Los Angeles FC 1-1 Portland Timbers: Donning the Beer Goggles, Willingly

Yes, I find it desirable. Hot, even.

Before the game kicked off, I topped my game thread by noting that I wasn’t sure what I wanted more: a good result or a good performance. The real question comes closer to what, between a lucky win and a brave loss, would give me more faith in the project.

Fun story: I got something close to both. It’s a tricky melon to cut, honestly, and depends largely on what you take from where. Let’s get into it…

Los Angeles FC 1-1 Portland Timbers
What Passes for a Match Report
Over the first 60 minutes or so, more or less the same thing happened: LAFC set up in Portland’s half, methodically probing for openings and, point in fact, finding them about 20 times. And every 12-15 minutes, Portland would finally connect a pass that got past or around LAFC’s midfield and set off a scramble that pulled their pants at least halfway off. That’s the big picture, but a fly snuck onto the projector. (Anyone keeping track of the metaphors? Where am I?)

The Timbers scored the opening goal in the fourth minute. Kristoffer Velde shagged a loose a ball out of midfield, carried it around LAFC’s right, chopped (tell me it was) Ryan Hollingshead out of stride, came inside and passed a dagger to David Da Costa. Da Costa’s run out of midfield did half the work and, dammit, there’s something to love about that near post finish. Made it smart, therefore classy. To tie that into the big picture, that goal started the timer for the game described above. LAFC created an embarrassment of chances over those long stretches of possession; James Pantemis posted five strong saves, at a minimum, over that entire period; LAFC played at least two near-perfect, grass-cutting crosses to runners breaking through a nose ahead centrally only to see said runners step over or on the pass: my butt puckered most on the latter, but all that seemed…fine somehow. LAFC could have scored two, but they, crucially, did not.

The way you feel about the game likely turns on how all the above made you feel. To pass my vote, I thought Portland could do it all night, maybe even into an extra time they don’t play in the regular season. Where a reasonable person might see a game teetering on the edge, I saw defenders in good positions on nearly every pass LAFC played(1). The chances came, clearly, but Portland consistently had a player close enough to challenge the shot or hassle the shooter. What they couldn’t cover, Pantemis back-stopped with yet another, “he’s not buying drinks tonight” performance. Pantemis’ best save may have been his first (the one on Mathieu Choniere; how does a Quebecois learn to slalom like that?), but he was still slapping ‘em away in stoppage time. (His greatest hits surely made the snapshot, yeah?)

There was nothing inevitable about LAFC’s equalizer – individual feelings will vary and do feel free to note them in the comments or on Bluesky – but the weight of the pressure definitely pushed the Timbers defense to where one mistake would do it - and it did. It’s kind of a fascinating goal, honestly, the way Ryan Hollingshead pulls Joao Ortiz to the endline to open the space inside for Denis Bouanga, who made it big as he could before bursting the net behind Pantemis' left shoulder. The way Ryan Hollingshead pulls Joao Ortiz to the endline to open the space inside for Denis Bouang poses one of those academic questions: was this less a who do you blame than a who do you blame more situation between Eric Miller and Ortiz? That’s more Ortiz than Miller for me, on the grounds that any sane person expects Bouanga to turn Miller at some point, but shit happens in defense and they call them mistakes. Seriously, a defense can't go back in time to keep a defender from making a mistake he knows not to make; it can only rearrange the pieces and how they fit together in the hope of making sure it never happens again.

That brings it back to the big picture: did I get my good performance tonight? Was this a good result? Personally, I’m on yes and yes. I’ll pick at some of that below, but first…

Follow up: is this Velde and Da Costa?

An Aside on Los Angeles FC
My thoughts on this start with trying to see that game/result through the eyes of an LAFC fan. For starters, I’d look at that starting eleven and find it underwhelming, capable, pedestrian, perhaps too reliant on get-out-of-jail-free cards, aka, Bouanga and Son Heung-Min – i.e., when they don’t perform what’s the ceiling? An attack “delivering” 0.5 goals/game has been the answer over the past four games (at Vancouver, v San Diego, at Colorado, then v Porland). Jacob Shaffelburg added a lot of energy when he came on and, again, this team created a lot of chances (34 shots, 11 on goal, which includes the great crosses noted above, among others), so what can a team do but curse rotten luck and go on to the next game? That gets to the problem: LAFC have taken two points from the last 12 on the table. That’s a tough stretch, no question, and they’re not so far behind in the West – e.g., five points behind Vancouver (two games in hand for them, though, plus a new stadium deal(?)), and a mere three behind second-place Houston. LAFC has plenty of talent – Mark Delgado and Choiniere are MLS-elite shuttlers and Hollingshead’s a nightmare to manage and Yehven Cheberko wrecked his share of havoc up the left, but it took Bouanga yanking a fluffy white bunny out of his ass for that [well-constructed] attack to break through. So...what gives? They’ll make the playoffs, might even do some things while they’re there – reaching MLS Cup wouldn’t be all that crazy – but what they lacked tonight argues against the best case, or maybe even a good case. And has for a few games, apparently.

That’s the game wrap. Let’s see how many stray thoughts I squeeze out.

[Eight] Stray Thoughts
1) To expand on the thought before (1) above, a team that allows eleven shots on goal clearly sympathizes with a sieve, but Portland’s defenders have managed space and stayed closer to dangerous players better over the past three games than they have since, dare I say it, 2020, 2021? The more often a defense gets defenders where they need to be, or thereabouts, the better the defense. Portland’s defense took (again) a lot of incoming tonight and, for me, they held the breach capably against one of the West's best. The positioning has improved lately, or I’m watching through beer goggles. Moreover…

2) I saw at least two instances where Pantemis clearly and effectively called off a defender in a tight situation. That came off seamlessly both times. As with the above, gods hope I’m seeing what I think I’m seeing because I like loud teams. A team that talks is a team that thrives.

Dabbing.

3) Portland looks and plays like a normal team. Broad concept, I know, but I haven’t seen a Portland team play as if they weren’t an advanced species of alien that had a basic understanding of soccer and how to play it. In the Phil Era, in particular, almost every player looked uncertain and uncomfortable, on the ball an off it. The passing that once seemed beyond any Timbers starting eleven feels natural now, assured even. Players move to receive the ball, seem prepared to receive when they didn’t, and a first option for the next pass has generally been available. This is how most MLS teams look. Seeing the Timbers rise to mean on that feels sensational.

4) While not new, Velde has total embrace of the “guy who makes shit happen” role has (finally) given the Portland an attacking option reliable enough to rattle the opposition. The man loves his chops, back heels, those, who do you say, epaulets on ze dress shirts? Being The Guy suits him and it’s suiting me more and more.

5) Every The Guy does a little better with a second banana and that’s where Da Costa comes in. The kinds of runs he made tonight are runs that force Velde to play the pass. To keep wailing on a drum I’ve hit for about a month, Velde will become great to the extent he uses his gravity to make space and opportunities for Portland’s other attackers. What happened between Da Costa and him tonight felt like the beginning of a wonderful relationship.

6) Maybe it took the hypnosis of repetition from the broadcast booth to make me finally start looking for it, but I feel more secure about Jose Caicedo after tonight. He’s more conservative than Diego Chara, as I see it, but there’s no sin in putting positioning ahead of running and maybe that’s Caicedo’s style. I’m happy to roll with that for as long as it works.

7) All the chatter about resting players makes it impossible to look past what the Timbers have on the bench. To hit that some thought from the other direction, how did each of Ortiz, Omir Fernandez, Antony, Ian Smith and Vincent Janssen do tonight? Even if I found his sending off warm-butter soft, Janssen had the worst night – and that pisses me off because Janssen looks clean AF on the ball and I want more of him/that, and as soon as possible. As for Antony…next. Hustle feels like Fernandez main contribution, useful enough for me, and Smith looked fine spelling Jimer Fory. For me that translates as, not giving away a lot, not gaining much more as the price for resting one of the current regulars for a game or two, whether out of kindness or necessity.

8) To carry that thought forward one more step, is this the ceiling? If so, how high is it?

That’s it for this one. With the next game a week away, I’m contemplating another level-set, but test-driving the new model racing around my head feels like a better use of time. Till I get that one posted, thanks for reading!