Barrett Vs. Vitti

[InTheCrowd]

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]

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]

Bananas.

[Darlofletch]

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]

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]

Barrett will never be the footballer Vitti is

[Yohan]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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/con...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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Id like MO to call RSL and swap BARRETT straight up for CDN WILL JOHNSON!

[Shakes McQueen]

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