June 29, 2007 5:55 PM
Erpen is an upgrade for Rapids
Facundo Erpen, whom the Rapids acquired from D.C. United on Friday in exchange for Greg Vanney, will be an improvement on defense for Colorado.
Erpen, 24, of Argentina, is nine years younger than Vanney, and he might be a better central defender than Petke. Erpen started 30 games for D.C. last season, scored three goals, added two assists and was selected for the All-Star team. His 35-yard strike against New York on April 22, 2006, was voted goal of the week. This season, he has two assists. On top of all this, there's good news and bad news.
Good news: Erpen has an excellent shot from distance.
Bad news: When D.C. came to Invesco Field in 2005, Erpen had one of the most embarrassing moments on a soccer pitch I've ever seen. Along the right touchline, almost at the top of the Rapids' penalty area, Erpen had the ball at his feet and was being guarded by one Rapids player (I think it was Dan Gargan, but I really don't remember). Erpen faked with his right foot like he was going to cross the ball, trying to get the Rapids defender to commit one way or the other. The player didn't move, so Erpen faked again, pulling his boot back just before it made contact with the ball. The defender didn't bite. So Erpen faked again. And again. And on that fourth fake, he pulled his foot back just a little too late, inadvertently tapping the ball. He could do nothing as the ball rolled softly to the player guarding him. It was so embarrassing that it was funny. Soccer moms, soccer dads, soccer kids, everybody in that corner of the field started laughing. It was painful. Erpen was totally ineffective the rest of the game.
Good news: When United returned to Denver in 2006, I pointed out Erpen to my son. "There's that guy who lost the ball on that fake last year when he tapped it with his foot." We watched him play 90 minutes that night in a 2-1 loss to the Rapids, and he was the best player on the field.
Bad news: Erpen should've been covering Jacob Peterson when the Rapids forward scored on a sweet header in the first half Thursday night on the road. He was standing about five feet away from Peterson and cringed as the ball whistled past him.
So which defender did the Rapids get: good Erpen or bad Erpen? The answer is probably a little bit of both.
D.C. wouldn't have traded an all-star central defender for Vanney had the central defender been playing like an all-star. Erpen won't be as effective in the air as Petke is.
But Erpen will make fewer mistakes than Petke and is faster. And if he can provide three goals and two assists from the back, it will be a welcome development for this scoring-challenged team.
The backline might look something like this on Sunday at Chicago, from left: Gargan-Erpen-Ihemelu-Prideaux. Or possibly like this, also from left: Erpen-Ihemelu-Prideaux-Gargan.
Petke's injury Thursday night turned out to be a hairline fracture in his left anke. He'll be out for at least four weeks. When he returns, we might see Erpen on the left, Petke and Ihemelu in the middle and Prideaux on the right.
The Rapids say this deal was in the works before Petke was hurt on Thursday, so the timing of the injury makes this a very fortunate move for the Rapids, who fell apart late against D.C. without Mastroeni, Beckerman, Ihemelu or Petke on the field.
Don't expect miracles at first from Erpen. He'll need time to work with his teammates before everyone is comfortable. But with him on the team and Ihemelu back in the lineup after a red-card suspension, Sunday's final score shouldn't be as lopsided as Thursday's 4-1 loss to United.
The Washington Post's Steven Goff has more details about the trade on his Soccer Insider blog.





July 1, 2007
2:18 PM
Allen writes:
I don't think this is a good move for the Rapids. IMHO DCU was ready to release Erpen after this year when they'd have the off-season to bring in a replacement. He's been very inconsistent since joining them late in the 05 season. Not a quality you want in a center back. And next year Erpen takes up an SI slot. Isn't that one of the reasons that was given for not bringing back Karanka?