Jacob Shaffelburg

[TOcanadafan]

2 hours ago, Macksam said:

No, they're different cats altogether.

Liam Millar has Tajon-esqe tenacity and with his hard work and dedication, he will become our best player in a couple years alongside Tajon himself and Theo. 

Shaf is a little more simple in how he plays, not to say he won't do great things but he has a ways to go so far. 

Ya, I hear what you’re saying.  Shaf is not on the same level as Liam… I guess I was making the comparison that both seem to be left wing attacking players without too much versatility, so no way Shaf gets called up since Liam is at a higher level.  The Tyler Pasher comparison is a good one too, but I think Shaff has a higher ceiling.

[BearcatSA]

18 hours ago, TOcanadafan said:

The Tyler Pasher comparison is a good one too, but I think Shaff has a higher ceiling.

Than Pasher, yes, but I tend to agree with the opinion of @maccaliam 

[narduch]

Starting against Austin tonight 

[solsous]

Thus far, he is looking lively.  Hany is finding him on the run.

[SoCalTransport]

36 minutes ago, solsous said:

Thus far, he is looking lively.  Hany is finding him on the run.

Yep it’s sad that TFC didn’t know where to play the kid…he’s obviously an MLS level player.

[SoCalTransport]

Nashville is a well built team, and are fun to watch. They probably have a budget that’s a tenth of TFC. Muhktar has to be one of the best finds in MLS history. If only TFC could have a Zimmerman quality CB. Serious MLS cup contender in my opinion.

[BearcatSA]

40 minutes ago, SoCalTransport said:

If only TFC could have a Zimmerman quality CB. Serious MLS cup contender in my opinion.

Zimmerman is an NCAA top draft pick who has done really well, particularly in his third MLS stop.  Andrew Farrell, top of that year's draft class, has been a solid CB with the club that drafted him (NER).  

[Dominic94]

10 hours ago, SoCalTransport said:

Yep it’s sad that TFC didn’t know where to play the kid…he’s obviously an MLS level player.

It’s just poor by Bob Bradley not to play Shaffleburg in a position where he did have success and showed where he belonged. Guy wasn’t a left back, no wonder he struggled. To be fair Nelson’s ceiling was higher but the move could have come sooner.

[DeRo_Is_King]

Happy for Shaf. Deserves to play. Always thought highly of him. Maybe he works his way back into the national team picture. 

[solsous]

1 hour ago, Dominic94 said:

It’s just poor by Bob Bradley not to play Shaffleburg in a position where he did have success and showed where he belonged. Guy wasn’t a left back, no wonder he struggled. To be fair Nelson’s ceiling was higher but the move could have come sooner.

It's not just Bob Bradley, for the most part, most MLS coaches does not like giving younger players extensive playing time.  They simply believe in their veterans.

 Right now, Nashville is the closest team to an EPL squad in terms of style of play.

[RS]

2 minutes ago, solsous said:

It's not just Bob Bradley, for the most part, most MLS coaches does not like giving younger players extensive playing time.  They simply believe in their veterans.

In this case it was a 19-year-old who took his playing time.

[DrunkOffPunch]

1 hour ago, solsous said:

It's not just Bob Bradley, for the most part, most MLS coaches does not like giving younger players extensive playing time.  They simply believe in their veterans.

MLS’ average age is similar to that of the Bundesliga/Ligue 1. I’d hardly say MLS coaches aren’t playing young guys.

[solsous]

25 minutes ago, DrunkOffPunch said:

MLS’ average age is similar to that of the Bundesliga/Ligue 1. I’d hardly say MLS coaches aren’t playing young guys.

That may be true, however, I wonder about the players in their academies.  Are the young players in the league from abroad or are they homegrown?  I guess that I am advocating for all academy players that can compete at the first team level.  

[DrunkOffPunch]

4 minutes ago, solsous said:

That may be true, however, I wonder about the players in their academies.  Are the young players in the league from abroad or are they homegrown?  I guess that I am advocating for all academy players that can compete at the first team level.  

Sounders won the CCL with a 16yo homegrown. Atlanta has spent the most money on young internationals but still starts a 17yo homegrown. NYRB, Dallas, Philly, Toronto all play several. The teams that don’t really play homegrowns are generally those that are too young to have a fully built up academy (ex-Nashville) or those that sold off theirs (ex-Colorado). There’s been a huge exodus of young players overseas the past couple years.

[solsous]

44 minutes ago, DrunkOffPunch said:

Sounders won the CCL with a 16yo homegrown. Atlanta has spent the most money on young internationals but still starts a 17yo homegrown. NYRB, Dallas, Philly, Toronto all play several. The teams that don’t really play homegrowns are generally those that are too young to have a fully built up academy (ex-Nashville) or those that sold off theirs (ex-Colorado). There’s been a huge exodus of young players overseas the past couple years.

Great counterpoint!

[BearcatSA]

56 minutes ago, DrunkOffPunch said:

 The teams that don’t really play homegrowns are generally those that are too young to have a fully built up academy (ex-Nashville) or those that sold off theirs (ex-Colorado). 

I guess the Whitecaps are latter.

[narduch]

3 hours ago, RS said:

In this case it was a 19-year-old who took his playing time.

And that 19 year old will go right back to the bench too eventually.

[narduch]

1 hour ago, DrunkOffPunch said:

Sounders won the CCL with a 16yo homegrown. Atlanta has spent the most money on young internationals but still starts a 17yo homegrown. NYRB, Dallas, Philly, Toronto all play several. The teams that don’t really play homegrowns are generally those that are too young to have a fully built up academy (ex-Nashville) or those that sold off theirs (ex-Colorado). There’s been a huge exodus of young players overseas the past couple years.

I would argue that one of the biggest issues MLS faces is that it doesn't play/develop enough Americans.

Most of the best American MLS teams only start about 2 Americans per game.

Personally I don't care because the success of the USMNT is irrelevant to me. But that is just my own observation.

[solsous]

1 minute ago, narduch said:

I would argue that one of the biggest issues MLS faces is that it doesn't play/develop enough Americans.

Most of the best American MLS teams only start about 2 Americans per game.

Personally I don't care because the success of the USMNT is irrelevant to me. But that is just my own observation.

From someone that played D1 soccer, I was always interested in how the MLS would become a top 5 league.  Initially, the league depended heavily on the draft and I was really excited about that.   All that has changed now and for the better.  However, it should not come at the expense of these talented young players.  One player that immediately comes to mind is JRR.  

 

 Maybe my eyes deceive me, but I am not seeing the local products on the field on a consistent basis.  They are given a few shifts and if they don't produce, they are sent back down to their respective academies or are rarely placed on the game day roster.  This, I believe, is a coaching problem that is systemic throughout the league.

[Obinna]

5 hours ago, Dominic94 said:

It’s just poor by Bob Bradley not to play Shaffleburg in a position where he did have success and showed where he belonged. Guy wasn’t a left back, no wonder he struggled. To be fair Nelson’s ceiling was higher but the move could have come sooner.

Yes, ideally he would have left at the beginning of the season, but I could forgive BB for taking a while to first identify who needed to move (Schaffelburg), and then to get appropriate assets in return.

In the end he made the right choice, Nelson was worth keeping, and now both are now in a better place than they were to start the year. A new coach has to evaluate the player, but also how that player fits in the team, and since "the team" is time to gel and find itself under a new coach, it's not surprising it took this long for Schaffelburg to be moved on. You must also factor in that a buyer had to present itself with the right offer, so it's not entirely in the control of BB or TFC.

(Sorry if that comes off as appologist, just how I see it)

Edited September 4, 2022 by Obinna

[rydermike]

At the beginning of the season, I was one of those who was dumbfounded at Shaff being at LB and not playing LW at all and/or getting limited opportunities after the LB experiment failed, but I've started to come around to understanding it.

My current understanding of it is, basically no one is going to unseat Lorenzo Insigne for the LW spot, so the first half of the season was about training his backup. I guess Bob Bradley pretty early identified and committed to the idea of Jayden Nelson as the backup/sub LW being the player with more potential and positional flexibility. Shaff became third string and you can't have a third stringer have one position only. So he tried Shaff at LB. If he did well there, then he would earn a roster spot as a utility left side sub. If he failed, then basically he would lose his roster spot because of a lack of required positional flexibility for a sub. Once it was obvious he was unable to play LB, he no longer had a spot on the team and there was no point in developing him for TFC  (he remained only as Nelson's emergency sub) because basically once Insigne arrived he would be shipped out. So, I don't think it was TFC didn't rate him, it's just they rate Nelson a bit higher and thus Shaff was superfluous to the team's needs, because a third-stringer requires positional flexibility which Shaff does lack.

Sure, everyone on this site would have loved to see Shaff get some development time, but I understand it from TFC's perspective. They knew they were going to get rid of him in a month or two, so they had no incentive to give him quality minutes that would take away from the player they were interested in developing (Nelson), when it was already decided that he was going to be moved very soon

[solsous]

4 minutes ago, rydermike said:

At the beginning of the season, I was one of those who was dumbfounded at Shaff being at LB and not playing LW at all and/or getting limited opportunities after the LB experiment failed, but I've started to come around to understanding it.

My current understanding of it is, basically no one is going to unseat Lorenzo Insigne for the LW spot, so the first half of the season was about training his backup. I guess Bob Bradley pretty early identified and committed to the idea of Jayden Nelson as the backup/sub LW being the player with more potential and positional flexibility. Shaff became third string and you can't have a third stringer have one position only. So he tried Shaff at LB. If he did well there, then he would earn a roster spot as a utility left side sub. If he failed, then basically he would lose his roster spot because of a lack of required positional flexibility for a sub. Once it was obvious he was unable to play LB, he no longer had a spot on the team and there was no point in developing him for TFC  (he remained only as Nelson's emergency sub) because basically once Insigne arrived he would be shipped out. So, I don't think it was TFC didn't rate him, it's just they rate Nelson a bit higher and thus Shaff was superfluous to the team's needs, because a third-stringer requires positional flexibility which Shaff does lack.

Sure, everyone on this site would have loved to see Shaff get some development time, but I understand it from TFC's perspective. They knew they were going to get rid of him in a month or two, so they had no incentive to give him quality minutes that would take away from the player they were interested in developing (Nelson), when it was already decided that he was going to be moved very soon

In general, coaches rarely adjust their schemes to fit players.  Fortunately, Shaffelburg style of play fits perfectly with Smith's coaching style. 

[DrunkOffPunch]

1 hour ago, narduch said:

I would argue that one of the biggest issues MLS faces is that it doesn't play/develop enough Americans.

Most of the best American MLS teams only start about 2 Americans per game.

Personally I don't care because the success of the USMNT is irrelevant to me. But that is just my own observation.

Again, the academies for these newer teams aren’t at a point where they can be consistently providing first team players. 
 

I guess I don’t know what you expect. NYRB, Dallas, NYCFC, and Philly have been churning out players. That’s 4 of your top 6 American teams. LAFC and Austin aren’t older than 5 years. And yet Austin has a 17yo with 20 appearances. Heck NER set the points record last year regularly starting 6 Americans plus a Canadian.

[rkomar]

I was shocked when I saw that LA Galaxy were starting one American against TFC last game.  Have the requirements slipped that much, or did LA acquire a lot of international player slots from other teams?  It's tough to see Canadians shunned because they are viewed as internationals on American teams, but then see one of those teams with only one American on it.

[DrunkOffPunch]

25 minutes ago, rkomar said:

I was shocked when I saw that LA Galaxy were starting one American against TFC last game.  Have the requirements slipped that much, or did LA acquire a lot of international player slots from other teams?  It's tough to see Canadians shunned because they are viewed as internationals on American teams, but then see one of those teams with only one American on it.

They started 3 Americans. Gasper, Araujo, and Bond.