2024 Roster and Transfer Discussion Thread
- Thread starter JayH
- Start date
For sure. But I think it's educated guesswork. I think there are ways for teams to have a pretty good idea how they want to roster-build. Some teams really have no use for the expansion draft and won't pick anyone of substance. Other teams want to use it to find solid roster pieces. There are ways for teams to get a pretty good idea which way San Diego wants to go. And that knowledge will give them a hint about who they should protect.
Charlotte used 2 of their five picks on players they did not want, including Shradi, who was effectively selected by LAFC for $400k. If someone else offered $425k, Charlotte would have chosen someone else. You can’t predict this.
Last edited:
I will make one prediction, if we leave O'toole unprotected he's gone. No expansion team is passing on a starting quality LB, that doesn't take an international spot and makes $195K.
On an unrelated note is it crazy to contemplate leaving Parks unprotected if we start running short on spots? I know it is a curve ball but I think you at least have to consider it for the following reasons:
1. A Sands + Perea midfield would not be a big drop-off from the current Sands + Parks pairing
2. Parks has been very inconsistent, sometimes he looks like one of the best CMs in the league that deserves more USMNT call-ups and sometimes he looks like he doesn't want to be there and is sleepwalking through the game.
3. Parks makes $970,000
4. It was reported last summer that he wanted to go back to Europe before signing an extension
5. He has some serious health issues that have caused him to miss substantial amounts of time
I don't think it's at all crazy to contemplate. I'm sure the team would hate to lose Keaton after all he's done for us, but at the same time, Perea does bring so much to the pitch. And he's younger.
Agreed on O'Toole, too. I can't imagine him being left unprotected, especially since McFarlane is sure to be gone in January.
RE: number 4, I don't know anything on this, but I get the sense that Keaton no longer wants to move to Europe after his son was born here.
I wish MLS would do away with the expansion draft entirely. Since LAFC entered the league expansion teams have had very generous roster building advantages. To the point as
mgarbowski pointed out Charlotte used 2 picks just to sell for GAM. Even when NYCFC entered the league on less generous terms the majority of our expansion draft picks were gone within 2 years. Why put all the teams in the league through this process just so the expansion team can grab some players to fill out the fringes of their roster.
Edit: they also shouldn't be messing with teams roster depth when they are forcing more games with leagues cup.
mgarbowski pointed out Charlotte used 2 picks just to sell for GAM. Even when NYCFC entered the league on less generous terms the majority of our expansion draft picks were gone within 2 years. Why put all the teams in the league through this process just so the expansion team can grab some players to fill out the fringes of their roster.Edit: they also shouldn't be messing with teams roster depth when they are forcing more games with leagues cup.
Last edited:
This is an opportunity to repeat myI wish MLS would do away with the expansion draft entirely. Since LAFC entered the league expansion teams have had very generous roster building advantages. To the point as
Old time expansion drafts in other sports generally involved fully dispersed costs. All or nearly all existing teams lost at least 1 player. The same was true when NYC and Orlando joined MLS: 15 of 18 teams lost at least one player. But now the burden of seeding a new team is borne by just 5 of 29 teams, with compensation that is way below market value. It's not right. Either drop the draft and add an extra $1-2M GAM to the expansion team's wallet from league coffers, or increase the GAM compensation to the handful of teams who lose players (regardless of whether flipped or kept by the new team) to match actual market value.
For sure -- the expansion draft makes little sense in a league where so many players come from overseas.
at least this will probably be the last expansion draft for a long time... or the last one ever? the league can't want more than 30 teams, can it?
Garber said 30 teams should be it for the foreseeable future. I can't imagine they'd want to go more than 32 under any circumstances, but they might be tapped out anyway.
Thirty strikes me as about right. There are between 30 and 32 teams in the other four major leagues.
I’m still a little skeptical that CA needed a fourth team. I get that MLS isn’t placing teams as much as ownership groups are bidding for an expansion so they don’t get to pick where teams go. But I think a Midwest team in Milwaukee, Detriot, or Pittsburgh would be filling more of a gap than SD will. Hell Louisiana could have been fun and Los Vegas make more sense geographically than SD
2 years? How about gone instantaneously. George John is for NYCFC originals. Drafted. Never made the preseason roster.
Messi himself probably generated more revenue for most clubs than even the most recent expansion fees. The narrative that the league needs the fee's to fix the balance sheet is not a very well reasoned one.
At the very least the Apple TV deal is helping, too. Maybe 10 years ago it was true that expansion fees were keeping the league afloat, but I don't think it's true anymore.
Far less than 10 years ago. Pre Messi and Apple the league was running at a loss. It will be interesting to see if they can stay profitable post Messi.
Watching Callens play for Peru got me thinking. Who will be our first player to go abroad for a substantial amount of time (Sands year at rangers doesn't count) and then return to NYCFC to finish their career. Will we see a Taty or Harrison return at some point towards the later part of their careers?
Similar threads
