The Exaltation of Juan Pablo Angel

Pop Quiz: Who has more goals this year, Juan Pablo Angel, or the rest of the New York Red Bulls combined? The correct answer is the latter, but I'll forgive you if you thought it was the former. Angel has nine goals for the Red Bulls, and the remainder of the team has fifteen (Mathis with 5, Altidore with 3, and Kovalenko with 2 lead the pack). Yet there has been an emerging trend recently, the idea that Juan Pablo Angel is "tearing the rest of the league up." Let's think about why so much is being made of one player...

That Angel has made a difference is undeniable, and he certainly deserves much credit for providing a great deal of offensive punch for a team that was mediocre in scoring in 2006 (7th in terms of goals scored). Yet one can't help but detect a certain degree of Eurocentric snobbery in some of the praise he is receiving. The idea being advanced by a certain type of soccer commentator is that Angel is simply at a different level than the rest of MLS, and that your typical MLS defender is simply no match for what Angel brings to the field. One example is here, but there are others that you might read, or hear, from various people. These pundits simply believe that most MLS Defenses should just sit down on the pitch with their beverage of choice and appreciate the brilliance of Angel's play, since it is clearly impossible to mark the man given our stumbling, incoherent talent.

Has Angel been brilliant? Certainly he's had great moments, and done exactly what a designated player acquisition is supposed to do: Make an immediate, high level impact for your team. And for many of these commentators, it's an easy choice to make to praise Angel. They'd be uncomfortable making the same noises about Beckham, it would sound too much like they had become the giggling schoolgirls they detest. But Angel is a different story. He comes from West Ham, and that's Academy of Football! Aston Villa. You have to respect a player from that club. To boot, he was rarely more than mediocre there, clearly an indictment of the MLS level of play if a mediocre player can have such an effect here. Angel confirms and conforms to the natural prejudices of such writers, so all credit for the Red Bulls goes to him. It's such a lovely image, it's a shame to spoil it.

The facts that argue against Angel as the savior of New York are simple. The Red Bulls were resurgent even before he suited up to them for the first time. They had a respectable 3-2-2 record before Angel scored his first league goal against Columbus. They were clearly better than they had shown previously. The resurrection of Clint Mathis predates Angel, and while Angel certainly gives Mathis an easier time, Clint had already shown his form was better than we had seen in years.

Since joining the Bulls, it's not as though no team has figured out how to defend Angel either. United denied him service and would quickly deny him space when he did receive the ball, surrendering only a garbage goal after the game had been decided. And while I love United, it's not exactly a defensive line that I'd call "elite" at the moment. So clearly an average defense can hold Angel in check, and even better backlines may present rough going. How will Angel fair against New England, whose backline excels at neutralizing obvious scoring threats?

It also does a disservice to the many other players that are helping New York. We've mentioned Mathis, but credit should also been given to Dema Kovalenko, who fights for that team and provides a spirit they've rarely seen, and to Dave Van Den Berg, who has quietly put together a strong resume as someone who brings vision to the field. Further, the pundits are completely ignoring Bruce Arena. Some of this, no doubt, is because media personalities find Bruce somewhat distressing. He doesn't make their lives easy. Yet Bruce Arena is the one primarily responsible for remaking that team. He has gotten New York to play a game that accentuates their strengths and plays away from their weaknesses. They do have weaknesses, and injury problems in the back have certainly exacerbated them, but what Arena has done this year is remarkable. He knows what problems his team has, and he plays around them. The defense was problematic, but he had gotten New York to defend as a team, even if it means stranding Angel up top. When transitioning from defense to attack, the team never breaks pell-mell, but rather plays a controlled system designed to minimize potential countering opportunities to their opponents. That's Arena, bringing in players to execute his plans and training them well enough to do it. Look at the team's home/away splits (to borrow a baseball term). Arena has that team playing well in the Meadowlands, because he knows what to do to take advantage of the turf and environment. The result is the paltry 4 home goals conceded to date, second best only to Chivas USA, and that's with a below average defense for most games. However, Arena was the scape-goat of 2006, even I was disappointed with his choices, but I can recognize when he deserves credit as well. But giving him credit may be a bit much for his detractors, though much of the success in New York belongs to him.

It's a slightly more complicated story than "Angel dominates MLS," but it's the one I think has more basis in reality. And it certainly will make New York harder for other teams to deal with. Marking Angel out of a game is one challenge, but it is not the entire challenge.