2018 Expansion Draft Thread - LAFC Selections

[SoupInNYC]

One player makes more than Maxi does at the moment. For now

Yes, currently. But you said he was the 2nd highest paid player and 7th most productive. So 7th most productive, I'm assuming in your opinion is in regards to last season, in which he was the 3rd highest paid player.

Next year, who knows how productive he will or won't be, and time will tell if he is the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th highest paid player.

Listen, I understand the disappointment of his production last year as a DP, but all I'm saying is your argument in that one post was inconsistent. We can't choose to rank his salary as 2nd during a time that doesn't align with his performance.

 

[Kjbert]

Yes, currently. But you said he was the 2nd highest paid player and 7th most productive. So 7th most productive, I'm assuming in your opinion is in regards to last season, in which he was the 3rd highest paid player.

Next year, who knows how productive he will or won't be, and time will tell if he is the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th highest paid player.

Listen, I understand the disappointment of his production last year as a DP, but all I'm saying is your argument in that one post was inconsistent. We can't choose to rank his salary as 2nd during a time that doesn't align with his performance.

OK. Would you be happier if I said he was the 3rd highest paid employee and 7th most productive?

Either way, in my world (and many others), that guy loses his job. Which was the original point you argued anyway.

 

[SoupInNYC]

OK. Would you be happier if I said he was the 3rd highest paid employee and 7th most productive?

Either way, in my world (and many others), that guy loses his job. Which was the original point you argued anyway.

Well it would be more consistent with what you are trying to argue.

 

[Christopher Jee]

OK. Would you be happier if I said he was the 3rd highest paid employee and 7th most productive?

Either way, in my world (and many others), that guy loses his job. Which was the original point you argued anyway.

Do you guys assess "production" in a similarly limited way in your world? Teach me the ways of your people.

 

[Kjbert]

Do you guys assess "production" in a similarly limited way in your world? Teach me the ways of your people.

Output of work.

How do you measure production in your career?

 

[Seven]

Output of work.

How do you measure production in your career?

Actually now I am curious, how are you measuring him as the 7th most productive? Not saying I agree or disagree, just curious what measurement you are using.

He is T-1st in assists, 3rd in goals, and 3rd in combined G+A. Unfair to measure "productivity" of the defensive players in goals or assists of course, but then how do you compare Maxi to those defensive players?

 

[Kjbert]

Actually now I am curious, how are you measuring him as the 7th most productive? Not saying I agree or disagree, just curious what measurement you are using.

He is T-1st in assists, 3rd in goals, and 3rd in combined G+A. Unfair to measure "productivity" of the defensive players in goals or assists of course, but then how do you compare Maxi to those defensive players?

Production vs payment is one way to look at it. You could also do production vs expected production. Production vs replacement level would be a third.

The order is something like Villa, Ring, Callens, Chanot, Johnson, Harrison, Maxi to me.

Maxi vs replacement level #10 in MLS is the most damning to me

 

[Christopher Jee]

Output of work.

How do you measure production in your career?

I'm funemployed right now so it's a bit hard to say.

When I was gainfully employed, we had a pretty comprehensive set of assessment criteria ranging from most directly impactful to extremely indirectly impactful factors. We would reach out for feedback based on that criteria on a quarterly basis and go from there. Overall, there was an understanding that one's contribution wasn't just the lines of code one wrote or bugs one fixed. It was really quite a lot of work. Or should I say quite really a lot of work.

By the way I have been feeling bad about the tone of the post you're responding to. I meant it as a kind of gallows-humor-ish, what the hell are we doing on this forum in the depths of off-season post. But it came off quite snarky. My b.

 

[Kjbert]

Dude we're good.

Back to the original thought here. Leaving Maxi unprotected is just smart business. They won't be able to take him based on their DP plans you would imagine. I say that without knowing how much GAM these new teams are getting.

 

[Fake Jew]

Don't DPs have to be protected? This discussion is stupid.

 

[413Blue]

Don't DPs have to be protected? This discussion is stupid.

That's what I thought but have not bothered to read the rules for this one. Either way, Maxi was a key player for us last season, and I believe he provided much more value overall than most people could see. That being said, we could certainly get better value from a dp position for him, so I'd like to see him sold and replaced with a more dominant dp.

 

[joe]

Don't DPs have to be protected? This discussion is stupid.

No they're not, but yes it is.

• Designated Players are NOT automatically protected (i.e., clubs must choose whether to protect such players and if such player is not protected, he will be available for selection in the Expansion Draft).

 

[Midas Mulligan]

I'm not entirely convinced he's that much better than RJ Allen in the limited amount we've seen him. He's an international player and he's replacement level.

There’s only one true statement in here. Struna is a full international.

 

[SoupInNYC]

Don't DPs have to be protected? This discussion is stupid.

Yeah, that was an error on the SITC podcast I think where they mentioned that. That was the first I ever heard that DPs had to be protected and I looked it up and its not the case.

 

[413Blue]

Yeah, that was an error on the SITC podcast I think where they mentioned that. That was the first I ever heard that DPs had to be protected and I looked it up and its not the case.

It was the case last time around. Probably because they have 22 teams feeding just one, they decided to be a bit more loose with the rules.

 

[EganSoccerWords]

It was the case last time around. Probably because they have 22 teams feeding just one, they decided to be a bit more loose with the rules.

It was not the case last time around. Every MLS expansion draft has never required teams to protect designated players.

"Designated Players are NOT automatically protected (i.e., Clubs must choose whether to protect such players and if such player is not protected, he will be available for selection in the Expansion Draft). " http://pressbox.mlssoccer.com/content/2016-expansion-draft-rules-and-regulations

That is the same wording in the recent MLS article on expansion.

Last expansion draft all of these DPs were left unprotected for a variety of reasons: DaMarcus Beasley, Robbie Keane, Steven Gerrard, Didier Drogba, Lucas Ontivero, Jose Goncalves, Frank Lampard, Omer Damari, Maurice Edu, Innocent Emeghara, Nelson Valde

 

[SoupInNYC]

It was the case last time around. Probably because they have 22 teams feeding just one, they decided to be a bit more loose with the rules.

I don't think that's correct. The note is the same at the bottom of this page in regards to DPs.

https://www.mlssoccer.com/post/2016/12/12/2016-mls-expansion-draft-protected-and-unprotected-lists

There are also DPs listed on the "unprotected" lists, granted I think all but DeMarcus Beasley did not return to their team. And Beasley returned, but not as a DP.

 

[Kjbert]

Don't DPs have to be protected? This discussion is stupid.

They must be protected.

It's not stupid.

If you know that LAFC can't take Maxi, then why not leave him unprotected so you don't run the risk of losing a Ben Sweat or Ethan White?

 

[Midas Mulligan]

I think people are all mixed up on what it means that DPs must be protected. How that has occurred, I don’t know.

If there’s a game theory bone in any single FO body, you leave Maxi unprotected. There’s no debate. Hell, I’d leave him unprotected even if he had a no trade clause. He WILL NOT be selected, so what does it matter?

 

[413Blue]

It was not the case last time around. Every MLS expansion draft has never required teams to protect designated players.

"Designated Players are NOT automatically protected (i.e., Clubs must choose whether to protect such players and if such player is not protected, he will be available for selection in the Expansion Draft). " http://pressbox.mlssoccer.com/content/2016-expansion-draft-rules-and-regulations

That is the same wording in the recent MLS article on expansion.

Last expansion draft all of these DPs were left unprotected for a variety of reasons: DaMarcus Beasley, Robbie Keane, Steven Gerrard, Didier Drogba, Lucas Ontivero, Jose Goncalves, Frank Lampard, Omer Damari, Maurice Edu, Innocent Emeghara, Nelson Valde

I stand corrected. For some odd reason I swore I remembered they had to be protected. I'm pretty sure it was because players with a no trade clause were required to be protected, and the only players for the most part who could have no trade clauses were dp's