Jump to content
coordinator0

Mosley Going to the Jets

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, wackywabbit said:

Again that has nothing to do with "building through free agency".

Drafting bad is bad for teams. That's that's the only statement being made here. 

I don't even buy the correlation that "smart teams" have all their money tied up in their own draft picks. That's certainly not what the Pats, us, or Eagles have done to get all those comp picks every year.

This is like arguing against 2 + 2 = 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wackywabbit said:

Again that has nothing to do with "building through free agency".

Drafting bad is bad for teams. That's that's the only statement being made here. 

I don't even buy the correlation that "smart teams" have all their money tied up in their own draft picks. That's certainly not what the Pats, us, or Eagles have done to get all those comp picks every year.

You’re being dense. It actually has very much to do with building through FA. By having crappy drafts they are forced to supplement their team talent via FA and thus BUILD THROUGH FA. It’s really not that complicated.

The correlation and the causation has been shown.

Causation = team is bad and has cap money thus they spend cap money on FAs.

Correlation = Teams with high cap numbers have generally missed on their drafts from 4-5 years before.

Ex. 2015 Draft. Indianapolis Colts

The Colts had the highest Cap in FA in 2019. If we go back four years to their draft class, let’s look at the results.

Round One- Phillip Dorsett = bust (4 years in NFL)

Round Two- D’Joun Smith = ultra bust (2 years)

Round Three- Henry Anderson = bust (3 years with Colts)

Round Four- Clayton Geathers = Hit

Round Six- Josh Robinson = bust (1 year)

Round Six- Amarllo Herrera = bust (1 year)

Round Seven- Denzel Good = neutral (3 years with Colts)

The Colts aren’t the only team that sees these same trends. Thus a correlation is to be made between bad drafting and available cap space. The causality for FA spending is a high amount of available cap. However the correlation is the draft class from four years before turning out poorly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

You’re being dense. It actually has very much to do with building through FA. By having crappy drafts they are forced to supplement their team talent via FA and thus BUILD THROUGH FA. It’s really not that complicated.

The correlation and the causation has been shown.

Causation = team is bad and has cap money thus they spend cap money on FAs.

Correlation = Teams with high cap numbers have generally missed on their drafts from 4-5 years before.

Ex. 2015 Draft. Indianapolis Colts

The Colts had the highest Cap in FA in 2019. If we go back four years to their draft class, let’s look at the results.

Round One- Phillip Dorsett = bust (4 years in NFL)

Round Two- D’Joun Smith = ultra bust (2 years)

Round Three- Henry Anderson = bust (3 years with Colts)

Round Four- Clayton Geathers = Hit

Round Six- Josh Robinson = bust (1 year)

Round Six- Amarllo Herrera = bust (1 year)

Round Seven- Denzel Good = neutral (3 years with Colts)

The Colts aren’t the only team that sees these same trends. Thus a correlation is to be made between bad drafting and available cap space. The causality for FA spending is a high amount of available cap. However the correlation is the draft class from four years before turning out poorly.

Cept that all my posts are about actions in free agency not causing any limitation in terms of building through the draft. Not about what the draft causes. Literally said this 4 times.

Not sure why you are still making a case that drafting poorly makes you a bad team. Not have great homegrown players to pay leaves you more cap space. Yep. Also, not my point.

Edited by wackywabbit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, wackywabbit said:

Cept that all my posts are about actions in free agency not causing any limitation in terms of building through the draft. Not about what the draft causes. Literally said this 4 times.

Not sure why you are till making a case that drafting poorly makes you a bad team.

Your argument was that FA has no correlation to the draft, which I literally displayed in my post that it does.

I didn’t make the case that drafting poorly makes one a bad team. In fact, I didn’t mention that not a single time in the post you just quoted. I mentioned the correlation between poor drafting and high amounts of FA dollars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said:

Your argument was that FA has no correlation to the draft, which I literally displayed in my post that it does.

No it wasn't. That's just the argument you are choosing debate with no one. The draft causes everything, it's always the biggest deal.

What I actually said was that nothing you do or don't do in free agency causes a limitation in what you can do in the draft. Or in other words, there is no trade-off for being active in FA that makes the draft a less significant avenue to improve.

My first post on this wonderful thread, read it again:

3 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

Every team builds through the draft.

Saying a team builds through FA instead of the draft either implies that they are either losing their draft picks or that spending money in free agency is the reason teams scout/develop poorly. 

Generally bad teams have a lot more draft capital. Whether they hit on or blow it has nothing to do with FA activity. 

 

Edited by wackywabbit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

Generally bad teams have a lot more draft capital. Whether they hit on or blow it has nothing to do with FA activity. 

Exhibit A.

You are literally stating that hitting on draft picks or blowing it has no correlation to FA activity, which isn’t true as I stated in my post.

What’s more there is an obvious correlation to teams having cap $$ to spend and teams actually spending much of their available cap on FA acquisitions (regardless of whether that available cap space is large or small). Otherwise said teams are not utilizing their cap space to be competitive.

Thus teams that draft poorly have more money available and thus more money to spend on FAs. Thus teams that draft poorly are forced to build through FA because of past drafting mistakes.

1 hour ago, wackywabbit said:

I mean... I've repeatedly asked you how aggressiveness in free agency CAUSES you to get less out of the draft, and I've heard nothing close to addressing that.

Gah... too focused on this nonsense debate... missed the Browns doing a thing

I know this isn’t my retort to make, but It causes you to get less out of the draft because if one looks at the hits of the 2016 draft/URFA (Stanley, Young, Judon, Pierce, Peanut, and MAYBE Henry) and it becomes clear that retaining those players will be a priority. So overpaying and being overly aggressive in FA can potentially inhibit a teams ability to retain their young studs.

Which is why the right player, right price philosophy is important. It allows a team to have the money to extend their core players before other desperate teams are able to get in on the bidding process. Thus allowing the team to ultimately save money in the long run that makes them more competitive.

So in conclusion, you get less out of the draft class because if you haven’t the money to retain your draft core talents than you are getting less tread out of your homegrown candidates. You are robbing Peter to pay Paul... at best and at worst you are robbing Peter in order to ultimately not have enough money to pay Paul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, diamondbull424 said:

Exhibit A "Generally bad teams have a lot more draft capital. Whether they hit on or blow it has nothing to do with FA activity. "

You are literally stating that hitting on draft picks or blowing it has no correlation to FA activity

No....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teams that bring in high priced free agents a teams that recognize they have a glaring hole on their team that have to be filled or they see a chance to bring in an established playmaker.

Sometimes those players can also be viewed as franchise cornerstones that bring other elements to the field than pure production. I think Mosley is considered such for the Jets, while Bell fits into the box "established playmaker". 

IF your team has to bring in more high priced free agents, it is because the talent pool is low, the teams floor is low OR you are trying to use a short window to win a super bowl. The Jets are a team depleted of talent due to bad drafting and bad priorities in free agency. Those things are tied together.

A team that rarely invests in free agency are the Packers, and they have struggled to build a team around Aaron Rodgers. 

The draft can't stand alone, but it is also rare that the big additions in free agency is what separates a team the following year. A need to spend that much money on one player usually indicates, that the teams roster has substantial issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we basically got Earl Thomas and Mark Ingram for the combined amount it would have taken to sign Mosley.

Yeah I think we made the right choice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BaltimoreTerp said:

So we basically got Earl Thomas and Mark Ingram for the combined amount it would have taken to sign Mosley.

Yeah I think we made the right choice. 

Without a doubt, 100% right choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BaltimoreTerp said:

So we basically got Earl Thomas and Mark Ingram for the combined amount it would have taken to sign Mosley.

Yeah I think we made the right choice. 

I still think these moves cancel out John Brown and Zardarius Smith. Mosley is the one sure comp pick we get now, Suggs contract might be too low and he would have to have a big season to warrant anything more than a 7.th

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Danand said:

I still think these moves cancel out John Brown and Zardarius Smith. Mosley is the one sure comp pick we get now, Suggs contract might be too low and he would have to have a big season to warrant anything more than a 7.th

Suggs got 7M for 1 year. Average annual value is 90% of the co.p pick formula, so he'll easily cover Ingram.

...unless there is something specific to a guy who had been in the league super long that vaguely sounds familiar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, wackywabbit said:

Suggs got 7M for 1 year. Average annual value is 90% of the co.p pick formula, so he'll easily cover Ingram.

...unless there is something specific to a guy who had been in the league super long that vaguely sounds familiar.

Yeah, that’s what I was thinking... or if there is something about multi-year deals providing additional weight in the formula while one year deals providing less weight?

Otherwise his $7m apy covers Ingram’s $5m apy for sure. Heck even if there’s a value placed on years offered, would have to think the additional $2m apy for Suggs should cover that difference.

So just based off of current moves I would think we should expect a 3rd and 5th/6th round comp pick barring any additional moves (though I’m gonna guess and say we decide to plug the rest of our depth holes with veterans that are cut vs FAs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, wackywabbit said:

Suggs got 7M for 1 year. Average annual value is 90% of the co.p pick formula, so he'll easily cover Ingram.

...unless there is something specific to a guy who had been in the league super long that vaguely sounds familiar.

Due to his age or amount of time in the league the highest comp pick Baltimore can get for Suggs is a 5th rounder. If his deal is for $7 million or close to that without incentives it easily falls the the 5th round range. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×