T O P
Sporkedup

Pitiful, Nashville. Pitiful! ...oh.


TraptNSuit

I feel like this is the majority our fans' comments around here these days. Someone posts something about how their team is near the bottom in some category and then we realize we are one of the teams keeping them from being the absolute worst.


Sporkedup

We're actually not worse than them in either category, funny enough. But we're basically *right on their heels.*


TraptNSuit

Well... We have had injuries to force more subs.


cheeseburgerandrice

The funny thing is that when Pulido went down for the season everyone would have taken a player like Sapong in a heartbeat. I haven't watched enough of Nashville to know what's going on over there though. We're already behind the 8 ball with our DP striker and more creative midfielder out.


stealth_sloth

Seattle being at the far right makes sense, since a lot of those "subs" were best-XI players who only came on late because they were being rested for CCL. But who would have guessed at the start of the season that *FC Cincinnati* would be nipping right at the heels there?


inspecter77

We have had several important starters miss 4+ games apiece due to minor injuries. I’m fairly sure that’s why, most of our real subs are mediocre on a good day.


seasportsfan

I wonder if there is a way to account for players who are starters who were simply being rested on that given day?


sounders1974

Or for all those Atlanta players tearing things and having to come off injured


gogorath

That's a terrible definition of sub (I assume it is min < 500, not > 500). Basically renders it pointless, since a number of those guys either got hurt or were being rested for other things. I get this was easier, but the real way would be to use, you know, actual subs. For example, Philly is up there because they rotate their strikers. It's not necessarily when they were subs; it's just that Santos, Uhre, and Burke are all under 500 minutes. Okay? Even the subs is total players used, not actually subs. This is just lazy, honestly. A team could lead in SUBS but actually never have used a single sub. Terrible, actually.


Bormsie721

Someone wanna let Jim Curtin know we can sub more than one player a game?


nautika

Damn orlando city is so forgotten we didn't even make the chart


TheAgeOfTomfoolery

Colorado also in yikesville


USSanon

It least it’s true. Not subbing a lot (you have 5 of them, use a few earlier Gary!), and some are Ake Loba for 5-10 minutes.


ngower

There's some flaws to this definition of a sub. For one, Ema Boateng has 3 goal contributions in 430 minutes, with 5 starts and 4 appearances off the bench. Only one of those goal contributions is as a substitute. Additionally, defining xG+xA as some kind of metric to gauge a subs effectiveness limits the impact of subs like Kessler for Omar in the DC game, where we were able to build out of the back BECAUSE of solid foundations at the back. Lastly, substitute minutes are cauclated in the Match Log on MLS' site, and presumably in whatever Opta databases folks have access too. Surely that would be a better measure of effectiveness than <500 minutes, as your best subs should be seeing plenty of time throughout the year