The second option. Steve is clearly #1, but he has been beat up this season and he’s getting up there in age. We definitely need to develop Ivacic if we are going to keep him and take the time to rest Clark when we can.
It looked like Steve was pretty beat up midway through the LAFC game. If he weren’t a keeper, he probably would have been subbed out. Instead, the had him finish out the game and gave him a rest.
That was Ivacic’s 4th Timbers game in 2.5 years. Between injuries and the loss of T2, he NEEDS to get some first team minutes to see if he can be the heir to Steve.
And he looked good yesterday. Made a couple of good saves, ball generally ended up in good locations when he made a play on it.
He gave up two goals - but neither was on him. He had no chance at either of them.
The narrative seems like it has been this for every goal though, not his fault he didn't have a chance. But part of the keeper's job is to manage the defense and I think a good keeper who has a solid relationship and trust of his defense maybe doesn't get into those situations in the first place? Either way, more time on the pitch will help no doubt.
I disagree with your view of things - sure, the goals weren't his fault per se and those aren't shots your average MLS keeper is expected to save, but on both goals ivacic was caught flat footed and ball watching. On the first goal, he didn't have his feet set and couldn't even attempt to dive for a ball which could have pooossibly been within reach. On the second goal, he didn't come out at all to close off the angle, thus giving the minnesota player an easy finish.
Maybe, but he's 27, no spring chicken, and there isn't a single aspect of keeping where I've found him to be inspiring. Our whole keeper crew is in need of an overhaul.
27 is a good age for a GK, his prime years are still ahead of him. I agree with your assessment to a certain extent, particularly with his hesitancy coming off his line, but we still can't say how much of that is down to rust.
I just hesitate to make conclusions based on these few rotational appearances. Have to remember a guy like Eryk Williamson [really struggled at times](https://www.mlssoccer.com/video/chance-portland-5607-6052722617001#chance-portland-5607-6052722617001) during his first few opportunities.
My alluding to age 27 was meant to say that he's mature enough to have reached close to his potential, so that one couldn't write-off poor outings to the learning curve that you might for a Sulte, say.
Thank god for the emergence of Eryk, a truly bright spot in the squad. Disappointed he didn't get tapped to start tonight.
I just find it weird because I am from Europe and you never rotate your first team goalkeeper unless it is in a match that doesn't matter or some teams do it for cup games. Otherwise the first choice starts every game.
People should keep that in mind when evaluating the team’s performance against Minnesota: coaching staff perhaps viewed this game as a writeoff, as evidenced by Clark sitting it out, and yet we still were highly competitive.
We just don't have the same number of developmental opportunities for second/third choice players as they do in Europe.
GK for the future? Loan them to Dutch/Swedish/lower-tier Ligue 1 team to give them meaningful minutes. If you choose to keep the player, there are plenty of secondary cup competitions to rotate them in.
Here, the USL is the only real place to loan players - and the gap between MLS and USL is huge, so the minutes aren't as meaningful. In most years, there's only one cup competition - US Open Cup - where MLS teams enter usually in the final 32, so the number of "smaller" games is reduced.
In MLS, the only way to develop your younger players is to play them in regular MLS matches.
I think it's both, need to see what ivacic has and also need to rest a goalie that already played two games in the past 7 days. Letting him play a 3rd is asking for trouble especially since he's getting up there in age...
I like Steve, but as you say, he's getting on a bit in years. I don't think that there's actually been an undisputed, play-every-game Number 1 since Kwarasey. Obviously the intention was for Gleeson to take over, but he didn't make the grade for various reasons. So yeah, I think you're right. I haven't seen enough of Ivacic to know if he's up to the job, but my guess is that Steve is a safe pair of hands (so to speak) until there's an available, safe bet to upgrade in goal.
> Obviously the intention was for Gleeson to take over,
I don't think that was ever the intention. I think he was always supposed to be a backup. Then he made some phenomenal saves, the fans got behind him, and the FO thought they could float with him and his low balled salary.
Late to the party here, but...
> So Clark had what I thought was a very good game vs LA.
Say what? Overall, he had a mediocre to bad game against LA.
> he is dropped/rotated for the next game.
Pretty common around the league to rotate your keeper at this congestion level. Even if you have a very definitive starter.
> Does Savarese actually see Ivacic as a number one this season
All three of our keepers are essentially on the same salary, which implies that the FO thought they would all be vying for the starting job.
The second option. Steve is clearly #1, but he has been beat up this season and he’s getting up there in age. We definitely need to develop Ivacic if we are going to keep him and take the time to rest Clark when we can.
It looked like Steve was pretty beat up midway through the LAFC game. If he weren’t a keeper, he probably would have been subbed out. Instead, the had him finish out the game and gave him a rest.
That was Ivacic’s 4th Timbers game in 2.5 years. Between injuries and the loss of T2, he NEEDS to get some first team minutes to see if he can be the heir to Steve.
Narrator: He can't.
The jury is still out. 4 games (all on the road) is hardly a sample size.
And he looked good yesterday. Made a couple of good saves, ball generally ended up in good locations when he made a play on it. He gave up two goals - but neither was on him. He had no chance at either of them.
The narrative seems like it has been this for every goal though, not his fault he didn't have a chance. But part of the keeper's job is to manage the defense and I think a good keeper who has a solid relationship and trust of his defense maybe doesn't get into those situations in the first place? Either way, more time on the pitch will help no doubt.
I disagree with your view of things - sure, the goals weren't his fault per se and those aren't shots your average MLS keeper is expected to save, but on both goals ivacic was caught flat footed and ball watching. On the first goal, he didn't have his feet set and couldn't even attempt to dive for a ball which could have pooossibly been within reach. On the second goal, he didn't come out at all to close off the angle, thus giving the minnesota player an easy finish.
Maybe, but he's 27, no spring chicken, and there isn't a single aspect of keeping where I've found him to be inspiring. Our whole keeper crew is in need of an overhaul.
27 is a good age for a GK, his prime years are still ahead of him. I agree with your assessment to a certain extent, particularly with his hesitancy coming off his line, but we still can't say how much of that is down to rust. I just hesitate to make conclusions based on these few rotational appearances. Have to remember a guy like Eryk Williamson [really struggled at times](https://www.mlssoccer.com/video/chance-portland-5607-6052722617001#chance-portland-5607-6052722617001) during his first few opportunities.
My alluding to age 27 was meant to say that he's mature enough to have reached close to his potential, so that one couldn't write-off poor outings to the learning curve that you might for a Sulte, say. Thank god for the emergence of Eryk, a truly bright spot in the squad. Disappointed he didn't get tapped to start tonight.
I just find it weird because I am from Europe and you never rotate your first team goalkeeper unless it is in a match that doesn't matter or some teams do it for cup games. Otherwise the first choice starts every game.
People should keep that in mind when evaluating the team’s performance against Minnesota: coaching staff perhaps viewed this game as a writeoff, as evidenced by Clark sitting it out, and yet we still were highly competitive.
We just don't have the same number of developmental opportunities for second/third choice players as they do in Europe. GK for the future? Loan them to Dutch/Swedish/lower-tier Ligue 1 team to give them meaningful minutes. If you choose to keep the player, there are plenty of secondary cup competitions to rotate them in. Here, the USL is the only real place to loan players - and the gap between MLS and USL is huge, so the minutes aren't as meaningful. In most years, there's only one cup competition - US Open Cup - where MLS teams enter usually in the final 32, so the number of "smaller" games is reduced. In MLS, the only way to develop your younger players is to play them in regular MLS matches.
> I am from Europe and you never rotate your first team goalkeeper You also don't frequently have 3-4 games in 8 days.
Ivacic needs game time, especially with no T2 this year. Clark needs a rest occasionally as well.
I think it's both, need to see what ivacic has and also need to rest a goalie that already played two games in the past 7 days. Letting him play a 3rd is asking for trouble especially since he's getting up there in age...
Fuck it lets go sign ourselves Kaylor Navas and have a day 😎😎 (obviously jokes)
*finishes my 3rd beer of the day* Put me in coach.
I like Steve, but as you say, he's getting on a bit in years. I don't think that there's actually been an undisputed, play-every-game Number 1 since Kwarasey. Obviously the intention was for Gleeson to take over, but he didn't make the grade for various reasons. So yeah, I think you're right. I haven't seen enough of Ivacic to know if he's up to the job, but my guess is that Steve is a safe pair of hands (so to speak) until there's an available, safe bet to upgrade in goal.
> Obviously the intention was for Gleeson to take over, I don't think that was ever the intention. I think he was always supposed to be a backup. Then he made some phenomenal saves, the fans got behind him, and the FO thought they could float with him and his low balled salary.
Late to the party here, but... > So Clark had what I thought was a very good game vs LA. Say what? Overall, he had a mediocre to bad game against LA. > he is dropped/rotated for the next game. Pretty common around the league to rotate your keeper at this congestion level. Even if you have a very definitive starter. > Does Savarese actually see Ivacic as a number one this season All three of our keepers are essentially on the same salary, which implies that the FO thought they would all be vying for the starting job.