Photo: Kyle Grantham
As the dust settles in the wake of the Daniel Gazdag trade to Eastern conference foe, Columbus Crew, there is a need for reflection on why this deal happened.
Trading away the franchise’s leading scorer is something that will never please fans. The soon-to-be 30 year old in the final year of his contract, has been an impact player and fan favorite since his arrival in 2021.
The Hungarian provided, not only in the attack, but in the construction of the Philadelphia Union identity. He fought hard in duels, he pressed, he held a role in the diamond that could not be replicated by anyone else tried there, and he essentially transitioned seamlessly into his new role under Carnell.
It isn’t the system
There is a narrative running around that Daniel Gazdag did not fit Carnell’s system. While the notion is plausible, a full consideration makes that narrative questionable.
In Jim Curtin’s “system” (I suppose we will attribute the diamond to Curtin by association), Gazdag played in the middle of the field. He was essentially playing a false 9 – the fulcrum on which the entire attack hinged. He was playing off both strikers, as well as being the first body in the second line of press.
Because of this, he was often the beneficiary of the strikers’ pressure – reading the first line of press and being the first to jump on opponents’ miscues and spring attacks from pressures by winning possession in the final third.
Due to the nature of the new formation with two #10s under Carnell, Gazdag was no longer the pivot point of every attack. The strikers’ pressure didn’t necessarily provide him with the same chances or situations as when he was at the point of the diamond.
Additionally, he is now paired with 19-year-old homegrown, Frankie Westfield, in attacks down the right. While Westfield has played well this season, he is no Kai Wagner or Olivier Mbaizo going forward this early in his career.
Sure, Gazdag became slightly more isolated out wide, but that does not mean that he did not fit. He had two goals and two assists in six games with the Union. Quinn Sullivan, the other #10 who fans likely think “fits the system more than Gazdag,” has zero goals and three assists in seven matches played.
Even if we are talking about chance generation, Gazdag’s expected goals plus expected assists per 90 are better than Sullivan’s.
The argument that he didn’t fit the system lacks the full context of the situation. He was effective, and would have continued as such had he not been traded away.
It seems bigger than just Dani
Since the Union’s run en route to defeat in MLS Cup 2022, the front office has slowly been attempting to sell high on many of the assets that helped the Club reach that high point.
Some of the fundamental pieces of that run have left Philadelphia for well below what they were worth to the Club.
To briefly summarize, impact and role players, like Julian Carranza, Jack Elliott, Leon Flach, and Matt Real all left the club this past offseason on either small fees or free transfers. Jack McGlynn, who had offers to leave for Europe last summer, was traded to Houston Dynamo for cash and a sell-on percentage. The cash, unfortunately, was about $2.5 million below Jack McGlynn’s current market value on Transfermarkt.com, and certainly below his worth to the Philadelphia Union.
As reports start to funnel in regarding the specifics of the Gazdag deal, it is tough to say for sure if Ernst Tanner’s objective in this deal was, in part, to make up for the lost revenue from the aforementioned sales.
Joe Tansey has reported that the deal was worth $4 million plus up to $500k in incentives. That is significant coin, but do those dollars amount to what Gazdag was worth to the Club?
Does $4.5 million make up for the fact that Union fans will now see their franchise goal scoring leader in yellow and black?
Whether the argument is that “Ernst is committing to the bit,” or that “Gazdag wanted more than he was offered in negotiations on a new deal,” or both, moving the franchise’s leading goal-scorer to a team just two points ahead of the Union in the standings is perplexing at this point in the season – no matter the dollars in.
Commitment to a plan?
Surely, the Gazdag deal, on its face, is Tanner exuding his commitment to the moneyball, team-building methodology that he has long tried to instill in Philadelphia. Whether that is right or wrong, fans will never be happy to see the team’s all-time leading scorer depart, under any circumstance.
In reality, teams like the Oakland Athletics, and the Philadelphia Eagles, Real Madrid, Arsenal, Manchester City, New York Knicks, etc. are just a business at the end of the day. The end goal is always profitability and shareholder value.
Yet, for who and for what will this $4.5 million recoup be used? More luxury seating? Bringing in another face that will block the Academy players from getting their shot? More reinvestment in the Academy? Lining the pockets of ownership who spend frugally to keep this organization competitive?
Experiencing the Philadelphia Eagles win a Super Bowl two months ago, by rewarding their best players with contracts that exemplify their worth to the organization, certainly makes it challenging to see the forest for the trees in this Gazdag deal.
While playing the business side of this may feel good when you’re lost in the weeds of “buying low and selling high,” the moneyball ideology, coined by Billy Beane, never brought the Oakland A’s a World Series.
The simple explanation is that the club is extracting value from a wasting asset. Apparently, in January DG (or his agent) asked for 3mil/yr for his next contract. DG is barely worth the 1.75mil he gets right now and I’m sure ET politely told him that. At that point, DG’s agent began shopping him to other teams.
.
So what do you do when you have a player who thinks he is worth much more than he actually is and an agent who is looking for his next team? You sell the player, get what you can and move on.
.
That’s what the U did. Let’s look at what they got from the deal.
1. 4.5 million in cash
2. 3.0 million wages not paid to DG for rest of 2025 and 2026
3. 1 DP slot
4. 1 roster slot
.
The U doubled their initial investment. I don’t think it’s moneyball at all. It’s necessity. ET absolutely nailed this one. A+.
I must say I find this accounting pretty compelling.
–
It hurts because the team has had such a strong start to the season. One would really hope that Tanner doesn’t want to toss that. But damn, 4
$4-4.5M is a lot of money for Gazdag. I can’t argue with it.
–
And you can only ever assess a cash trade like this down the road. Because the real questions are: 1. Can the remaining players step up? And 2. What will we get with that money?
As a Spurs fan (pain on both continents for me), I’ve watched what happens when a team doesn’t freshen up the lineup over time. You have to remove some players and add others, even when good players are the ones leaving. Let’s face it, bad players aren’t exactly in demand.
.
With that being said, so many people are assuming the worst. That is totally understandable, but give it time. The team flew out of the gates but has been stagnant for the past 3 matches. Shaking things up might not be the worst idea. And, if we take Tanner at his word, if this doesn’t work out well enough, he’ll go shopping in the summer. As Gruncle Bob said above, the U have just freed up $7M dollars over the next years between the transfer fee and the salary. That’s not chump change. But there is no need to go spend it on the first shiny object you see. See how the team looks. If there is a need, fill that need.
.
Deep breaths, everyone. It’s a long season. They were starting to look a bit stale. Maybe this is the catalyst they need.
Or maybe it’s the start of the apocalypse. Who knows…
And we get to watch Eintracht Frankfurt on both sides of the Atlantic this year (hopefully Spurs will manage to win on the road next week).
Union and Spurs fan here too #COYS #DOOP
2024 Philadelphia Union had 20th highest average wage bill in MLS (I believe the numbers below are relatively accurate)
Highest earners were
*Uhre. $1.94m
Gazdag. $1.35m
Glesnes. $1.04m
Carranza. $950k
*Blake. $895k
Elliot. $850k
*Wagner. $700k
Perea. $590k
^Bedoya. $390k. (New 1 year deal ’25)
*Mbaizo. $375k
Lowe. $320k
Torres. $310k
Martinez. $301k
Flach. $294k
Bendik. $192k
Real. $150k
(*still on the team)
So, salary decrease from 2024 Top 16 Union earners is just under $6m (with the exception of Bedoya who I imagine is getting maybe $300k this season)
So $6m (salary savings) plus transfer fees $4m for Gazdag, $2m for McGlynn, $2m for Martinez, maybe $500k-$1m for Carranza.
Union paid $3m for Damiani.
Close to $12m in gross profit for the owners in less than 10 months.
I am sure Uhre is next. He had a club option exercised for 2025 and I am sure the Union will be shopping him aggressively in the next two weeks before the transfer deadline (April 25th)
They probably won’t resign Glesnes based on this.
So, you can call it Moneyball.
I call it ownership f*cking over the fan base.
I wish the MLS had relegation and promotion.
Not even remotely accurate with your accounting. Say you don’t understand MLS contracts without actually saying it…
I’m in no way a proponent of this ownership’s spending, or lack thereof, but the Union did not make anywhere near $12m in gross profit. They are operating in the red.
I know its moneyball but its a myopic business model, as the article eloquently stated the athletics never won with it. The empty seats in the stadium will be worth in lost revenue more then moneyball…The Union as a franchise dear to Philly cultural sport entity and will not support the team has no nucleus to fit the young players so the they could contribute by development. I will not pay a penny for an academy level team that is barely competitive. sorry Mr Tanner, Curtin was a winner with a nucleus of players that almost got a championship.
Hope this means Cavan Sullivan is now starting some where on the field.
I’ve seen so many people say this, and this is not directed just at you, but why? If you want to watch Cavan Sullivan, go to a Union 2 match. He’s one of the best players there, but he’s not dominating the competition to a level where he should be starting for the first team. He also needs to grow (hopefully) into his brother’s body type otherwise he is going to get pushed around in MLS.
–
I understand this move according to the business model and it’s fun watching young players develop and move on but in the end the goal should be to win trophies. This move does not help with that.
–
Regarding the Moneyball A’s, if they didn’t have Hudson, Mulder and Zito, 3 Cy Young caliber pitchers, they would not have had the success they did.
“It makes me very happy that I’m playing for a for a club that is actually playing for titles.”
/
BOOM!
Before the Union became the Union, I had often wondered about how fans for “selling clubs”, e.g. Southampton, can maintain their fandom. I came to the conclusion that if you are from a smaller market where your expectations are low, it is a viable way to run a club with low expectations. While I understand that model, I just can’t rationalize that model for Philly, given the size of the market and expectations for other sports teams. I get it that maybe there was some good business here for Gazdag but just imagine how the Eagles would approach a similar situation and would want to keep the fans engaged. At a minimum there would be robust communication about why and the plans to address the hole. Also don’t get the enthusiasm about giant doses of Cavan right now. Agree if you want to see him to say you did before he becomes a big star, you can, but I’d rather be competitive since we don’t really get the upside of him developing faster, unless I’m missing something.
So when does the team move to Las Vegas via Sacramento… hard to identify with the team after so many key player exits this past year.
Reminds me of the classic Seinfeld monologue:
.
“Loyalty to any one sports team is actually pretty hard to justify… because the players are always changing, the team can move to another city–you’re actually rooting for the clothes when you get right down to it.
.
You are standing and cheering and yelling for your clothes to beat the clothes from another city.”