|
Post by redbird87 on Mar 15, 2022 12:47:10 GMT -6
FA contracts are almost always WAY overvalued for what you get in tier 1. It's pretty rare you see a FA signing be a game changer. It happens on occasion when the situation is perfect, but most of the really impactful moves come via trade not FA. Do you remember how much we paid for Rieff and Remmers...neither was a stud. In fact Reiff was average at best, had a lot of limitations and Remmers was pretty much below average. Only FA's I can remember coming here in the last 20 years that had a true impact were 1) Farve 2) Linval and 3) Winfield 4) Cousins and we sign a lot of FA every year. Pat Pete was OK, but I still think we overpaid for what we got.
My point is with most FA you wind up with a player that disappoints (See Pierce and Tomlinson) and can't play up to their contract and yet you are stuck with them for an extended period of time due to all the dead cap. So perhaps (I'm just spit balling) if they aren't able to trade away any of the Vets for any meaningful picks, and we have a ton of young unpolished players drafted for potential with high upsides but little film to go off of, the strategy is changing to one of "let's make some small tweaks, draft well and see who excels and who fits well in the new system and THEN we'll start making wholesale changes in 23 when the cap hits are less to unload and we know a whole lot more about our players and where our true holes are before locking ourselves into overpriced contracts for players we may not need or even want.
I could be totally off....but it could very well be part of the discussion right now.
Thoughts??
|
|
|
Post by marshalltohof on Mar 15, 2022 12:51:33 GMT -6
FA contracts are almost always WAY overvalued for what you get in tier 1. It's pretty rare you see a FA signing be a game changer. It happens on occasion when the situation is perfect, but most of the really impactful moves come via trade not FA. Do you remember how much we paid for Rieff and Remmers...neither was a stud. In fact Reiff was average at best, had a lot of limitations and Remmers was pretty much below average. Only FA's I can remember coming here in the last 20 years that had a true impact were 1) Farve 2) Linval and 3) Winfield 4) Cousins and we sign a lot of FA every year. Pat Pete was OK, but I still think we overpaid for what we got. My point is with most FA you wind up with a player that disappoints (See Pierce and Tomlinson) and can't play up to their contract and yet you are stuck with them for an extended period of time due to all the dead cap. So perhaps (I'm just spit balling) if they aren't able to trade away any of the Vets for any meaningful picks, and we have a ton of young unpolished players drafted for potential with high upsides but little film to go off of, the strategy is changing to one of "let's make some small tweaks, draft well and see who excels and who fits well in the new system and THEN we'll start making wholesale changes in 23 when the cap hits are less to unload and we know a whole lot more about our players and where our true holes are before locking ourselves into overpriced contracts for players we may not need or even want. I could be totally off....but it could very well be part of the discussion right now. Thoughts?? Hate to say it but your #4 impact player made the team worse than it was the previous year...
|
|
|
Post by redbird87 on Mar 15, 2022 13:15:54 GMT -6
Not going to beat that horse....but there was a lot more than Cousins that changed from 2017-2018. Biggest misconception out there. Not saying it was his best year...it wasn't....but there were actually a lot of things different in 2018.
|
|
2012mom
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,366
|
Post by 2012mom on Mar 15, 2022 13:21:32 GMT -6
FA contracts are almost always WAY overvalued for what you get in tier 1. It's pretty rare you see a FA signing be a game changer. It happens on occasion when the situation is perfect, but most of the really impactful moves come via trade not FA. Do you remember how much we paid for Rieff and Remmers...neither was a stud. In fact Reiff was average at best, had a lot of limitations and Remmers was pretty much below average. Only FA's I can remember coming here in the last 20 years that had a true impact were 1) Farve 2) Linval and 3) Winfield 4) Cousins and we sign a lot of FA every year. Pat Pete was OK, but I still think we overpaid for what we got. My point is with most FA you wind up with a player that disappoints (See Pierce and Tomlinson) and can't play up to their contract and yet you are stuck with them for an extended period of time due to all the dead cap. So perhaps (I'm just spit balling) if they aren't able to trade away any of the Vets for any meaningful picks, and we have a ton of young unpolished players drafted for potential with high upsides but little film to go off of, the strategy is changing to one of "let's make some small tweaks, draft well and see who excels and who fits well in the new system and THEN we'll start making wholesale changes in 23 when the cap hits are less to unload and we know a whole lot more about our players and where our true holes are before locking ourselves into overpriced contracts for players we may not need or even want. I could be totally off....but it could very well be part of the discussion right now. Thoughts?? I hope you're wrong, because if they're really just now realizing that they can't pull a competitive team together for '22, they just wasted a ton of money and cap space on KC.
|
|
JR44
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 3,529
Member is Online
|
Post by JR44 on Mar 15, 2022 13:25:08 GMT -6
I hope you're wrong, because if they're really just now realizing that they can't pull a competitive team together for '22, they just wasted a ton of money and cap space on KC. This is the sad truth, not a lot we can do over the next two years with the money going to a QB who cannot carry a team. I see two more years of what we have gone through the last 4 with no real shot of being competitive. The rest of FA and the draft is not going to move the needle for us.
|
|
Vikeroo
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 10,078
|
Post by Vikeroo on Mar 15, 2022 13:41:56 GMT -6
Reality is they have less then 20 hours to open enough cap space to even complete the one FA signing they have made when new league year opens. They have 2.4 mil of cap at the moment without Phillips and you cant really get his number on 3 yr/ 19 M deal under that unless they gave him like 3 M SB and league min this year which seems unlikely. If I were e betting man I think right now you are looking at restructuring at least 4 contracts and possibly cutting someone like Kendricks as a post June 1st guy to have the rookie pool money with. They are talking to FA's so they have to have some plan. If they were going to trade Hunter all along his value was highest before the start of free agency. It is why most teams setup their big trades before free agency.
|
|
purpleberserker
β ββ ββ ββ
From the fury of the Northmen deliver us, O Lord.
(A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine.)
Posts: 537
|
Post by purpleberserker on Mar 15, 2022 13:55:12 GMT -6
1) Farve 2) Linval and 3) Winfield 4) Cousins Steve Hutchinson?
|
|
|
Post by frantheman10 on Mar 15, 2022 13:57:05 GMT -6
I've been saying for weeks that the extend Kirk and win now road was a fool's errand. A Kirk extension was never going to give you enough money to be a player in FA and we had too many vets making too much on inflexible contracts. We extended Kirk but still have no capital to improve the O line or fix a putrid defense. We should have gutted the house in 2022 but the Wilfs were afraid to have a 4-5 win season but we'll if they feel better after winning 7-8 games.
|
|
Vikeroo
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 10,078
|
Post by Vikeroo on Mar 15, 2022 13:57:29 GMT -6
1) Farve 2) Linval and 3) Winfield 4) Cousins Steve Hutchinson? Phat Pat was good also.
|
|
Vikeroo
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 10,078
|
Post by Vikeroo on Mar 15, 2022 14:02:27 GMT -6
Not normally a RR fan, but this is funny!
|
|
kato70s
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 1,614
|
Post by kato70s on Mar 15, 2022 14:04:02 GMT -6
I hope you're wrong, because if they're really just now realizing that they can't pull a competitive team together for '22, they just wasted a ton of money and cap space on KC. This is the sad truth, not a lot we can do over the next two years with the money going to a QB who cannot carry a team. Β I see two more years of what we have gone through the last 4 with no real shot of being competitive. Β The rest of FA and the draft is not going to move the needle for us. Β They shudnt have done the Kirk deal. They cud try to treat it as a sign and trade, but now they have the extra hurdle of a no trade clause. Cudn't make this stuff up if u tried.
|
|
Vikeroo
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 10,078
|
Post by Vikeroo on Mar 15, 2022 14:10:56 GMT -6
This is the sad truth, not a lot we can do over the next two years with the money going to a QB who cannot carry a team. I see two more years of what we have gone through the last 4 with no real shot of being competitive. The rest of FA and the draft is not going to move the needle for us. They shudnt have done the Kirk deal. They cud try to treat it as a sign and trade, but now they have the extra hurdle of a no trade clause. Cudn't make this stuff up if u tried. Dude even if they traded him now it would be an extra 4 mil in dead money over what he costs. If they were going to trade him they would have traded him. Maybe next year if he agreed to be traded, but even then he would be twice the dead money he was this year. Kirk is here for 2 years at least so come to peace with it.
|
|
kato70s
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 1,614
|
Post by kato70s on Mar 15, 2022 14:19:09 GMT -6
I suspect you know the terms better than I do. Based on your comments, this is a worse mistake than I knew.
|
|
budgrant1
β ββ ββ ββ
Competitive rebuild my ass...sell the team WILF
Posts: 2,643
|
Post by budgrant1 on Mar 15, 2022 14:36:20 GMT -6
I've been saying for weeks that the extend Kirk and win now road was a fool's errand. A Kirk extension was never going to give you enough money to be a player in FA and we had too many vets making too much on inflexible contracts. We extended Kirk but still have no capital to improve the O line or fix a putrid defense. We should have gutted the house in 2022 but the Wilfs were afraid to have a 4-5 win season but we'll if they feel better after winning 7-8 games. SCREW the WILFS ..They ARE a MAJOR problem here ...
|
|
|
Post by redbird87 on Mar 15, 2022 14:43:32 GMT -6
I don't think I ever indicated the team wouldn't be competitive in 22.
My point is perhaps the team is taking a more prudent approach given the existing roster is such an unknown and in doing so are not looking to put themselves in a bind in the future until they have had a chance to really assess things. That doesn't mean they are throwing away 22 as this team was a fumble, misssed FG and bad coaching away from having 4 losses last year and as of now what have we really lost. Barr and Pat Pete? Woods was not very good and Bynum showed plenty of potential and Alexander was the worst CB in the league last year. I'm not promoting they are taking a "keep the band together" one more try attitude, but perhaps keeping things in place gives them the best chance to win in 23 and 24 by making smarter decisions and not killing the cap in those years with poor or unnecessary FA signings we'll be stuck with.
We have a lot of young players that were drafted as high ceiling projects and none of us (including the GM and coaches) have any idea what they have in house to work with yet and how they will respond and adapt to a new system. So is it really prudent to go out aggressively in FA and sign overpriced players while killing our cap in future years and perhaps we don't even need them? Vikeroo made a great post about good teams building through draft and trades and using FA to put icing on the cake. My point is I'm not sure we are ready for icing just yet.
Furthermore, you have to look at value add. Let's take Smith as an example. If we cut or trade him he counts 7 Mil against the cap and frees up 5.5 Million. Now that creates another hole in an already porous defense and you likely try to replace him in FA. That means you are going to spend probably more than 5.5 in cap savings to get a S you hope is his caliber in FA AND they may not even be as good. You spent more and got less. Instead maybe you decide to keep him for a year and see if someone on the squad who was buried under Zimmer is ready to thrive in a new system and new coach or perhaps you draft a guy that really shines. So you play out 22 with Smith, get perhaps better play than a FA replacement would have cost in the 6M range AND you get a year to evaluate both the existing players and the new draft class to see if you have an inhouse replacement that can play on the cheap and be a long term solution. Then if you decide to cut Smith in 23 you save $11 Million and now you know for sure we need a S and you go get them either via the draft or FA or you have a budding player in house who can take over on a rookie deal. This saves a lot of cap and allows you to allocate it better in 23 and 24!
And I'm putting this in all caps......I'M NOT SAYING THIS WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE, I'm not even saying this is what is going on. But I certainly could understand and appreciate if this is the approach they are taking. It's all about building for 23 and 24 in my opinion. Yes they can be competitive in 22 and I'm sure they expect to be, but I think the vision and decision are being made with a 23-24 outlook. That's when the window opens back up again.
|
|