MLS: Conservative SuperDraft beginning of end or odd year out?

The MLS SuperDraft was much more conservative this year. Does that hint at the beginning of the end for the event or is it just an anomaly?

The impact and value of the MLS SuperDraft is being discussed every year. With MLS franchises turning to academies and homegrowns and a decreasing number of players in Major League Soccer coming from college and through the SuperDraft, there is reason to question its utility.

And this year, those that have been critical of the SuperDraft’s presence — I include myself among those commenters — have been helped by the conservative nature in which it was conducted.

There were no blockbuster, David Accam, Jack Harrison-style trades, the number five pick was traded for a Matt Lampton and $75,000 less in allocated money last year than this year, and LAFC were asking FC Cincinnati for the number one pick with an offer worth approximately $250,000-$300,000, depending on your value of an international roster spot, a third of what the pick went for in 2017.

More from MLS Multiplex

• Javier Milei Elected in Argentina: Potential Impacts on MLS and Signings of Argentine Players
• Orlando City and New York City FC in the Battle for Matías Arezo; Grêmio Enters Negotiations! Who Will Come Out on Top?
• USA, Honduras, Panama, and Canada Close in on a Spot in the 2024 Copa America
• De Gea Turns Down Al-Nassr’s Lucrative Offer: Speculation Points to Possible Reunion with Messi at Inter Miami
• Messi’s Magnetic Impact in the United States

All of that is to say one thing: the MLS SuperDraft was much more conservative this year than in previous years, which suggests that the clubs, very much like the trajectory of the discussion surrounding the whole event, are beginning to question, scrutinise and downgrade its value. But does this more conservative, devalued approach actually indicate the beginning of the end for the SuperDraft or was this just an anomalous year?

Unlike other years, this draft had a string of decent players but no real standout stars. The top seven or eight players were all of a similar standard; anyone of them could have been picked at number one without too much complaint. That meant that teams were quite happy to stand pat and wait for the cheapest option.

As Houston Dynamo’s Matt Jordan stated to mlssoccer.com:

"“I think a lot of times when there’s kind of a clear No. 1 or No. 2, that’s when you see the trade values get a little more elevated and go a little higher. I felt that this year there was a handful of guys that could’ve slotted into that No. 1 spot and I think that played into the lower market value of trades.”"

This is of no slight to Frankie Amaya, who was selected number one overall by FC Cincinnati. He is a tidy midfielder who has a shot of making their MLS roster. But he is not the difference-maker than many previous number-one picks were. Accam and Harrison, for instance, were both considerably better prospects than any in this draft class.

Perhaps, then, this year’s diminished draft value had more to do with the players that were available than the value of the draft itself. That argument does not quite hold up when so many teams were completely passing on later round picks as to not block the developments of their academy players. But it does perhaps give some hope to those who feel the SuperDraft is still an important process in the MLS calendar.

Ultimately, the SuperDraft will have to change in format. That much has become clear. But the decreased activity of this year’s event may have more to do with the players than the draft itself. Nevertheless, Don Garber has a lot to ponder.