vegas492 Posted February 14, 2023 Share Posted February 14, 2023 2 hours ago, Mr. Fussnputz said: https://www.sciencefocus.com/science/is-anything-truly-random/ I love being philosophical but PackerRaymond is going to shut us down. So back to football. The whole idea of scouting players and making trades, and roster construction is to avoid randomness. We should be talking intentionality. Draft choices are intentional, not random (although we joke about it because they aren't always successful). Intentionality in this case is guided by scouting reports, player interviews, RAS scores, etc. Obviously, since not all draft choices are successful, something is missing. If all necessary data were identified, successfully collected, and properly analyzed, the success rate of draft choices should be near 100%. Since that iss far from the outcome, we say there must be randomness involved, but is that true, or is it failure to identify all the necessary data and properly analyze it? Roster construction is also intentional. In the age of salary cap where to spend your money is a perfectly legitimate question. Outpost advanced a hypothesis that spending more than 13% of cap space on the QB position it would not be possible to win the Super Bowl. Now there is some disconfirming data, but should the hypothesis be junked? I would argue that things aren't so black and white. Maybe the number needs to be changed to 14% or 15%. Surely there's a limit. You can't spend 50% of your cap number on one player, even if that player is the GOAT QB, and expect to field a competitive team. From an intentionality view point regarding roster construction, it would be good to know what that number is, and what the optimum number is for the QB position. How do you feel about a QB's contract being a % of the cap? Who cares what the number is, as the number will be say 12% of the salary cap? I've heard that a lot lately when listening to Sirius XM. And while I like the idea, the practicality doesn't work for me. Typically the contracts signed are lower in the beginning and then inflate over time. So doing a % of the cap would take away those "light" years, right? That's my only real hangup on that kind of a deal. And...maybe that isn't so bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted February 14, 2023 Share Posted February 14, 2023 31 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said: Well, there was this guy called Judas. He played a pretty nasty prank on Jesus. But I won't spoil the book any more. He's the priest and had a band? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted February 14, 2023 Share Posted February 14, 2023 6 minutes ago, incognito_man said: He's the priest and had a band? He was breakin the law and living after midnight. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Fussnputz Posted February 14, 2023 Share Posted February 14, 2023 1 hour ago, vegas492 said: How do you feel about a QB's contract being a % of the cap? Who cares what the number is, as the number will be say 12% of the salary cap? I've heard that a lot lately when listening to Sirius XM. And while I like the idea, the practicality doesn't work for me. Typically the contracts signed are lower in the beginning and then inflate over time. So doing a % of the cap would take away those "light" years, right? That's my only real hangup on that kind of a deal. And...maybe that isn't so bad. I would imagine management would be against that. They couldn't play their salary cap games by kicking the can down the road. The only negative I can see from a player stand point is what happens when the cap goes down, as it did during the pandemic. I suppose management could put a backstop on that, but then I don't see how management would like it in the first place. Not being able to kick the can down the road with your highest paid player, would be a bummer for the Russ Ball types. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted February 14, 2023 Share Posted February 14, 2023 35 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said: I would imagine management would be against that. They couldn't play their salary cap games by kicking the can down the road. The only negative I can see from a player stand point is what happens when the cap goes down, as it did during the pandemic. I suppose management could put a backstop on that, but then I don't see how management would like it in the first place. Not being able to kick the can down the road with your highest paid player, would be a bummer for the Russ Ball types. I agree. But also....maybe Russ likes that kind of deal because it is known and can be budgeted around? It's just an interesting concept to consider. 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.