How is the 3rd most expensive roster also the league's youngest?

[Pookie]

Considering we have the 3rd most expensive roster in the league, one might think that we have amassed some serious experience.

You'd be wrong.

Our starters (defined as a player that plays half the minutes available) are the youngest in the league at an average age of 24.9 years. The MLS average is 27.1.



Team
Avg Age Starters


Toronto
24.9


NE
25.5


Portland
25.7


SKC
26.1


PU
26.3


Dallas
26.5


DC United
26.5


Columbus
26.7


SJ
27.1


Houston
27.1


Seattle
27.5


Colorado
27.7


RSL
27.8


LA
27.8


VAN
27.8


MTL
28.1


Chicago
28.5


NY
28.7


Chivas
29.1



If you go further and look at the distribution of minutes (ie. do the younger guys play) it gets more interesting. Since there are 900 minutes to be distributed in a game (outside of Goalkeepers... 10 players x 90 minutes each) how many minutes do teams give to "rookies"?

Even taking a very liberal definition of rookie as someone out of NCAA and under 24 years of age, check this out:



Team
% Game Inexperienced
Play


Toronto
53.8%


Dallas
51.4%


PU
42.5%


NE
38.7%


Chivas
35.7%


DC United
34.3%


LA
34.1%


Portland
33.1%


Columbus
31.4%


RSL
28.9%


MTL
28.0%


Seattle
25.8%


SJ
25.6%


SKC
20.2%


Chicago
17.9%


Colorado
15.9%


NY
10.5%


VAN
10.5%


Houston
10.4%




Is this a function of:

- Lack of investment in scouting/identification programs?
- MLSE putting all the eggs in a DP basket as a quick fix to sell tickets?
- Rushing kids through the Academy?
- a solid element of future team building?

Anyway you put it, the 3rd most expensive roster in the league should not be the most inexperienced when it comes to starters and minutes available. Fundamental issue for me in terms of the team going forward.

I'm hoping that the boys (and Winter) can come together to overcome the odds that have been stacked against them by MLSE mis-management of our resources.

[narduch]

Interesting analysis. Thanks for taking the time to crunch the numbers.

The easy answer is that all the money goes to 3 of the 30 players on the roster.

If that $8 million was spread more evenly that most likely wouldn't be the case.

[Pookie]

I thought that too when I was putting this together but if that were true you would expect other big spending teams to be in the same situation. The one note to that is that LA and Seattle also have 3 DPs but manage to find experienced players. New York with their mega contracts also only distributes minutes to inexperienced players on a conservative basis.

[narduch]

I think all it means is that it has nothing to do with money. Its about choice/player selection.

The two aren't inter-related.

For whatever reason TFC has chosen youth over experience.

[narduch]

It would be interesting to know how many minutes TFC is getting from 'off cap' players vs. other teams.

[starter]

I believe AW may be OK with it, since he prefers molding youth into into 433, plus he used to working with 'youngers'

[T-boy]

How are we working out the average in this? What starting 11 did you chose to make the average age? Unless we actually have a break down of all the teams, the stats don't really mean that much.

[brad]

Actually, this is normally a smart way to build a team. You get a core of young players, mix them in with a group of experienced players and let the mature over a few seasons. This is how Fergie has rebuilt United repeatedly in his tenure (yes, I know that is a very different situation). With it comes the acceptance that you will have a dip for a period of 2-3 years where you will not be dominant, but teams usually move in cycles.

Now - I'm not sure that approach will work in the MLS, but I can understand why Winter would take such an approach.

[Pookie]

How are we working out the average in this? What starting 11 did you chose to make the average age? Unless we actually have a break down of all the teams, the stats don't really mean that much.

"Starters" were defined for each team as a player that has played in over half their total minutes as a team. So, if a team had 810 total minutes played, those who had 405 mins or more were considered "starters." This was the same criteria for all teams.

[Yohan]

Actually, this is normally a smart way to build a team. You get a core of young players, mix them in with a group of experienced players and let the mature over a few seasons. This is how Fergie has rebuilt United repeatedly in his tenure (yes, I know that is a very different situation). With it comes the acceptance that you will have a dip for a period of 2-3 years where you will not be dominant, but teams usually move in cycles.

Now - I'm not sure that approach will work in the MLS, but I can understand why Winter would take such an approach.
There is a reason why RSL is so good. The core players have been playing with each other for like 3 years. Same with LA, with exception of adding Robbie Keane. Seattle more or less the same. Though these teams didn't do it with a lot of youth like TFC is doing

[Beach_Red]

There is a reason why RSL is so good. The core players have been playing with each other for like 3 years. Same with LA, with exception of adding Robbie Keane. Seattle more or less the same. Though these teams didn't do it with a lot of youth like TFC is doing


Yes, in addition to age it might be useful to know the lengths of the contracts. For players in their mid-20s they've likely found their level, so to speak, and are being paid accordingly. For the 19-20 year olds on TFC they may be in for a raise in a year or two and TFC may not be able to keep them all. Or, they may be able to keep them but not have 3 DPs. Which might be okay, if the core group is good enough.

[Wooster_TFC]

Awesome stats on way too small of a sample size. Both Frings and Koevermans, who I think everyone can agree are starters on our team don't fall into the starters category based on your definition. Cann, who most will think is at least a starter on this team, doesn't either.

I don't think there's anything you can take away from this.

[Pookie]

Awesome stats on way too small of a sample size. Both Frings and Koevermans, who I think everyone can agree are starters on our team don't fall into the starters category based on your definition. Cann, who most will think is at least a starter on this team, doesn't either.

I don't think there's anything you can take away from this.

It's a fair point but the very definition of a starter is a player that plays significant minutes for you. In that sense, if we have put all our eggs in 2 players that have ongoing health issues then that is a fundament issue with our team building.

Further, injuries have influenced whether Frings and Koevermans have started for us. However, they have also influenced NY by way of Marquez. Yet, NY's roster allows them to cope in that they distribute minutes to inexperienced players very infrequently.

The fact that we only have youth to rely on when an aging DP goes down really speaks to roster management. My theory is that MLSE threw money at DPs in order to placate season ticket renewals without much of a thought towards the total roster.

As a result our "plan" has been to use big names as our immediate hope for a turn-around and fill out the rest of the roster with younger players. Either by convenience (ie. the Academy) or through the draft. We don't seem to have spent a lot of time scouting international or US domestic talent outside of these routes.

Stats are stats and we can look at these many ways from Sunday. The fact is that it appears that when our starters line up against opposing teams we are doing so with a line up that has less experience.

[newb]

I'm not sure if the sample set is too small and these are interesting statistics. Should they be overly surprising though? I could be completely wrong on this but I was under the impression that the entire goal was to build the team through youth.

A counter theory on the choice of Frings and Koevermans as the DP's could be that they were deliberately chosen to be the elder statesmen to lead by example and instill a specific ideology in the growing youth (this would be opposed to MLSE throwing big money at aging stars to placate the fanbase). Not that I'm saying this alternate theory is correct (as I don't know and have no inside information on it).

Additionally - I'm curious as to how TFC's average age compares to other leagues around he world. And not just to the big leagues (BPL, La Liga, Bundesliga, Serie A) but other "feeder" leagues such as the various Scandinavian and in particular Hollands. The reason this may be relevant (or interesting) is it could provide insight into Winter's mentality with player selection (e.g. Younger players are selected to provide exposure with an eye to selling the player).

Just a thought and my completely worthless .02$.

[Pookie]

newb, all good points. I'd buy 'em for $.02

[Technorgasm]

we also have No MLS veterans. . . a key to success in this league IMO.
Come back Dwayne.

[69Chevy396]

It is evident from these stats that TFC mediocrity is no accident. The inexperienced and/or over priced players are the result of a manager and organization that doesnt know how to build a winner.

[james]

growing youngsters can be very good in hte future, if the right players are chosen with the right coaching! Otherwise (which is what i really think) Toronto just don't know how to spend there money on the right players and are throwing money at the wrong players and don't have a clue what they are doing!

[spe18]

It is evident from these stats that TFC mediocrity is no accident. The inexperienced and/or over priced players are the result of a manager and organization that doesnt know how to build a winner.

or at the very least a playoff contender lol