PDA

View Full Version : Barrett Vs. Vitti



[NBF]
06-13-2009, 09:00 AM
Two men enter, one must score, and the other must copy. Its a game of Horse.

I Figure this might have been a lineup at some point during the season, but both of these guys need a goal and the pressure of putting both side by side will bring results.


4-4-2:

------------------Frei------------------
Attakora----Velez-----Serioux---Brennan
---------------------------------------
J. Smith---Robinson--DeRosario--Ricketts
---------------------------------------
----------Vitti----------Barrett---------

or

-----------------Frei-------------------
Garcia---Attakora----Serioux----Brennan

:drum:

Brooker
06-13-2009, 09:21 AM
barrett has actually scored....

vitti has not... so i voted for chad.

it's funny... pablo always looks like he's about to break out... especially when he hit the post in vancouver... that should have been his coming out party.

CMON PABLO! BREAK THAT ICE!

Kickit09
06-13-2009, 10:33 AM
;571761']
Who would score first if Vitti and Barrett are lined up side by side?



trick question

InTheCrowd
06-13-2009, 11:10 AM
Vitti has scored for us. It was just offside. :(

FluSH
06-13-2009, 11:22 AM
Vitti has scored for us. It was just offside. :(


well he's scored against us...

InTheCrowd
06-13-2009, 11:27 AM
well he's scored against us...

If that counts for anything lol.

poppamidnight
06-13-2009, 12:49 PM
Question: If both are not all that likely to score, what is the point of this poll...

Shouldn't it be classified as who does more/creates more opportunities?

...Not that it would change the outcome:

Pablo Vitti = more likely to score, does more/creates more opportunities than Chad

Kickit09
06-13-2009, 03:56 PM
I just looked at the results, since i refuse to vote in this ludicrous poll, and I'm amazed that Vitti is in the lead with twice as many votes as Barrett ( 41-20). As bad as Barrett is, at least he's scored a goal this season. Must be the same people voting that voted in the Vitti vs Montero poll.

DoubleUp
06-13-2009, 04:32 PM
Chad does more actual work, but Vitti makes doin less look more spectacular.:rolleyes:

poppamidnight
06-13-2009, 04:37 PM
I just looked at the results, since i refuse to vote in this ludicrous poll, and I'm amazed that Vitti is in the lead with twice as many votes as Barrett ( 41-20). As bad as Barrett is, at least he's scored a goal this season. Must be the same people voting that voted in the Vitti vs Montero poll.


Why has he scored?
-Got more starts/oppurtunities than Barrett...

Quite simple really.

It's like the Chinese Olympic team....
Hammer out over a million athletes and your bound to get a couple medals here and there.....

...Doesn't necessarily mean they are better than others.....


It's like the carnival,
Take your little BB gun - If you get 1 or 2 bulletts, your not gunna shot out those little star things,
Give a full clip - your likely to shoot out the star


Vitti does more with his limited starts than Chad does,

and PS -
I have yet to see anyone (besides chat barrett) who can kick a ball inside the box 20 yards away from goal,
or put two beautifully-set-up headers within minutes of each other right into the goalie

Kickit09
06-13-2009, 05:09 PM
Doesn't matter if Barrett has played more because Vitti has had more than enough time and opportunities to score a goal. Barrett has played 989 minutes and has 2 goals, Vitti has played 715 minutes and no goals. By comparison, Dichio has 2 goals in 512 minutes. Bottom line is Vitti and Barrett are both shit, but according to Mo "good enough".

poppamidnight
06-13-2009, 05:45 PM
Doesn't matter if Barrett has played more because Vitti has had more than enough time and opportunities to score a goal. Barrett has played 989 minutes and has 2 goals, Vitti has played 715 minutes and no goals. By comparison, Dichio has 2 goals in 512 minutes. Bottom line is Vitti and Barrett are both shit, but according to Mo "good enough".

Factor in the fact your less likely to score off the bench, due to the fact your not in the rhythm of the game (not sure if you've ever played before - but it's a fact),

Yes bottom line is both are crap, But your quote inferred that Barrett was somehow better than Vitti...
...which is by no means so,

I had to say something... Can't just have people in here saying the world is flat now can we?

TFC USA
06-13-2009, 05:57 PM
Who cares? Barrett and Vitti's combined work rate can make us the hardest working team to not score in the MLS!

InTheCrowd
06-13-2009, 10:01 PM
I know Barrett can be amazing. Anyone remember last season?

trane
06-13-2009, 10:07 PM
Thank god we started old slow Dichio.

TFC USA
06-13-2009, 10:08 PM
Fuck last season. This season he's shit.

trane
06-13-2009, 10:12 PM
Neither of them are likely to have a future as strikers, if I had to chose one, I would take Vitti, but he is on a shot leash. If the salary cap were not an issue I would keep them both convert them both one to CM, Vitti, one to Winger. Both have some good attributes, and can be MLS starters, maybe all-stars one day, just not as strikers.

poppamidnight
06-13-2009, 10:32 PM
Vitti was our best player on the pitch today...

Created almost all our attacking opportunities (aside from De-Ro near the end of the match)...

Chad had a promising run which he flubbed when he got flustered.

Vitti is proving himself an attacking wing/MF... The Guevara of our Right Side.

Chad Barrett no longer fits with this team,
Ali Gerba is our striker,
NOT Vitti/Barrett,

Vitti is our Right-Wing, creating oppurtunity
We can't have Chad Barrett + Rohan Rickett's salaries on the bench,

Barrett will go when either/or: Gerba is signed/OBW is cleared to play

InTheCrowd
06-13-2009, 10:54 PM
How is Barrett just going to go?

poppamidnight
06-13-2009, 10:56 PM
How is Barrett just going to go?


traded for a lesser-salary (roll player/positional player - possibly a utility defender to spell velez)

or for a mid-round pick if a team has the cap-room for him

InTheCrowd
06-13-2009, 11:03 PM
traded for a lesser-salary (roll player/positional player - possibly a utility defender to spell velez)

or for a mid-round pick if a team has the cap-room for him

Nobody would want to take over Barrett's contract. 4 years with such a big salary. We're screwed unless he picks up his game.

poppamidnight
06-13-2009, 11:11 PM
Nobody would want to take over Barrett's contract. 4 years with such a big salary. We're screwed unless he picks up his game.

That's why I said theres the option to trade for a lesser salary,
to fill a positional need,

Teams may not want to eat the full salary,
but would be more willing to take it if we're taking some salary in return,


Much like BC did last week for the raptors: Kapono for Reggie Evans, saved like $1-1.5/yr for identical 3-yr deals

Kaz
06-14-2009, 12:01 AM
I'm thinking Vitti fell into a slump at the beginning of the season, and it looks like he's working his way out of it, if he scores in Montreal or New York, then I think we'll get our money's worth. I could see him picking up 5 or 6 by the end of the season, if he keeps working as hard as he has, and starts finding that finishing touch.

Darlofletch
06-14-2009, 12:28 AM
and PS -
I have yet to see anyone (besides chat barrett) who can kick a ball inside the box 20 yards away from goal,
or put two beautifully-set-up headers within minutes of each other right into the goalie



I had to say something... Can't just have people in here saying the world is flat now can we?

I presume in your first post you're referring to the vancouver game, and the first of those headers went over the bar, the second one was the only one he headed right at the goalie.

It doesn't change the fact that he missed them both, and that he's shit, but seeing as how you're in here correcting other people's opinions, i just know you'd hate to have an actual 100% wrong fact from your own post left unchallenged.

Darlofletch
06-14-2009, 12:34 AM
Vitt had a decent game again today, but once again, just can't score.

Barrett did pretty much nothing when he came on, the one time he did have a chance to run at the defence and maybe try and score, you can tell the whole time he was desperately trying to find someone to pass to, rather than take repsonsibility for trying to score himself. That seems to me like a sign his confidence is shot, which is not a good thing.

Vitti clearly deserves playing time ahead of Barrett right now, but I still have 0 confidence in his ability to score.

Shakes McQueen
06-14-2009, 02:33 AM
Pretty silly poll question. If you lined up both of them in front of an empty net, jokes aside, both would probably put it in.

Vitti has good moves and footwork, but again today, wasn't able to turn it into goals. The penalty was the result of an idiotic decision by the NY defender (who falls to the ground in the box when they get beaten, and simply bats the ball away with their entire arm?), and the second goal was Dichio cleaning up a very Barrett-esque breakaway miss from Vitti.

Barrett needed to sit tonight, but aside from some good work ethic, Barrett has actually produced us a few goals (more than 2, if you include the cup). Vitti still hasn't scored, and both have had AMPLE starting lineup time at this point, so don't trot out that old excuse for Vitti.

Vitti has good technical skills, but lacks that killer finishing touch. Barrett has the work rate of a first-class footballer, but also lacks that killer finishing touch.

Both have been pretty unimpressive as strikers, in my opinion. Barrett works pretty well out wide, instead of as a target man. Vitti's skill set seems more conducive to a withdrawn second striker role, or even attacking midfielder.

I currently wouldn't be heartbroken if either of them left. That said, I still think Barrett often get's judged too harshly - especially when compared to Vitti, who seems to get a pass from more people purely based on his flashy footwork.

- Scott

Kaz
06-14-2009, 07:54 AM
if you look at the replay, Vitti was tripped by the Keeper, I think had Dichio not scored right away a foul would have been called. For once I don't blame Vitti for that miss, he player that right and should have scored.

I_AM_CANADIAN
06-14-2009, 08:03 AM
I'm a Vitti fan. The guy adds an extra dimension to our attack with his skill on the ball. Barrett works hard, but Vitti is a better player IMO. I don't dislike Barrett by any means, but he's had the most playing time out of all of our strikers and has failed to produce much.

TFCRegina
06-14-2009, 08:04 AM
This poll question is like asking "Which cripple will learn to run first?"

Vitti created a lot of chances yesterday though.

Erkan16
06-14-2009, 10:20 AM
i would take Vitti 10 times out of 10.

Barrett is a useless waste of space. fuck him.

InTheCrowd
06-14-2009, 11:51 AM
That's why I said theres the option to trade for a lesser salary,
to fill a positional need,

Teams may not want to eat the full salary,
but would be more willing to take it if we're taking some salary in return,


Much like BC did last week for the raptors: Kapono for Reggie Evans, saved like $1-1.5/yr for identical 3-yr deals

No team would want to do that.

Would you take on Barrett's contract? I highly doubt it. No matter if you trade off one of your players with a lower salary. That player with a lower salary barely affects your cap, they wouldn't care. Not to mention if they wanted to get rid of that guy with a low salary they could just sell him or trade him.

But no GM in their right mind would take on Barrett's contract in the current situation.

For example would you give away Velez for a striker who has a high salary and isn't performing well? Velez has a low salary, it barely impacts your team. Why would you take on a player in this situation, it makes no sense financially and would just hurt your team.

I doubt any team would take over his contract for free.

poppamidnight
06-14-2009, 12:08 PM
No team would want to do that.

Would you take on Barrett's contract? I highly doubt it. No matter if you trade off one of your players with a lower salary. That player with a lower salary barely affects your cap, they wouldn't care. Not to mention if they wanted to get rid of that guy with a low salary they could just sell him or trade him.

But no GM in their right mind would take on Barrett's contract in the current situation.

For example would you give away Velez for a striker who has a high salary and isn't performing well? Velez has a low salary, it barely impacts your team. Why would you take on a player in this situation, it makes no sense financially and would just hurt your team.

I doubt any team would take over his contract for free.

Dude your not getting what I'm saying,

I'm not saying trading Chad's $202,000 salary for a $50,000 Salary,
That's proportionally off,

I'm saying we could likely deal it for a $120-140,000 salary,

Relieving us slightly...
Teams would be more willing to do something like that.

PS - Velez salry isn't all that low, it does effect our team. He's at $60,000. A salary that doesn't effect us is a young kid, say Gabe Gala ($34,000) or Gomez ($25,000)....
$60,000 is the (actual - not "mo-inflated") market-value difference between De Rosario and Robinson.

BRed
06-14-2009, 12:10 PM
Bananas.

Darlofletch
06-14-2009, 12:53 PM
if you look at the replay, Vitti was tripped by the Keeper, I think had Dichio not scored right away a foul would have been called. For once I don't blame Vitti for that miss, he player that right and should have scored.

Dude, that is just so wrong it's funny. Their keeper stuck his leg out and got the ball (which is why it went all the way back to Dichio) then Vitti tripped over him.

InTheCrowd
06-14-2009, 01:36 PM
Dude your not getting what I'm saying,

I'm not saying trading Chad's $202,000 salary for a $50,000 Salary,
That's proportionally off,

I'm saying we could likely deal it for a $120-140,000 salary,

Relieving us slightly...
Teams would be more willing to do something like that.

PS - Velez salry isn't all that low, it does effect our team. He's at $60,000. A salary that doesn't effect us is a young kid, say Gabe Gala ($34,000) or Gomez ($25,000)....
$60,000 is the (actual - not "mo-inflated") market-value difference between De Rosario and Robinson.

I see what you're saying, but I doubt many clubs would take that. We'd have to offer them another player or maybe allocation for clubs to consider this kind of trade.

bhoybobby
06-14-2009, 01:55 PM
Barrett will never be the footballer Vitti is

Yohan
06-14-2009, 02:07 PM
quote from Coach Cummins



Cummins had said at the end of the week that slumping striker Chad Barrett's ankle was healthy, but took advantage of Guevara's return from the Honduran national squad to sit Barrett at the start. Barrett came in for the scoreless Vitti in the 68th minute.
"He has been hungry in training this week and (sitting him) might give him some hunger back as well," Cummins said of Barrett. "Pablo's a wonderful footballer; unfortunately, he can't hit the back of the net right now, can't hit a barn door with a banjo as they say. But he's working. He's tidy, he links the play. The (bumpy BMO) pitch doesn't help him. I wanted to try a couple of different things with Amado coming back."

TFC USA
06-14-2009, 02:14 PM
This "he's in a scoring slump" excuse has to end. We're in the middle of a playoff race so fuck slumps. Vitti can't score and Barrett hasn't done shit in eons.

Yohan
06-14-2009, 02:20 PM
This "he's in a scoring slump" excuse has to end. We're in the middle of a playoff race so fuck slumps. Vitti can't score and Barrett hasn't done shit in eons.
your eons equals 4 weeks? (Barrett goal vs Mtl)

TFC USA
06-14-2009, 03:32 PM
Great goal but right now it means fuck all.

This slump shit has to stop because it's June now and we've sucked in the summer for the last 2 years, especially trying to score. Admit that they suck and Mo has to do something about it.

poppamidnight
06-14-2009, 03:48 PM
quote from Coach Cummins

thing I dislike about that, Is Cummins is assuming both are our go-to strikers...

If he hasn't clued in as to now that we score through our attacking MF/Wings, then he's in trouble...

Our scoring is balanced, which is what it should be,
Dichio, Amado, DeRo....

Vitti creates chances for those guys,
Chad blows chances for himself + others.

Ali Gerba + OBW on the way = who gives a f*** about relying on Chad + Vitti, they no longer need to be the main goalscorers,

With that said, Vitti is more suited to this team with OBW + Gerba as the two up front.....Would actually be in that starting 11 on the wing...
Chad Barrett? he can't play wide, doesn't create the chances for others = the most expensive sub in that lineup

Nodoubtguy
06-14-2009, 04:30 PM
I'd go with Vitti. Chad works hard but he is there to score and misses to many chances. Vitti on the other hand can create so much more. If we look at Vitti as a playmaker then finisher, he will be so useful to this team.

bhoybobby
06-14-2009, 05:36 PM
People keep talking about Vitti as a playmaker and creating chances, but he has ZERO assists to go along with his ZERO goals. Barrett has 1 assist to go along with his 2 goals. I'm not saying Barrett is better, I just don't understand why Barrett gets shit on and Vitti gets a free pass when by the numbers Barrett has been more effective (since wins are measured by goals and not fancy footwork). I like Vitti, He is definitely more talented and skilled than Barrett, but a striker who can't score is useless. Bottom line, at $300,000 an 0 goals and 0 assists Vitti is our most expensive and least effective striker. He has 1 goal (in a meaningful game) in the last 3 years. I don't think that's just a slump.


So how'd we get a penalty yesterday? Vitti's play. How'd we get the 2nd goal?, Vitti's rebound.

Give yer head a shake & pay attention

Dirk Diggler
06-14-2009, 05:44 PM
So how'd we get a penalty yesterday? Vitti's play. How'd we get the 2nd goal?, Vitti's rebound.

Give yer head a shake & pay attention

Yeah ... people get so caught up with stats sometimes that they forget to pay attention to the game itself.

InTheCrowd
06-14-2009, 06:10 PM
Right, because it was Vitti's strategy that Stammler would fall and hadball it and we would get a penalty kick. Just like it was his strategy to mess up that breakaway on purpose so Dichio could get the rebound. If you give Vitti credit for those 2 goals than YOU need to give your head a shake and pay attention.

+1 on this and your post before this one!

jloome
06-14-2009, 06:19 PM
Right, because it was Vitti's strategy that Stammler would fall and hadball it and we would get a penalty kick. Just like it was his strategy to mess up that breakaway on purpose so Dichio could get the rebound. If you give Vitti credit for those 2 goals than YOU need to give your head a shake and pay attention.

You people are blind. He walked the ball past two players to get into the box in the first place, then reversed field onto his left foot, which is why Stammler went down, trying to stay on his hip.

The second play, his run was timed perfectly, the ball from Guevara was timed perfectly.

Vitti effectively created both goals by simply having flat-out better technique than the people marking him. If you can't see that, you might as well go watch three-down throwball.

The only reason both Barrett and Vitti can't turn their possession into scoring opportunities is release; both release the ball slowly on a shot, giving goalies (ala Cepero's excellent kick save) a chance to react. In Barrett's case, he overcompensates incorrectly for this by blasting the ball.

Kickit09
06-14-2009, 06:42 PM
You people are blind. He walked the ball past two players to get into the box in the first place, then reversed field onto his left foot, which is why Stammler went down, trying to stay on his hip.

Really??? I think you need to watch the replay because Vitti was right on the edge of the box when he got the ball, he turned around took 2 steps and than Stammler who was in front of Vitti fell and handball. At no point in that play did Vitti walk past 2 players. So who is blind?

http://torontofc.neulion.com/tfc/console.jsp?catid=2&id=781



The second play, his run was timed perfectly, the ball from Guevara was timed perfectly.

I'll give him credit on a nice run, but in the end he made a major mess of it and is LUCKY Dichio was there to clean up his mess.

Shakes McQueen
06-14-2009, 08:33 PM
You people are blind. He walked the ball past two players to get into the box in the first place, then reversed field onto his left foot, which is why Stammler went down, trying to stay on his hip.

No, Vitti took a pass from Guevara at the top of the 18yd box (Guevara beat two players before he made the pass). Vitti was about to beat Stammler to the left, and then Stammler just sort of awkwardly fell over and tried to sweep the ball away with his arm. I'm watching the replay on my PVR right now.


The second play, his run was timed perfectly, the ball from Guevara was timed perfectly.

I agree, it was a great run. No one was saying it was a shitty run - just that it was a shitty finish, and one that Barrett would get all sorts of flack for.

And to whoever said Vitti was tripped - no he wasn't. Cepero toe poked the ball away when Vitti tried to cut left on him, and then Vitti tripped over the leg Cepero poked the ball away with. It was a perfectly legal play.


Vitti effectively created both goals by simply having flat-out better technique than the people marking him. If you can't see that, you might as well go watch three-down throwball.

I think giving Vitti credit for both goals is being generous. The first was the result of a bizarre decision by Stammler to sweep the ball away with his arm. If Stammler hadn't done that, who knows where the play would have ended up.

The second was Dichio cleaning up, after the same sort of breakaway miss Chad Barrett has made many times before.

I think you'd have to be crazy to say Vitti doesn't have technical skills - but those skills still haven't delivered anything tangible. The ability to dance around with the ball at your feet is supposed to be a means to an end for a striker - that end being to score goals. And Vitti still doesn't have any.


The only reason both Barrett and Vitti can't turn their possession into scoring opportunities is release; both release the ball slowly on a shot, giving goalies (ala Cepero's excellent kick save) a chance to react. In Barrett's case, he overcompensates incorrectly for this by blasting the ball.

I agree completely with this analysis.

- Scott

fetajr
06-14-2009, 09:48 PM
after last nights game, Vitti all the way. Since he's not scoring, he sure as hell is producing in creating plays and chances.

ExiledRed
06-14-2009, 10:15 PM
after last nights game, Vitti all the way. Since he's not scoring, he sure as hell is producing in creating plays and chances.

That's just it.

Doubters should watch the game in six, and note down every time the commentator says Vitti's name. Vitti is a major offensive player, whether he scores or not.

Now people have said the same about Barrett, in terms of workrate but it's just a false comparison. Vitti reads the game better, he's a better ball winner than Barrett, he doesn't lose it so easily and he doesn't terminate plays with boneheaded miskicks to the opposition.

Kaz
06-14-2009, 10:37 PM
Dude, that is just so wrong it's funny. Their keeper stuck his leg out and got the ball (which is why it went all the way back to Dichio) then Vitti tripped over him.

I could have missed the that, I suppose, wasn't paying that much attention, but I didn't notice that, I saw Vitti knock the ball around the keeper, and the keeper miss the ball and get Vitti. And then DD came around and struck the loose ball.

Steve
06-15-2009, 10:34 AM
I agree, it was a great run. No one was saying it was a shitty run - just that it was a shitty finish, and one that Barrett would get all sorts of flack for.

- Scott

Haha, I was thinking the same thing. I love how people will rail against Barrett, and praise Vitti, for doing the exact same thing. How many times has Barrett made perfectly timed runs to get a one on one with a keeper? How many people praised his skill at making that run? No one. Everyone was too busy jumping on him (perhaps rightly so) for missing the chance. Then, Vitti makes a good run, and gets stuffed by the keeper, and suddenly he is a soccer god? I guess the difference is that DD managed to put it away after, but wasn't that all due to DD, and not because of Vitti?

Now, granted, I used to be more of a Barrett supporter (I've started becoming too frustrated with him), and granted Vitti did have a fairly good game, but I really don't understand how this board chooses it's heros and villians. Vitti, who is a striker, and has scored 1 goal since 2006, none for TFC, no assists either, is the best player on our team? Barrett, who has scored twice this year, 9 times last year, and 20 times in the period Vitti scored 1, is the worst player to ever suit up for TFC?

Again, I don't think Barrett is our answer right now, I think he has mental issues that is preventing him from scoring, and that might mean we should just drop him. I just don't understand how Vitti gets such a huge pass here.

jrober38
06-15-2009, 11:26 AM
Considering that the thread is asking who is more likely to score a goal, I don't see how anyone could choose Vitti. As some people have pointed out, Vitti hasn't scored a meaningful goal in three years while in that same time Barrett has scored many goals.

Since the thread isn't asking about who the better play maker is, the obvious answer for who is more likely to score a goal is Chad Barrett simply because he has a history of doing so while Vitti does not.

poppamidnight
06-15-2009, 11:29 AM
Haha, I was thinking the same thing. I love how people will rail against Barrett, and praise Vitti, for doing the exact same thing. How many times has Barrett made perfectly timed runs to get a one on one with a keeper? How many people praised his skill at making that run? No one. Everyone was too busy jumping on him (perhaps rightly so) for missing the chance. Then, Vitti makes a good run, and gets stuffed by the keeper, and suddenly he is a soccer god? I guess the difference is that DD managed to put it away after, but wasn't that all due to DD, and not because of Vitti?

Now, granted, I used to be more of a Barrett supporter (I've started becoming too frustrated with him), and granted Vitti did have a fairly good game, but I really don't understand how this board chooses it's heros and villians. Vitti, who is a striker, and has scored 1 goal since 2006, none for TFC, no assists either, is the best player on our team? Barrett, who has scored twice this year, 9 times last year, and 20 times in the period Vitti scored 1, is the worst player to ever suit up for TFC?

Again, I don't think Barrett is our answer right now, I think he has mental issues that is preventing him from scoring, and that might mean we should just drop him. I just don't understand how Vitti gets such a huge pass here.


Read people!
It's not about scoring... Neither of these 2 are out dependent-on-strikers for the future (Ali Gerba/OBW set to play alongside DD)
Vitti creates more for his teammates,
the teammates who score (DD, Amado, DeRo)....

on top of that Chad blows proportionally more chances than Vitti does,
you can say Chad can be labeled a "blower of created chances"
While Vitti can be labeled a "creator of chances"...who sometimes blows chances.

Then factor in Chad's history in Chicago (unraveling Crappyness in Toronto almost exactly as it did in Chicago),
and the fact Chad is locked up to a 4-yr deal, whereas Vitti is merely on a loan

Hence,
Vitti = Hero
Barrett = Villan


I go the extra further in an effort to counterbalance Craig Forrest's ridiculously biased coverage on-air (getting Barrett of scotch-free, while ripping Vitti, and refusing to praise him even when he was our best player last game)

....Mind you Forrest has a history of this,
With Greg Sutton... Ohh yes craig, Sutton was the league MVP for the first part of the year last year, and you didn't criticize him when he started to faulter about the 2/3-3/4 point last year, because you were too buddy-buddy with him,
...and subsequently inferred your preference to see Sutton starting over Frei in the early stages of the yr,
...something you quietly swept under the rug when it became obvious Frei was our #1
...but im getting off topic

jrober38
06-15-2009, 11:38 AM
Read people!
It's not about scoring... Neither of these 2 are out dependent-on-strikers for the future (Ali Gerba/OBW set to play alongside DD)
Vitti creates more for his teammates,
the teammates who score (DD, Amado, DeRo)....

on top of that Chad blows proportionally more chances than Vitti does,
you can say Chad can be labeled a "blower of created chances"
While Vitti can be labeled a "creator of chances"...who sometimes blows chances.

Then factor in Chad's history in Chicago (unraveling Crappyness in Toronto almost exactly as it did in Chicago),
and the fact Chad is locked up to a 4-yr deal, whereas Vitti is merely on a loan

Hence,
Vitti = Hero
Barrett = Villan


I go the extra further in an effort to counterbalance Craig Forrest's ridiculously biased coverage on-air (getting Barrett of scotch-free, while ripping Vitti, and refusing to praise him even when he was our best player last game)

....Mind you Forrest has a history of this,
With Greg Sutton... Ohh yes craig, Sutton was the league MVP for the first part of the year last year, and you didn't criticize him when he started to faulter about the 2/3-3/4 point last year, because you were too buddy-buddy with him,
...and subsequently inferred your preference to see Sutton starting over Frei in the early stages of the yr,
...something you quietly slipped under the rug when it became obvious Frei was our #1

You're not painting a clear picture here.

First off I think you're grossly overstating how much Vitti actually creates for our other players. As other people have said, he has 0 assists this year.

Second, you're ignoring the fact that Chad Barret has a history of scoring goals which is the premise of this thread. Barrett might blow a lot of quality chances, but he still manages to score sometimes while Vitti might blow fewer chances, but he doesn't score at all.

I don't see where the logic is to pick a guy who has a history of scoring no goals ahead of a guy who has a history of scoring some goals.

poppamidnight
06-15-2009, 12:35 PM
You're not painting a clear picture here.

First off I think you're grossly overstating how much Vitti actually creates for our other players. As other people have said, he has 0 assists this year.

Second, you're ignoring the fact that Chad Barret has a history of scoring goals which is the premise of this thread. Barrett might blow a lot of quality chances, but he still manages to score sometimes while Vitti might blow fewer chances, but he doesn't score at all.

I don't see where the logic is to pick a guy who has a history of scoring no goals ahead of a guy who has a history of scoring some goals.

because NEITHER is needed as the main goal-scorer in the near future:

Ali friggen Gerba, and O'Brian 'Toronto's Adopted Son' White are our goal scorers,

You look at who fits in that situation better, and are honestly going to tell me Chad Barret?

You look for who can create, and fit into that system,
Pablo Vitti has shown his ability to play the wing in a system of attack setting up others,
Chad hasn't... He just isn't suited to playing Wing, and cannot play behind people...

And history of scoring goals?
I've already said it, it's a CLONE situation as to Chicago,
starts off strong, and fades into a unbearable slump!
Chicago was eager to deal him for a reason,
Why would we be any different?

To them, the slump was worrysome,
why wouldn't it be for us?

and PS - "assists" aren't the only measure of creating chances

Yohan
06-15-2009, 12:58 PM
And history of scoring goals?
I've already said it, it's a CLONE situation as to Chicago,
starts off strong, and fades into a unbearable slump!
Chicago was eager to deal him for a reason,
Why would we be any different?

Actually, Barrett was forced on us by MLS head office.

Though whether Chicago FO wanted to get rid of Barrett is another question, but I think they'd rather have McBride and Rolfe than Barrett...

poppamidnight
06-15-2009, 01:50 PM
Actually, Barrett was forced on us by MLS head office.

Though whether Chicago FO wanted to get rid of Barrett is another question, but I think they'd rather have McBride and Rolfe than Barrett...

Yea that's what was meant by "eager to get rid of"...
...As opposed to Rolfe,
Who was our intended target, the one Mo was holding out for until MLS stepped in

RPB_RED_NATION_RPB
06-15-2009, 04:47 PM
Id like MO to call RSL and swap BARRETT straight up for CDN WILL JOHNSON!

Shakes McQueen
06-15-2009, 05:15 PM
because NEITHER is needed as the main goal-scorer in the near future:

Ali friggen Gerba, and O'Brian 'Toronto's Adopted Son' White are our goal scorers,

But that isn't the POLL QUESTION in dispute here. The poll question is, if you put them both in front of a net, who would score?


You look at who fits in that situation better, and are honestly going to tell me Chad Barret?Again, you're re-framing the argument on the fly, to suit your point better.


You look for who can create, and fit into that system,
Pablo Vitti has shown his ability to play the wing in a system of attack setting up others,
Chad hasn't... He just isn't suited to playing Wing, and cannot play behind people...No, Barrett has shown his inability to play a target-man striker up front. Both have had flashes of brilliance on the wings. In fact, off the top of my head I can think of at least two games Barrett made some great plays into the middle from the wing.


And history of scoring goals?
I've already said it, it's a CLONE situation as to Chicago,
starts off strong, and fades into a unbearable slump!
Chicago was eager to deal him for a reason,
Why would we be any different?Did you read what he wrote? Whether he "tails off" or not, he still literally has more goals than Vitti's zero, and he pointed out that Vitti has one goal since 2006. Whether Barrett is still a shit sandwich of a player despite that, is irrelevant, because that isn't the question being asked.


and PS - "assists" aren't the only measure of creating chances

You're right, another simple metric would be shots on goal - how many of those does he have?

The ironic thing about this point is, Barrett is absolutely the KING of creating chances. He gets himself in position for lots of great chances. He just finishes a frustrating dismal percentage of them.

- Scott

Kickit09
06-15-2009, 05:25 PM
Id like MO to call RSL and swap BARRETT straight up for CDN WILL JOHNSON!

come on, give RSL some credit. They are not foolish enough to do that.

cmonyoureds
06-15-2009, 09:11 PM
Chad Barrett.

Vitti should be crucified as strongly as Chad was for messing up that clean break.

I have yet to see Vitti make a meaningful pass or shot after one of his famous "dribbles" through 3 or 4 guys. If I played with him I'd just stop running seeing as it's a one man show to nowhere with him.

Darlofletch
06-16-2009, 12:10 PM
Chad Barrett.

Vitti should be crucified as strongly as Chad was for messing up that clean break.

I have yet to see Vitti make a meaningful pass or shot after one of his famous "dribbles" through 3 or 4 guys. If I played with him I'd just stop running seeing as it's a one man show to nowhere with him.

He didn't mess it up though. He wasn't trying to score. Don't you see he's that good that he knew Dichio was behind him and deliberately shot the ball against the goalies leg so that it would bounce for Dichio to score.

Once again he did a great job creating a chance for someone else rather than just wasting the chance like Barrett would have.

Did he get an official assist for that? if not it's a crime.

:rolleyes:

poppamidnight
06-16-2009, 12:11 PM
Chad Barrett.

Vitti should be crucified as strongly as Chad was for messing up that clean break.

You clearly didn't hear Craig Forrest the last few games he called,

If you just listened to forest without even watching you wouldh've sworn Pablo Vitti was Adam Braz, and Chad Barrett was C. Ronaldo....

Forrest is throwing out more propaganda than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad!!!


I have yet to see Vitti make a meaningful pass or shot after one of his famous "dribbles" through 3 or 4 guys. If I played with him I'd just stop running seeing as it's a one man show to nowhere with him.

Well maybe if you actually watched the games you would see what happens in them:flare::scarf:

Pachuco
06-16-2009, 12:18 PM
I just looked at the results, since i refuse to vote in this ludicrous poll, and I'm amazed that Vitti is in the lead with twice as many votes as Barrett ( 41-20). As bad as Barrett is, at least he's scored a goal this season. Must be the same people voting that voted in the Vitti vs Montero poll.

I answered Vitti, because he hasn't got a shot at playing Barrett's position. Put Vitti as out and out striker and I think you'll see him score.

cmonyoureds
06-16-2009, 04:43 PM
You clearly didn't hear Craig Forrest the last few games he called,

If you just listened to forest without even watching you wouldh've sworn Pablo Vitti was Adam Braz, and Chad Barrett was C. Ronaldo....

Forrest is throwing out more propaganda than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad!!!



Well maybe if you actually watched the games you would see what happens in them:flare::scarf:

LOL

If I actually listened to Craig Forrest I might wonder why Shaka Hislop was never voted WPOY.

I do watch the games. The ones I've seen have not had Pablo Vitti score in them, and he's just about one of the worst passers I've seen. Having said that, he does make amazing runs to nowhere. A little fire guy and smart ass remark unfortunatley won't change history.

elvis
06-16-2009, 05:34 PM
I voted Lombardo...err...Vitti...

TFC OZZ
06-16-2009, 07:36 PM
I can't believe how many people voted Vitti here. Barrett has scored this year, and the fact that there aren't 5 threads simply titled "Pablo Vitti" with ranting about how bad he is because of that ASTRONOMICAL MISS against NYRB just astounds me. Barrett's one of the hardest working guys on the pitch, and I think some of you must just over-rate Vitti because he's on a 300,000 a year salary, and he's South American. Hell, I bet if we had Claudio Lopez last season, everyone that voted for Vitti would have that that he was the scond coming because he was not only a DP, but he was south American too; despite the fact that he's shite.

Jack
06-17-2009, 05:24 PM
I think we're probably too hard on both of them.

Neither is really a goal-scorer.

I hope Chad can get his confidence and learn to do so. It's painfully obvious that his confidence is shot. As for Vitti, he brings a lot to the table, from what I've seen, but he's not a great finisher.

Shakes McQueen
06-17-2009, 05:59 PM
LOL

If I actually listened to Craig Forrest I might wonder why Shaka Hislop was never voted WPOY.

I do watch the games. The ones I've seen have not had Pablo Vitti score in them, and he's just about one of the worst passers I've seen. Having said that, he does make amazing runs to nowhere. A little fire guy and smart ass remark unfortunatley won't change history.

Just ignore him. 95% of his responses to people he personally doesn't agree with, involve accusign them of not watching the games.

- Scott

Darlofletch
06-18-2009, 11:33 PM
poppamidnight, tfc_usa, kaz, fushida. Can't think of others right now and too lazy to look.

Now what do you have to say?

More missed chances for Barrett, but 1 goal, 2 assists, what did Vitti do again? 1 good pass to Dichio which could have been an assist, and then fuck all else, a whole lot of dribbling into trouble and losing the ball.

Shakes McQueen
06-18-2009, 11:41 PM
That flick to Guevara was brilliant, to get the 6th goal. Barrett has potential to be a fantastic wide player.

- Scott

poppamidnight
06-18-2009, 11:48 PM
poppamidnight, tfc_usa, kaz, fushida. Can't think of others right now and too lazy to look.

Now what do you have to say?

More missed chances for Barrett, but 1 goal, 2 assists, what did Vitti do again? 1 good pass to Dichio which could have been an assist, and then fuck all else, a whole lot of dribbling into trouble and losing the ball.


1 - Cummins put him on the left side today... Vitti blows on the left side... If you remember the last game, Vitti was our best player on the pitch when we had him on the RIGHT side...
...once he moved over to the left, he wasn't noticable...
...as was the case w/ tonight

2 - Chad's getting more accurate... Instead of missing the net by 20 feet when he has an open shot in the box, he kicks it at the goalie...
...THAT is development!!!!

3 - The goal was a header...

4 - Assists = not goals my friend... He's still so messed in the head he had to DIVERT the play on Guevara's goal (which lets be honest - was all skill on Amado's part to Juke the guy)....
...Chad shouldh've shot it....

But none of this matters,
I've said it before and I'll say it again (since it was proven tonight),

Chad Barrett and Pablo Vitti ARE NOT the players this team relies on to score goals,

Our attack is through our MF,

Could possibly move up front w/ Gerba + OBW, but until then, this team runs through the MF,
and it really doesn't matter if Vitti or Barrett are on the pitch...

Bottom line = both still need to go, or will go eventually

poppamidnight
06-18-2009, 11:50 PM
That flick to Guevara was brilliant, to get the 6th goal. Barrett has potential to be a fantastic wide player.

- Scott

See my post above,

Peep the replay on that... That was Guevara's skill and composure man,

Chad shouldh've shot it, but his head is still messed up....


Yay, I applaud the finish by Amado,

But the problem this team gets in with Pablo and Chad, is their head's are in the 'i won't score this' mode, and they make stupid little/extra passes, that end up costing chances when they should be shooting

Shakes McQueen
06-18-2009, 11:53 PM
4 - Assists = not goals my friend... He's still so messed in the head he had to DIVERT the play on Guevara's goal (which lets be honest - was all skill on Amado's part to Juke the guy)....
...Chad shouldh've shot it....

Yeah, stupid asshole, going with a perfect flick centering pass for the goal that sealed the championship for us, instead of taking a shot from a less attractive angle.

He totally get's no credit for that.

- Scott

GBV
06-18-2009, 11:53 PM
vitti ist shitty. and soft.

CB19 hands down. love the work ethic. i think he'll come around on the goal-scoring front. just a feeling.
(i know, maybe he should have long ago.)

poppamidnight
06-18-2009, 11:54 PM
Yeah, stupid asshole, going with a perfect flick centering pass for the goal that sealed the championship for us, instead of taking a shot from a less attractive angle.

He totally get's no credit for that.

- Scott

So you applaud the one time the extra pass works for us,

but where are you when they don't work???

What's the % of extra passes that don't go through on the part of our guys?
Chad, Pablo, Ricketts (gone)...etc

this is joga
06-18-2009, 11:57 PM
poppamidnight, tfc_usa, kaz, fushida. Can't think of others right now and too lazy to look.

Now what do you have to say?

More missed chances for Barrett, but 1 goal, 2 assists, what did Vitti do again? 1 good pass to Dichio which could have been an assist, and then fuck all else, a whole lot of dribbling into trouble and losing the ball.

are you blind?
vitti worked his ass off... is all he did.

Shakes McQueen
06-19-2009, 12:02 AM
So you applaud the one time the extra pass works for us,

but where are you when they don't work???

What's the % of extra passes that don't go through on the part of our guys?
Chad, Pablo, Ricketts (gone)...etc

I've given both of them TONS of flack for unnecessary passes that kill forward progression. Especially Vitti.

This wasn't an "unnecessary" pass. It lead to an easy finish from an attractive spot for Guevara.

- Scott

poppamidnight
06-19-2009, 12:08 AM
I've given both of them TONS of flack for unnecessary passes that kill forward progression. Especially Vitti.

This wasn't an "unnecessary" pass. It lead to an easy finish from an attractive spot for Guevara.

- Scott

Okay, I gotta call you out on this, since the video was just put up on Toronto FC TV,

Now everyone can see it again, and again, and again...

That goal was Amado's Skill,
Not Chad's flick,

Chad just has the keeper ahead of him,

amado had a defender right on him, one to his left + the goalie...

...I gotta admit, you had me questioning myself over it,
but just consulted toronto fc tv,
and tape don't lie

But go ahead, have your glory thinking chad is great again because of an extra pass he made...
Don't cry to me when the next 10 extra passes blow us 10 chances on goals

Jack
06-19-2009, 12:09 AM
Wow, talk about a stupid argument.

The pass worked. Barrett scored a huge massive goal. Vitti played well, but not well enough and was subbed.

It's not a bad play when it works.

Shakes McQueen
06-19-2009, 12:10 AM
It's not a bad play when it works.

I should have just said this, and nothing else.

- Scott

Section225
06-19-2009, 12:13 AM
I can't even understand how you are comparing Barrett and Vitti. Both are shit but Barrett has f'd up WAY more chances....chances where it is much easier to score than not to.

I really hope Barrett is gone soon...who would even pick him up though? A USL club?

poppamidnight
06-19-2009, 12:13 AM
Wow, talk about a stupid argument.

The pass worked. Barrett scored a huge massive goal. Vitti played well, but not well enough and was subbed.

It's not a bad play when it works.

Your missing the point El Presidente....

It's not the play,
it's the IDEA OF AN EXTRA PASS,

We've blown a good portion of chances on goal in the past due to the extra pass,
this time it worked, but what about the other 90% of the times it didn't?

All I'm saying is I'd still prefer a striker to be hungry for goal over this extra pass...
...and Chad and Vitti aren't that striker...

God Bless our attacking MF!

Darlofletch
06-19-2009, 12:15 AM
1 - Cummins put him on the left side today... Vitti blows on the left side... If you remember the last game, Vitti was our best player on the pitch when we had him on the RIGHT side...
...once he moved over to the left, he wasn't noticable...
...as was the case w/ tonight

Vitti does work better on the right it's true. Glad you agree he wasn't noticeable tonight.

2 - Chad's getting more accurate... Instead of missing the net by 20 feet when he has an open shot in the box, he kicks it at the goalie...
...THAT is development!!!!

3 - The goal was a header...

What? so a header doesn't count????

4 - Assists = not goals my friend... He's still so messed in the head he had to DIVERT the play on Guevara's goal (which lets be honest - was all skill on Amado's part to Juke the guy)....
...Chad shouldh've shot it....

You've been creaming over how well Vitti does to set people up, and saying how Barrett never does that, and now you're going to criticise Barrett for doing it better than vitti ever has?

But none of this matters,
I've said it before and I'll say it again (since it was proven tonight),

Chad Barrett and Pablo Vitti ARE NOT the players this team relies on to score goals,

This again is true.

Our attack is through our MF,

Could possibly move up front w/ Gerba + OBW, but until then, this team runs through the MF,
and it really doesn't matter if Vitti or Barrett are on the pitch...

Bottom line = both still need to go, or will go eventually

Both could have some kind of part to play as wingers, ideally with lower contracts, neither will be the goalscoring answer.

Ah well it's all good, champions:canada:

Jack
06-19-2009, 12:25 AM
Your missing the point El Presidente....

It's not the play,
it's the IDEA OF AN EXTRA PASS,

We've blown a good portion of chances on goal in the past due to the extra pass,
this time it worked, but what about the other 90% of the times it didn't?

All I'm saying is I'd still prefer a striker to be hungry for goal over this extra pass...
...and Chad and Vitti aren't that striker...

God Bless our attacking MF!

I'm not missing the point at all.

You said you wanted to talk about the reality that happened in the video.

Barrett made a pass to Amado and he scored.

That's what happened.

I understand your point, but in this case, you're not proving your point because the play worked.

I agree with you about preferring them to be hungry, but again, the play worked and the goal was scored.

Bitching about the hypothetical just seems like a waste of time after what we witnessed tonight. "What if he'd fucked it up?"

Well, he didn't. When it mattered most, he didn't.

The Kingpin
06-19-2009, 12:29 AM
I'm not missing the point at all.

You said you wanted to talk about the reality that happened in the video.

Barrett made a pass to Amado and he scored.

That's what happened.

I understand your point, but in this case, you're not proving your point because the play worked.

I agree with you about preferring them to be hungry, but again, the play worked and the goal was scored.

Bitching about the hypothetical just seems like a waste of time after what we witnessed tonight. "What if he'd fucked it up?"

Well, he didn't. When it mattered most, he didn't.

Not that I was able to watch the match - but it seems my theory may prove to be correct. Maybe Barrett would be an excellent energy guy out wide... I'll keep watching, but I think it may be the case.

Jack
06-19-2009, 12:34 AM
Not that I was able to watch the match - but it seems my theory may prove to be correct. Maybe Barrett would be an excellent energy guy out wide... I'll keep watching, but I think it may be the case.
He made a good pass and he probably would have botched it if he'd made the attempt on goal.

But he wasn't "out wide" on the play.

His crossing still needs a ton of work.

Watch the replay on the TFC site.

The Kingpin
06-19-2009, 12:39 AM
He made a good pass and he probably would have botched it if he'd made the attempt on goal.

But he wasn't "out wide" on the play.

His crossing still needs a ton of work.

Watch the replay on the TFC site.

Yea - I just did. But I'm not backing away from the thought yet... I just see something. He does actually have a decent touch... In my opinion anyway.

Jack
06-19-2009, 12:41 AM
Yea - I just did. But I'm not backing away from the thought yet... I just see something. He does actually have a decent touch... In my opinion anyway.
He does.

Again, I think it's a confidence thing. He tends to overthink on the ball. His best plays have come when he does things more instinctively (like that pass tonight or the volley bomb he scored against *I can't remembe who right now*)

a_billi
06-19-2009, 01:16 AM
wow some of you guys are hilarious. Barret scored a goal in which he had a wide open net and put his head to it. I could of made that. You guys are making it out to seem he had 3 defenders on him and the goalIE as 4 feet in front of him. He literally put his head down and prayed it went somewhere near the net. Why don't you guys talk about the one on one with the goalie and the shot right at his feet. The two shots over the ball his countless turnovers and stupid passes. And his lack of hustle on D. Vitti did not have the best of games but I still rate him over Chad because he works hard, tracks hard and is smart on the ball. Please don't say this is Barret's breakthrough cause its really not and you guys are OVEREXAGGERATING his goal. 5 feet away from an open net and just used his head. And yes the pass was pretty. But Barret is still useless. And Vitti played alright today and made some dumb choices but still better than Barret. ANd if we make it to the Champions leauge were going to need a guy who can play it on the ground and be creative against the other teams. Just please don't get excited over Barret you are going to be up for a major dissapointment.

sampace
06-19-2009, 06:09 AM
And Vitti has bagged how many open chances this year? Let me think....

I_AM_CANADIAN
06-19-2009, 06:11 AM
lol, I knew the haters and lovers would be out after this... Let's face it, Barrett had another poor game, but he managed to get one out of his about 50 chances into the net, so I'm not complaining. It's all that matters.

trane
06-19-2009, 06:45 AM
^ He also had to assists I am no Barrett lover, but he 2 assists and a goal, that is a good game, I still do not like him as the lead strikers, he just does not have those instinct.

I_AM_CANADIAN
06-19-2009, 06:48 AM
^ He also had to assists I am no Barrett lover, but he 2 assists and a goal, that is a good game, I still do not like him as the lead strikers, he just does not have those instinct.
Yeah, he just can't score. Not a lead striker for sure.

Suds
06-19-2009, 07:35 AM
^ He also had to assists I am no Barrett lover, but he 2 assists and a goal, that is a good game, I still do not like him as the lead strikers, he just does not have those instinct.

I just hope the kid can turn one decent game into two decent games and build from there.

There is no doubt he's not an out-and-out striker. He just does not have that finish. But if he can assist a goal or two a game, and pot a decent percent of his chances, he would be a good player to keep.

I_AM_CANADIAN
06-19-2009, 07:45 AM
you know, I've always felt he'd do better as a left winger in a 4-3-3. He can't score but he has a knack for setting things up. I've always been torn about him because he does some great work on the pitch but he can't put it in; and when he's playing as a lead striker, that's not acceptable.

Of course, DeRo has left wing covered, so yeah... Unless DeRo moves back into more of a midfield role, which doesn't make sense.

FluSH
06-19-2009, 07:51 AM
barrett Wins This Thread Is Dead