Dome Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 16 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said: you’re saying that all players who are cut must be worth less than 7th rounders? Because if they were actually worth that, then a team would’ve done traded for them? If 31 teams were aware that a player was available and all 31 teams declined to offer up a 7th round pick then I would say yes, that player was worth less than a 7th rounder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said: I’m not talking about after the fact. At the time of the deal. Watkins was an overpay, as soon as he signed. That’s what he was worth to the Chiefs, but he wasn’t worth that contract (again, before even playing a down). To use your example, what my $4M employee is worth to me isn’t necessarily what he’s actually worth. If that’s my window washer or my shoe shiner, it doesn’t matter how I value him, you can pretty objectively say he isn’t worth that. The market determines what the player can or cannot get but it isn’t necessarily indicative of their actual worth. And Warford is worth to 31 teams what they were willing to give up for him. ”That’s what he (Warford) was worth to _________ (insert any team that didn’t trade for him)” Edited May 11, 2020 by Dome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 4 minutes ago, Dome said: And Warford is worth to 31 teams what they were willing to give up for him. ”That’s what he (Warford) was worth to _________ (insert any team that didn’t trade for him)” So again - at the time of the signing - there can thus be no overpays by this logic... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MookieMonstah Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 This is such a minor thing so I'm not sure how it resulted in almost 12 pages of argument lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said: So again - at the time of the signing - there can thus be no overpays by this logic... There can be perceived overpays... yes. And some of those perceived overpays are easier to spot than others. Those teams still value those players at whatever they gave up for them. The teams are saying “this is what this player is worth to us” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MookieMonstah Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 I apologize to everyone for saying that Warford probably isnt that good anymore, didn't realize he had such a massive fan club on the site Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, Dome said: There can be perceived overpays... yes. And some of those perceived overpays are easier to spot than others. Those teams still value those players at whatever they gave up for them. The teams are saying “this is what this player is worth to us” Well, players are worth what the markets bears or they aren’t. If there are overpays, then there are also steals and other misrepresented transactions - which I think Warford falls into. But as Mook said, I think we’re at a point where we’re agreeing to disagree & are going on over a mole hill, lol. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 28 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said: I think we’re at a point where we’re agreeing to disagree & are going on over a mole hill, lol. We really need sports back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ty21 Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 8 minutes ago, Dome said: We really need sports back What is a sports Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, Tyty said: What is a sports And you wonder why your dad has been at the store for 20 years 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 19 minutes ago, Dome said: We really need sports back Yep, at least I have some basis for talking out of my *** when the Pats are playing... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted May 11, 2020 Share Posted May 11, 2020 1 hour ago, MookieMonstah said: This is such a minor thing so I'm not sure how it resulted in almost 12 pages of argument lol It isn't that. It's just that a few weeks ago, the selection of Ruiz wasn't exactly met with "all right, our OL is SET, good bye Larry!" For example: On 4/23/2020 at 9:46 PM, Raves said: Ceaser Ruiz, Michigan OC WTF!?!?!?! On 4/23/2020 at 10:09 PM, Dome said: Caesar Ruiz Center lol On 4/23/2020 at 10:10 PM, Dome said: Wtf On 4/23/2020 at 10:13 PM, Dome said: Then we cut a guy who’s already an OK starter? Makes no sense. On 4/23/2020 at 10:31 PM, tyler735 said: Well aware, but I don't see the rookie bringing Warford to the bench and Terron Armstead is made of glass, so Peat is the first to slide to Tackle when he gets his yearly injury. Definitely seems like a strange scenario with us drafting him On 4/23/2020 at 10:32 PM, Raves said: If they didn't just massively overpaid Peat, I could've been ok with this pick... but they did so this pick was horrible. This is worse than what we paid for to get Davenport, though Davenport is underrated overall, he's still performed less than what we paid for. For the most part, Ruiz was a waste of a pick over other needs, and Warford OR Peat wouldn't lose snaps to a rookie. Less than a month later...and it's telling Warford wasn't traded for a 7th? We've all seen this before with our own teams - once a guy is gone, we do all sort of mental gymnastics to justify the decision and devalue their old guy in a lot of creative ways. I did similar things during th Jadevion Clowney trade, so you're not alone. Just stop trying to pretend we don't see that for what it is. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted May 12, 2020 Share Posted May 12, 2020 (edited) 44 minutes ago, ET80 said: It isn't that. It's just that a few weeks ago, the selection of Ruiz wasn't exactly met with "all right, our OL is SET, good bye Larry!" For example: For the most part, Ruiz was a waste of a pick over other needs, and Warford OR Peat wouldn't lose snaps to a rookie. Less than a month later...and it's telling Warford wasn't traded for a 7th? We've all seen this before with our own teams - once a guy is gone, we do all sort of mental gymnastics to justify the decision and devalue their old guy in a lot of creative ways. I did similar things during th Jadevion Clowney trade, so you're not alone. Just stop trying to pretend we don't see that for what it is. But did you see before the draft/free agency where saints fans wanted Warford to be restructured/extended to lower his cap hit? And where I called him an “OK” starter and assumed he’d be cut rather than traded once Ruiz was announced? Not exactly glowing reviews by Saints fans. A restructure/attempted restructure never happened, so Saints fans assumed Payton was happy with Warford. Then Payton drafts Ruiz and we’re all shocked at the timing. It’s not because we were all high on Warford, it’s because we were confused by what Payton’s plan was. Bu the following morning, twitter and Reddit (much lager sample size) were singing a different tune about the pick and happy to have an upgrade to Warford. The backlash had little to do with how we viewed Warford and almost everything to do with what we expected Payton was going to do with the 1st pick If saints fans are doing mental gymnastics to downplay Warford’s value, what are teams doing by not offering up peanuts to get him? Mental gymnastics to convince themselves he’s not even worth a 7th? Coaches apparently agreed he’s not worth giving up a 7th round pick for, but saints fans who say he’s really not that good anymore are doing mental gymnastics? Nah, can’t get on board there. Edited May 12, 2020 by Dome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MookieMonstah Posted May 12, 2020 Share Posted May 12, 2020 49 minutes ago, ET80 said: It isn't that. It's just that a few weeks ago, the selection of Ruiz wasn't exactly met with "all right, our OL is SET, good bye Larry!" For example: For the most part, Ruiz was a waste of a pick over other needs, and Warford OR Peat wouldn't lose snaps to a rookie. Less than a month later...and it's telling Warford wasn't traded for a 7th? We've all seen this before with our own teams - once a guy is gone, we do all sort of mental gymnastics to justify the decision and devalue their old guy in a lot of creative ways. I did similar things during th Jadevion Clowney trade, so you're not alone. Just stop trying to pretend we don't see that for what it is. I mean where am I in that quote tree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dome Posted May 12, 2020 Share Posted May 12, 2020 (edited) 22 minutes ago, MookieMonstah said: I mean where am I in that quote tree? he also failed to mention a convo he and I had immediately after round 1 i asked what BOB might be willing to give up for 3x pro bowler Larry Warford ET joked BOB give up “40” for him referring to pick 40... I replied you mean “40 units” (which is literally nothing) or “a 40” (referring to a bottle of malt liquor) and said I’d be OK with either then later I tried convincing myself we could flip him for a late round pick @ET80 does that seem like a guy who thinks highly of Warford and is changing his tune later? if anything, my mental gymnastics was when I jumped from “we’ll trade him for a bottle of booze” to “maybe we can get a late round pick for him” Edited May 12, 2020 by Dome 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.