ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 1 minute ago, ET80 said: This is a function that is less of where a player wants to go and more of what a franchise is wanting to spend. Some teams spend in FA, some don't - when was the last time Belly made a splash signing? Did LA have cap room after Gurley/Goff/Cooks? Miami was stockpiling future draft picks, so they're not spending big money, right? I don't know, but I'd venture that guys who are coming out of college dirt poor are much less likely to take a paycut voluntarily than free agents who played out their rookie eligibility and may already have life changing money. So why would that not also apply to drafted players? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 1 minute ago, ET80 said: I couldn't tell you about the parity in baseball or hockey - I know that teams that spend a lot win a lot (Yankees/Dodgers) and teams that don't spend a lot don't win a lot (San Diego, I think)? I don't call that parity. The NFLs lack of parity is due to one person, only one person - Tom Brady. Let's not try to paint that as a function of some system and call it as it is, an anomaly. You can calculate parity statistically the same way you calculate wealth inequality. Statistically, the parity between the MLB, NHL, and NFL is virtually identical. And by the way, San Diego has spent like half a billion dollars on free agents the past few years and spent tens of millions in the international free agent market before that. They aren't the "small city" example like Detroit, but it's another example that giving big name players choices on where to go doesn't necessarily aggregate talent, whether you're Manny Machado getting $300MM or a 16 year old Dominican kid getting $500k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 To those questioning the why the draft exists, This is a reminder that even when the player could only negotiate with one franchise they were being immediately payed the highest in the league (Sam Bradford) so the league instituted a slot system. And yet you think the draft is about parity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 5 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: I don't know, but I'd venture that guys who are coming out of college dirt poor are much less likely to take a paycut voluntarily than free agents who played out their rookie eligibility and may already have life changing money. So why would that not also apply to drafted players? What are you arguing with this? I'm talking about the tendencies of teams in FA, not the tendencies of players on the open market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 4 minutes ago, ET80 said: What are you arguing with this? I'm talking about the tendencies of teams in FA, not the tendencies of players on the open market. Your entire argument is that greater player choice leads to less parity, and yet you're saying that because of team priorities there may be limited options for free agents and therefore, it's not as big a deal. I'm arguing the same thing would apply to draft picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Also this is why I stick to bad puns when I comment in NFL gen. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 11 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: You can calculate parity statistically the same way you calculate wealth inequality. Statistically, the parity between the MLB, NHL, and NFL is virtually identical How are you calculating parity across these leagues? Playoff appearances, Championships, etc? Because I have a difficult time coming to this conclusion as-is. One thing that's not brought up - building a competent MLB team is far different than building a competent NFL team, which will have impact on parity. By NFL standards, the Angels should be a six time WS Champion with Mike Trout as the Tom Brady of baseball. But there's so much more than having a guy who is far ahead of his peers, which is what propelled the Pats to their dominance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 13 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: We don't really know what causes parity in the NFL. Historically, football has had about the same amount of parity as the MLB (where the draft doesn't matter at all and there is a soft salary cap) and the NHL (where the draft matters a little more and there is a hard salary cap). If the draft is vitally important and causes parity, than why doesn't football have more parity? Sure we do. One game eliminations. Hard cap. Draft process. Low amount of league games. And you can’t go historically because historically the NFL wasn’t always a hard cap league. Even then, the NFL still has the most amount of unique champions and unique championship participants. Are you contending that the draft doesn’t enforce parity? Or are you saying that the free market principle should override the idea of competitiveness? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candyman93 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 What big name free agent has Cleveland signed the last 5 years....? Small markets have to trade and give up assets for guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 4 minutes ago, ET80 said: How are you calculating parity across these leagues? Playoff appearances, Championships, etc? Because I have a difficult time coming to this conclusion as-is. One thing that's not brought up - building a competent MLB team is far different than building a competent NFL team, which will have impact on parity. By NFL standards, the Angels should be a six time WS Champion with Mike Trout as the Tom Brady of baseball. But there's so much more than having a guy who is far ahead of his peers, which is what propelled the Pats to their dominance. http://harvardsportsanalysis.org/2016/12/which-sports-league-has-the-most-parity/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 2 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Your entire argument is that greater player choice leads to less parity Correct. 3 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: and yet you're saying that because of team priorities there may be limited options for free agents and therefore, it's not as big a deal Also correct. 4 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: I'm arguing the same thing would apply to draft picks. Disagree, simply because most teams don't sign 7-8 "priority" free agents (but teams do draft and sign 1-7 round picks) along with 8-10 "non-priority" free agents (your UDFA classes). Volume is the difference between the two. Free agency doesn't see a significant amount of players being signed by a single team. Draft does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said: Are you contending that the draft doesn’t enforce parity? I would argue that I haven't seen proof that the NFL draft increases parity. I would separately contend that the correlation between parity and a quality sports product is virtually non-existent, but that's a much tougher thing to quantify. Edited February 19, 2020 by ramssuperbowl99 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 7 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Also this is why I stick to bad puns when I comment in NFL gen. It's also why I need to make sure you stay in TAST. Have you played Mafia yet? That keeps people on that side of the forum... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Just now, ET80 said: It's also why I need to make sure you stay in TAST. Have you played Mafia yet? That keeps people on that side of the forum... Like once. I posted a conversation with the guy who ran it because I kept getting PMs/tags from people asking if I was a good guy or bad guy. So then I got kicked out. Oh and someone tagged me in one and then forced me to play but the poster who ran it sucks butt so I just kept posting that he could go eff himself. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 3 minutes ago, ET80 said: Disagree, simply because most teams don't sign 7-8 "priority" free agents (but teams do draft and sign 1-7 round picks) along with 8-10 "non-priority" free agents (your UDFA classes). Volume is the difference between the two. Free agency doesn't see a significant amount of players being signed by a single team. Draft does. I don't buy this as a distinction. At least not a meaningful one. There's 22 starting spots, plus like another 10 spots on each team that get meaningful playing time, otherwise it's just backups. Whether you're a draft pick or a free agent those are the spots that are meaningful, and that's going to dictate the volume of player turnover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.