2022 Roster Discussion

[ManhattanValley]

Happy for James and it shows other younger players the path etc etc, but this move is pretty close to a worst-case scenario for us.

Losing a player on such a favorable contract in MLS is only worth it if it frees up allocation spots, or generates allocation money. This deal appears to do neither, at least for the next 18 months. Not only that, but Rangers having an exclusive right to buy for the next 18 months puts a ceiling on how much compensation we can expect to get, if we get any at all. Rangers are a team with a history of financial problems and are not in a position to spend big money - they have paid more than $9 million for a player just once in their history, and that was 20 years ago.

Our best outcome here is that Sands dominates and forces Rangers into paying big money for him - hopefully we need the cash more in 2024 than we do today, but obviously we can’t know that yet. Our worst outcome is that he suffers a serious injury/falls out of favor at the wrong time and we essentially receive nothing for the 18 months. For the sake of giving a talent like Sands the opportunity to play in a middling league like the SPL, this seems like a poor return for us.

 

[mgarbowski]

Happy for James and it shows other younger players the path etc etc, but this move is pretty close to a worst-case scenario for us.

Losing a player on such a favorable contract in MLS is only worth it if it frees up allocation spots, or generates allocation money. This deal appears to do neither, at least for the next 18 months. Not only that, but Rangers having an exclusive right to buy for the next 18 months puts a ceiling on how much compensation we can expect to get, if we get any at all. Rangers are a team with a history of financial problems and are not in a position to spend big money - they have paid more than $9 million for a player just once in their history, and that was 20 years ago.

Our best outcome here is that Sands dominates and forces Rangers into paying big money for him - hopefully we need the cash more in 2024 than we do today, but obviously we can’t know that yet. Our worst outcome is that he suffers a serious injury/falls out of favor at the wrong time and we essentially receive nothing for the 18 months. For the sake of giving a talent like Sands the opportunity to play in a middling league like the SPL, this seems like a poor return for us.

What I don't like about this deal is it only makes sense if you assume facts that might be true but for which we have no evidence, and most of them are depressing. The Rangers will gladly pay us in summer 2023 for a James Sands today. This deal only makes sense if:

There is very little market interest in Sands and not likely to be in the next 18 months, and Sands pushed very hard to be moved now despite the lack of interest and the club deemed the cost of not moving him so high (which basically means he threatened to be a jerk) that NYCFC believed they had no choice but to accept bad terms, or
The Rangers' exclusive right to purchase is attached to a price that makes the 18 month deferral worthwhile, but that probably means the Rangers are unlikely to be able to pay it, or
The Rangers are paying an unusually high and undisclosed loan fee.

I cannot really think of a scenario besides the seemingly unlikely high loan fee that makes this a good deal for NYCFC.

Sands get what he wants
The Ranger get him for 18 months on a loan plus they hold an exclusive option to buy with no obligation
NYCFC bears the risk of injury or stunted development (which they no longer control) and in return gets guaranteed (________). Basically NYCFC gets guaranteed nothing in return that I can see. Plus anything they do get is deferred for 18 months.

Last year NYCFC refused Palmeiras because that club wanted to buy Taty on some sort of deferred financing deal. Now transferring Sands with an 18 month payment deferral - which Rangers can simply reject and return him at their preference- is good business?

If the Rangers choose not to buy at the end of 18 months, NYCFC is in a terrible position. It diminishes Sands' market value, and creates a fire sale situation, unless the club is suddenly willing to play hardball and force him to come back to MLS against his preferences, which would create more ill will and bad looks than not letting him go right now possibly could.

To the people who justify this on the grounds that we have to show we do right by developing players: is there any outer limit to that principle?

 

[Shwafta]

To the people who justify this on the grounds that we have to show we do right by developing players: is there any outer limit to that principle?

I think there is an outer limit, of course. However, James is our first homegrown, and what we do with him resonates across the board. I think with future interactions it can/will be different, but James is the test child and it's possible that they over/under extend for him in ways they wouldn't normally do.

I'm willing to trust the FO on their decision here.

 

[Revfugee]

What I don't like about this deal is it only makes sense if you assume facts that might be true but for which we have no evidence, and most of them are depressing. The Rangers will gladly pay us in summer 2023 for a James Sands today. This deal only makes sense if:

There is very little market interest in Sands and not likely to be in the next 18 months, and Sands pushed very hard to be moved now despite the lack of interest and the club deemed the cost of not moving him so high (which basically means he threatened to be a jerk) that NYCFC believed they had no choice but to accept bad terms, or
The Rangers' exclusive right to purchase is attached to a price that makes the 18 month deferral worthwhile, but that probably means the Rangers are unlikely to be able to pay it, or
The Rangers are paying an unusually high and undisclosed loan fee.

I cannot really think of a scenario besides the seemingly unlikely high loan fee that makes this a good deal for NYCFC.

Sands get what he wants
The Ranger get him for 18 months on a loan plus they hold an exclusive option to buy with no obligation
NYCFC bears the risk of injury or stunted development (which they no longer control) and in return gets guaranteed (________). Basically NYCFC gets guaranteed nothing in return that I can see. Plus anything they do get is deferred for 18 months.

Last year NYCFC refused Palmeiras because that club wanted to buy Taty on some sort of deferred financing deal. Now transferring Sands with an 18 month payment deferral - which Rangers can simply reject and return him at their preference- is good business?

If the Rangers choose not to buy at the end of 18 months, NYCFC is in a terrible position. It diminishes Sands' market value, and creates a fire sale situation, unless the club is suddenly willing to play hardball and force him to come back to MLS against his preferences, which would create more ill will and bad looks than not letting him go right now possibly could.

To the people who justify this on the grounds that we have to show we do right by developing players: is there any outer limit to that principle?

Or maybe, just maybe, when they signed him to the long-term deal last year, they said “help win us a cup and we will help place you in Europe.” Perhaps they underestimated the demand in that scenario but were bound contractually or otherwise to honor the promise. Either way, I doubt Lee is stupid enough to do this deal without at least some form of salary relief. It does leave us very thin at the back for now but the trajectory on development/signings and depth has been upward over the last couple of seasons. I’ll miss the guys leaving, but I think we have only scratched the surface on our expensive young Brazilians and we now have DP flexibility. So I’m gonna be patient.

 

[mgarbowski]

However, James is our first homegrown, and what we do with him

If you ignore everyone who went to Europe already. It’s not like we have no history.

 

[Kjbert]

If you watch his interview, he implies that he signed his extension last year with the promise that they would let him leave this window

 

[Shwafta]

If you ignore everyone who went to Europe already. It’s not like we have no history.

Yeah, but it's slightly different with James. Gio never played actual minutes for us and Scally was sold before he even stepped foot onto the senior pitch.
Jack Harrison, while being an awesome story, was not a homegrown player.

James is, and always will be, "The First" and what the club does with/for him goes a long way to future academy prospects specifically. I think one of the main reasons CFG picked New York is because of the huge potential of young talent within the city. Building mini pitches etc. They'll do anything they can do to show the young prospects here that there's a future for them, and that's something different from "Hey you young brazillian, look what we've done before!"

...Also separately, dang it rangers i just wanna see our boy jimmy interview T-T

 

[mgarbowski]

Yeah, but it's slightly different with James. Gio never played actual minutes for us and Scally was sold before he even stepped foot onto the senior pitch.
Jack Harrison, while being an awesome story, was not a homegrown player.

Why would any academy prospect GAF whether they play as a homegrown before moving to Europe? And why would anyone prefer to wait longer to move, and end up in the SPL - on loan - instead of going sooner and younger on a permanent deal to the Bundesliga?

 

[mgarbowski]

Here's a minor puzzle:

New York City FC | MLSSoccer.com

All the latest MLS club news, scores, stats, standings and highlights.

www.mlssoccer.com

Sands and Mitrita are both officially on loan. Mitrita is still listed on the NYCFC roster page, with his loan status noted. So is Haak for that matter, though I thought his loan ended with the 2021 season. But Sands is just off the roster completely, one day after his loan was announced. Also, Mitrita is listed as a DP, which could be the reason why he's listed, ie, just to show he is taking up a DP slot, but that is inconsistent with the news items from when he was first loaned that people posted very recently that all said the loan freed up his DP position.

It could be as simple as MLS web interns not being consistent. But I can't see any logical reason for this that does not involve human error?. Anyone else know or have a better theory?

 

[Fantazma]

Here's a minor puzzle:

New York City FC | MLSSoccer.com

All the latest MLS club news, scores, stats, standings and highlights.

www.mlssoccer.com

Sands and Mitrita are both officially on loan. Mitrita is still listed on the NYCFC roster page, with his loan status noted. So is Haak for that matter, though I thought his loan ended with the 2021 season. But Sands is just off the roster completely, one day after his loan was announced. Also, Mitrita is listed as a DP, which could be the reason why he's listed, ie, just to show he is taking up a DP slot, but that is inconsistent with the news items from when he was first loaned that people posted very recently that all said the loan freed up his DP position.

It could be as simple as MLS web interns not being consistent. But I can't see any logical reason for this that does not involve human error?. Anyone else know or have a better theory?

its the mls site interns. remember when they made a whole article saying we qualified for CCL and in reality we didnt.

 

[Kjbert]

Everyone should watch the James Sands interview. Seriously. He pretty much says he only signed an extension with the promise that he could leave

 

[joe]

Is my signed jersey more valuable or less tho

 

[Shwafta]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1479108393667215366

 

[Aleeksa]

Not that it was ever our strength-strength, but does anybody know who is taking free kicks come February 15th?

Follow-up Question: are we worried?

 

[JayH]

Not that it was ever our strength-strength, but does anybody know who is taking free kicks come February 15th?

Follow-up Question: are we worried?

Callens takes all kicks of all kinds from all over.

 

[Fantazma]

Not that it was ever our strength-strength, but does anybody know who is taking free kicks come February 15th?

Follow-up Question: are we worried?

Maxi but it wont be a shot at goal, it will probably be just a pass to the box for a header or something.