we get him in allocation or simply at a cheaper price. I would feel much better about adding him if I knew he had to fight with Fucito for the starting spot.

by atu81 on Feb 23, 2012 8:52 AM PST up reply actions  

It's worth noting I believe...

That if the Sounders thought they could get a player of EJ’s caliber for less, they would have tried that first. We can disagree on how good of a gamble EJ is, but I really think the idea that the Sounders could have gotten more for Neagle and Fucito or paid less to get EJ or a player like him is flawed thinking.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 23, 2012 9:27 AM PST up reply actions  

Flawed?

We got Mauro Rosales last year for 42K with no trade, yes that was rare but it happens. Could we have gotten more for Neagle and Fucito? That is questionable – but I’m sure we could have found another player like EJ who’s had a poor career for the last 5 seasons without giving those two up in the process.

by atu81 on Feb 23, 2012 9:34 AM PST up reply actions  

Look...

If you are insistent on viewing EJ only as a player who’s coming off four lackluster years (that would be the 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 seasons in case you need help with math) that’s fine, but you can’t really expect to be taken seriously if you think that’s the player the Sounders believe they got.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 23, 2012 10:09 AM PST up reply actions  

Not what they believe

Thats what I believe, and hope to be proven wrong. And yes he played four lackluster seasons – 07/08, 08/09, 09/10, 10/11 and the 5th (11/12) he hasn’t even played!

by atu81 on Feb 23, 2012 10:57 AM PST up reply actions  

so you're counting the current season?

OK, it’s clear the kind of thinking I’m dealing with.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 23, 2012 11:01 AM PST up reply actions  

Why wouldn't we?

Did he play somewhere? What has he done since playing with Preston in Spring of 11? Europeon season started last fall. Same with Mexico, MLS played through November, everyone has been playing but him. When is the last game he’s played in?

by atu81 on Feb 23, 2012 11:34 AM PST up reply actions  

That's also assuming

he doesn’t play any games in MLS before the end of the European season.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 23, 2012 11:36 AM PST up reply actions  

Now we're nit picking

Call it 4 or 5 seasons, the guy hasn’t played in a long time and I think that says something. For an editor of the site you are pretty rude and condescending. I hope he does really well, I just think we overpayed for a guy who hasn’t done much in a long time. Please excuse me for having a different opinion.

by atu81 on Feb 23, 2012 11:57 AM PST up reply actions  

It's not your opinion

It’s the way you’re going about defending it.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 23, 2012 12:11 PM PST up reply actions  

In what way is that?

What is this a S@H gang? You guys just have to jump in and defend each other, is Jeremiah not a big boy? Can he not defend his opionion on his own? What did I do to bring you guys down on me? We are all Sounders fans here, I have season tickets, where’s the love guys?

by atu81 on Feb 23, 2012 1:46 PM PST up reply actions  

You are free to have a different opinion

I’m objecting to your misuse of facts. Hopefully can see that.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 23, 2012 12:52 PM PST up reply actions  

Wow, you cant stop

2007 to now = 5 europeon seasons, and EJ has been playing in Europe. But I guess since he hasn’t played this season he really had 4 lackluster seasons as you put it and one not played. So you win – 4 seasons, congrats. Or you can go by MLS season as you’ve already done and say 2008/2009/2010/2011 and you get 4 seasons. You’re brilliant, I’m ignorant.

The difference between 4 or 5 seasons has very little to do with my point so throw out any number you want. I didn’t intend to start an argument over how many seasons he played – only to point out that the value of a player who’s a long time removed from his best playing days should be diminished.

by atu81 on Feb 23, 2012 1:40 PM PST up reply actions  

I honestly apologize...

If it feels like I’m picking on you, but I really do feel as though one of the problems with this debate is that people on both sides bolstering their arguments by misusing facts. (ie, Fucito wasn’t going to start, EJ is five years removed from being any good) I agree, we’re all fans here, but what I take objection to is the assertion that there’s anything obvious about this trade. There are lots of ways to reasonably like and dislike it and when people act otherwise, it does drive me a bit nuts.

Editor/writer at Sounder at Heart, MLS editor SB Nation. Follow me on Twitter. You'll Never Yacht Alone.

by Jeremiah Oshan on Feb 23, 2012 2:00 PM PST up reply actions  

Apology accepted

In the end we all hope EJ is a beast and scores 15+ goals this year, it’s just the biggest trade they’ve really made in their MLS existance so it seems like a much bigger deal than it probably is. And it hurts to lose Fucito and Neagle as they were both very likeable players.

by atu81 on Feb 23, 2012 2:19 PM PST up reply actions  

jeremiah

may be the least condescending of the s@h people imo

by Realio on Feb 23, 2012 3:05 PM PST up reply actions  

That is what it is looking like to me.

I posted a transcript above, this is another part of that same interview:

Jeremiah: I think it is selling the decision making process short, I think the Sounders believe they added talent, that the total net talent on this team is greater than if they didn’t do this trade.

Aaron: I hope that they don’t believe that.

Aaron: this strikes me as a panic move.

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 4:21 PM PST up reply actions  

Fair enough

People have made a lot of good points to think about on both sides of the argument

by Coug1990 on Feb 22, 2012 4:25 PM PST up reply actions  

Ultimately, there's plenty of room for disagreement on this trade

There’s also plenty of room for discussion and even if no one’s mind is going to be changed as a result of that discussion it’s always good to A) hear other viewpoints and B) understand where the people that disagree with you are coming from, so in that sense I appreciate the conversation a great deal.

Ultimately though, none of this matters a lick. It’s done, I’m guessing both teams have called “no-takesies-backsies” and from here on out everyone here wants it to turn out as well as it can.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 4:30 PM PST up reply actions  

Maybe

there’s “takesies-backsies” Houston got Ching back.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 4:34 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree

this is why I’ve been having trouble understanding his aversion to this move. It’s well known they’ve wanted Johnson (even back to last summer) for some time this was not a knee jerk move out of desperation. They know exactly what they’ve lost and what they’ve gained. That sounds like a thought out process to me.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 3:54 PM PST up reply actions  

I don't I agree with your analogy

The reason DMZ and Dave Cameron lost their minds over the Bedard trade wasn’t the price, but the time when it was done.

They argued that the Mariners FO completely misjudged the true talent level on their team, and that they were foolish to trade so much talent to get Bedard when Bedard wasn’t nearly enough to put them over the top.

They did say that they would have been for the trade, even at the price paid, had Bedard been the missing piece to win the WS.

You, however, are arguing that even if EJ lights up the league and “puts us over the top” that you still won’t like it because it violates the “process.”

No offense but that is a really odd stance to take. You’d rather trade intellectual purity for an MLS Cup? Moreover, what kind of “process” are you employing that values freely available talent that is performing at its limit over a guy who can potentially light it up?

You aren’t making a process argument. You just think EJ is lazy and washed up and that any price we paid would be too high. That’s a defendable stance. Go with it. But don’t try to make us think that your process is better than the Sounders FO process.

by Choskasoft on Feb 22, 2012 4:52 PM PST via mobile up reply actions   1 recs

I can't speak for Dave or DMZ, but if that was the argument I would have disagreed with them.

I actually disagree with a lot of what Dave Cameron says and thinks about baseball, and I always have.

Again, I am talking about process over results simply as a means to evaluate the trade. If it turns out well that won’t mean it was, in my estimation, a good trade. I will be thrilled, but I wouldn’t want them to do the same thing again because I don’t like the risks involved.

And I’d thank you not to put words in my mouth; I have not once said that I think EJ is “lazy and washed up” and I’ve quite clearly said that there is a price which I would have paid to have him on the team. Similarly, to say that I would trade “intellectual purity for an MLS Cup” is absolute hogwash. I’d be thrilled with an MLS Cup win and I hope against hope that EJ helps gets us there. I just think that this move has a better chance of going wrong than it does right.

When I complain about dishonest arguments, this is precisely what I mean. I’ve never said any of the things that are being attributed to me. I’ve tried to be very clear in my reasoning against the trade and what exactly that entails. If I’ve failed to do so then that’s on me and I apologize, but at least I’m not making up absurd arguments to make my own look better.

by Aaron Campeau on Feb 22, 2012 5:20 PM PST up reply actions  

Give me a second...

I’ll find a way to argue against this point.

GFYRC

by silver00 on Feb 22, 2012 3:21 PM PST up reply actions  

Given the fact

that the FO has been painfully conservative in it’s player movements, if this is as risky as it gets then we have nothing to worry about.

by Adam Waltering on Feb 22, 2012 1:42 PM PST up reply actions  

If you ever go it alone

… you could be “Sounder @ Head — 1) Insightful 2) Reasoned 3) Impeccably Formatted”

by CityDrew on Feb 22, 2012 2:17 PM PST reply actions  

Thanks for the compliment but I'm not going anywhere.

I joined the staff here because I think that S@H is all of those things already. I like this community and am grateful that there appears to be a role for me here.

by Abbott Smith on Feb 22, 2012 7:09 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

lets pause for a second

and think about how much brain matter and blood would have been splattered all over had our heads explosded at the news that EJ was going to make DP money and we had to let go of fernandez.

by fuzzyforeigner on Feb 22, 2012 3:09 PM PST reply actions  

I guess in the end I don't have much to complain about the trade

If you had given me a list of the bottom 3 starters last year, all three of those guys are gone.

We got both Fucito and Neagle for practically nothing and we traded them for a big upside guy.

Plus it looks like it clears up time and roster space for Estrada and possibly Babayele Sodade. Both guys that might have a similar upside to Fucito and Neagle.

Buy low and sell high and our team will always get a little better.

by blakec on Feb 22, 2012 7:41 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Sounder at Heart is a blog about the Seattle Sounders FC, with occasional forays into Democracy in Sports, Roster Management, Soccer Statistics and Life in Puget Sound. We are not the actual Sounders blog.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Twitter-icon_small
Fredy Montero with magic at the death vs. the Whitecaps part 1 (animated)
Small
On "fake turf" in Seattle, 2012 edition

Recent FanPosts

2334846872_d5a0828b89_small
The Friendly Confines of the Clink
Small
Sounders go after Drogba, yes or no?
Img957001_small
Substitute +/- Ratings
Twitter-icon_small
Fredy Montero mesmerizes Whitecaps' Joe Cannon (animated)
Acerimmer_small
Eddie Johnson Scores on Michael Gspurning? Yes indeed!
Paraguay_small
Sounders #awaysupport
Small
Andy Rose!
Small
What's our line-up vs. Dallas?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Sounder at Heart exists on Facebook - Like Us

Follow SounderAtHeart on Twitter

Sounder At Heart on Twitter

follow me on Twitter

Follow the rest of us on Twitter

Sounder At Heart (Site Feed)

Sidereal (MLS stats)

Jeremiah Oshan (top 10 soccer journalist on Twitter, Baby!)

Aaron Campeau (Villa, Mariners)

Dave Clark (beer, specfic, mideast)

Brian Floyd (all Seattle sports)

Nos Audietis (podcast stuff, snark)

Chris Coulter (photos, academy)


Managers

Tiny_dave_with_scarf_small Dave Clark

Oshan_small Jeremiah Oshan

Seattlesoccerscene_small sidereal

Nos Audietis Crew

Avatar_small Aaron Campeau

254350_1953423628277_767159_n_small dano_seattle

Authors

Img_0349_small malcontentjake

Devlin_small sum anon

Small dennyoffside

Ravelry_logo_small Abbott Smith

Special1tv_o_small Timm Higgins