D.C. United Approval Ratings: Stephen King
by Martin Shatzer on Nov 14, 2011 8:00 AM EST
Email
Print
We're spending the first month or so of the D.C. United offseason grading each player on the roster with an approval rating. A vote for APPROVE means you were satisfied with the player's performance and want to see him back in D.C. next season. A vote for DISAPPROVE means you want United to move on without him. There is no middle ground, so please leave salary and contract implications out of your decision.
When we were debating the qualities of Austin da Luz earlier this month, the Stephen King standard was proposed - a suggestion that a player must be better than King to get an Approve rating. So then how do we grade King himself?
The midfielder was utilized throughout the season on occasion as the more attacking half of a central midfield partnership. In certain situations, he was asked to hold back and act mainly as an outlet for the defenders behind him and as the chief distributor to link the back with the front, allowing Clyde Simms to focus more on being the disrupter. Other times though, King would get forward into and around the box, a spot where he's been less than lethal since joining United last season.
King finished the season with just a single goal and no assists in 11 starts and 20 total appearances. Not a great stat line for an attacking midfielder, especially since that goal came on a fairly simple shot in the lopsided 4-0 win over the Vancouver Whitecaps. But the 2011 King was a distinct improvement over the 2010 King. And through mid-September, United was undefeated in matches that featured King, with a 5-0-8 record.
He may not be a player to build the roster around, but King was a vital part of United in 2011. Should he be in 2012?
5 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The 0 assists is really the most damning thing
I get that he can be depth, but when I see him in the starting lineup, I feel like we’re in trouble.
Thus the King line
He’s got a lot of good attributes: he’s tidy on the ball, moves well off the ball, works hard, stays within the system. He also has a lot of deficiencies: technique, vision, raw athleticism. He’s not a starting grade player, and I’m not sure anyone would advocate for him as such. But as a bench player, I continue to find him valuable. He’s a very good fit for a team with DeRo on it, because when DeRo is around you don’t have to have a pure playmaker in the midfield to generate offense.
And he sure beats hell out of Rod Dyastinko.
by Stunned Duck on Nov 14, 2011 11:38 AM EST up reply actions
Co-sign
King is a fine player to have making your bench regularly, and appearing as a sub rather frequently. He shouldn’t start for us all that often, but he should probably get into the game as a sub when we’re winning (assuming a 442 in 2012).
Writer on SB Nation's DC United blog Black and Red United | @ChestRockwell14 | KEEP UNITED IN DC
by ChestRockwell on Nov 14, 2011 8:45 PM EST up reply actions
King can come back, but his role should be...
…the one filled by Kurt Morsink this year. He can practice hard all year and win the beep test again and play for the reserves and be on the 18 man roster and come in to protect a lead in the 75th min… but that’s it. That should be his role…
This obviously means that I’m going to disapprove of Morsink when we get to him…
I think this is exactly right
By the Stephen King standard, Stephen King is the midfielder on the roster who gets the least amount of playing time. We want a player of his attributes and caliber to be, to put it bluntly, the worst guy on the team (or in competition for worst with the defender and forward deepest on the depth chart). If King is our weakest link, then we are A) much better in terms of depth than currently; and B) potentially a very good team by the time we get to our first XI. This should be an achievable goal.
Sorry, Kurt.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Black And Red United
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
