2018 Roster Discussion

SoupInNYC said:
Yes, true I exaggerated your point there, though you were comparing him to Almiron (who was a Best11 player). But the way you were describing Jack was portraying his abilities much more than they are.
Click to expand...
Somebody else compared him to Almiron, and since that was the talking point, I continued with it and clearly stated that while I don’t think Jack is as good as Almiron, he overperformed considering his stats and situation whereas Almiron seemed to underperform considering what he had to work with.

Your last sentence is projection on your part.
 
Ulrich said:
Somebody else compared him to Almiron, and since that was the talking point, I continued with it and clearly stated that while I don’t think Jack is as good as Almiron, he overperformed considering his stats and situation whereas Almiron seemed to underperform considering what he had to work with.

Your last sentence is projection on your part.
Click to expand...
I really don’t think that was projection, but sure.

If Almiron underperformed last year and was a Best XI player, then Atlanta should be getting more than $20m for him.

brb, I’m heading to Brooklyn to go curling.
 
SoupInNYC said:
I know he had that great game against LAG on the left, but I thought he impressed more on the right with his performances against Chicago and Philly. I'm not sure I see him as someone who cuts in and shoots with his right. His best talent seems to be getting to the endline and crossing in.
Click to expand...
.
He played on the left against Chicago as well. In the combine played on the left and won combine MVP as a left winger scoring 3 goals. My only problem with Jlew is will he be consistent and ready to step up if he gets sufficient playing time but we can’t judge him until we see him more of him in preseason.
 
Ulrich said:
Point of information (and not disputing anything): that is a comparison between a world-class player, known for his scoring, at the tail end of his career vs essentially a 1st year (1.5 years) pro.
Click to expand...
Really? Then I withdraw the comparison.
Except I didn’t bring it up.
 
I thought the reported price sounded a bit low, but looking at what other England U21 players have gone for in the past few years it's basically on a par with that. The only player I know anything about is James Maddison who went for about $3 million to Norwich, and he's a cut above Harrison, so this price tag seems about right.
 
ManhattanValley said:
I thought the reported price sounded a bit low, but looking at what other England U21 players have gone for in the past few years it's basically on a par with that. The only player I know anything about is James Maddison who went for about $3 million to Norwich, and he's a cut above Harrison, so this price tag seems about right.
Click to expand...

Did you know James Madison’s first Vice President was George Clinton?

8EFFB7ED-6A71-462B-B421-020274C1DD8D.jpeg
 
A few things.
  • Medina is nearly a like-for-like switch with Jack. A very young left footer who likes to cut in from the right and put shots on goal with his left. He may not be as likable as Jack (who is?), but if Medina puts the ball in the net enough, he will be plenty likable enough.
  • This move would let a guy we developed chase his dream and demonstrate to other young players that we are not only happy to help them do the same but very capable of it. That’s important.
  • All that said, I do wonder about this move for Jack. I am not convinced Stoke will be giving much time to a 21-YO new to the league. The odds are high that he will end up getting lent out to a Championship side - or worse - playing there with a relegated Stoke. That’s not going to provide him with significantly better development than staying in a league with basically the same level of quality where he gets to play all the time.
 
Gotham Gator said:
A few things.
  • Medina is nearly a like-for-like switch with Jack. A very young left footer who likes to cut in from the right and put shots on goal with his left. He may not be as likable as Jack (who is?), but if Medina puts the ball in the net enough, he will be plenty likable enough.
  • This move would let a guy we developed chase his dream and demonstrate to other young players that we are not only happy to help them do the same but very capable of it. That’s important.
  • All that said, I do wonder about this move for Jack. I am not convinced Stoke will be giving much time to a 21-YO new to the league. The odds are high that he will end up getting lent out to a Championship side - or worse - playing there with a relegated Stoke. That’s not going to provide him with significantly better development than staying in a league with basically the same level of quality where he gets to play all the time.
Click to expand...
Medina is unproven in MLS. But he looks a lot calmer near goal. How much of that is because of a suckass league remains to be seen.

I don't mind them selling Jack. But pay a real effing fee and buy real effing players.

(Edited to try to stop swearing so much)
 
Last edited:
LionNYC said:
WE CANNOT BUY DOWN MAXI.

For the love of god, I hate explaining this all the time. Players making above $1.5M cannot be bought below the DP line.
Click to expand...

Point of clarification. We can not use TAM to buy down Maxi.

The interpretation of the transfer fee usage is that we could buy down Maxi's contract with our 1/2 of the Harrison transfer fee.

Assuming a $4.5 Million deal, we receive $2.25 Million. $650k of that is GAM, leaving us with $1.65 Million. $1.65 Million could be used to bring Maxi's budget charge to $350k, and frees up another DP slot. The $650k of GAM can be applied to offset the extra cost of Maxi at $350k now, while accommodating another DP at a $505k budget charge.

And we would still have $300k of GAM remaining.

Is that correct dummyrun ?
 
Now I'm reading the original post again and I think I'm wrong. The non-GAM part of the transfer fee that we get can't be used to buy down Maxi's contract. It COULD be used to pay a transfer fee of $1.65 Million and eliminate the transfer fee from a cap hit. I think that's the correct interpretation.
 
Kjbert said:
Point of clarification. We can not use TAM to buy down Maxi.

The interpretation of the transfer fee usage is that we could buy down Maxi's contract with our 1/2 of the Harrison transfer fee.

Assuming a $4.5 Million deal, we receive $2.25 Million. $650k of that is GAM, leaving us with $1.65 Million. $1.65 Million could be used to bring Maxi's budget charge to $350k, and frees up another DP slot. The $650k of GAM can be applied to offset the extra cost of Maxi at $350k now, while accommodating another DP at a $505k budget charge.

And we would still have $300k of GAM remaining.

Is that correct dummyrun ?
Click to expand...

Not quite. The non-GAM bulk of the transfer fee (in your example, the $1.65m) can't be used to buy down a DP to non-DP status, only to pay a DP. The buying down part has to be done with GAM or TAM.

This is why LionNYC is reminding us that we can't buy down Maxi. There are rules reasons and budgetary reasons why this is true—I think he's pointing us to the former. I don't know how to quote a second post, so:

"Players making above $1.5M cannot be bought below the DP line."

This is on the right track. The rule outside the summer transfer window is that players making above $1m can't be bought down with TAM (GAM has other restrictions, but we almost definitely don't have enough GAM anyway). There's a separate rule for the summer transfer window: in July and August you can buy down a DP who's making $1.5m on a prorated basis, or about $3m for the year.

So it could be that we could hang onto our TAM and buy down Maxi then. Whether he's in range for the prorated-$1.5m rule will depend on how the "compensation ceiling" part of the TAM limit works, which I touch on in the Harrison post.
 
dummyrun said:
Not quite. The non-GAM bulk of the transfer fee (in your example, the $1.65m) can't be used to buy down a DP to non-DP status, only to pay a DP. The buying down part has to be done with GAM or TAM.

This is why LionNYC is reminding us that we can't buy down Maxi. There are rules reasons and budgetary reasons why this is true—I think he's pointing us to the former. I don't know how to quote a second post, so:

"Players making above $1.5M cannot be bought below the DP line."

This is on the right track. The rule outside the summer transfer window is that players making above $1m can't be bought down with TAM (GAM has other restrictions, but we almost definitely don't have enough GAM anyway). There's a separate rule for the summer transfer window: in July and August you can buy down a DP who's making $1.5m on a prorated basis, or about $3m for the year.

So it could be that we could hang onto our TAM and buy down Maxi then. Whether he's in range for the prorated-$1.5m rule will depend on how the "compensation ceiling" part of the TAM limit works, which I touch on in the Harrison post.
Click to expand...

Wouldn’t we have a problem next season when we don’t have the TAM and he reverts back to his normal salary?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shwafta
NYCFC Survivor 2023 Winner!
Replies
0
Views
1,029
Shwafta
Shwafta
mgarbowski
NYCFC Season Discussion 2024: The Definition of NYCFC is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over and Getting the Same Result
10 11 12
Replies
226
Views
10,048
gbservis
gbservis
mgarbowski
  • Poll Poll
NYCFC Season Discussion 2023: We Know What We Are, But Not What We May Be
15 16 17
Replies
332
Views
18,631
FootyLovin
FootyLovin
Shwafta
  • Sticky
NYCFC Survivor [2022 Edition] General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
2,048
mgarbowski
mgarbowski
K
The 2021 Season Prognostication Thread
Replies
15
Views
2,469
Kjbert
K
Back
Top