Is paying big money for a QB worth it?

[Soko]

3 hours ago, biletnikoff said:

You didn't  understand my point at all. It has nothing to do with your ability  to count. Yang your yin on your own time and not in front of the children

I understood your point just fine. You may be the most intelligent guy on this board - maybe even the whole interwebz - but we can do some long addition here. Our gap isn’t that big, mathematically speaking. 

I didn’t even use a calculator for that.

 

[childofpudding]

If I wasn't so lazy right now, I'd look at the correlative factor over the last decade or so between a QB's cap hit percentage and his team's win percentage. My guess is that it isn't that high because of rookie deals. If you subtracted those, the correlative factor likely goes up. Not sure how much though, considering the contracts that players like Flacco, Cutler, Glennon and Eli Manning got.

[squire12]

5 minutes ago, childofpudding said:

If I wasn't so lazy right now, I'd look at the correlative factor over the last decade or so between a QB's cap hit percentage and his team's win percentage. My guess is that it isn't that high because of rookie deals. If you subtracted those, the correlative factor likely goes up. Not sure how much though, considering the contracts that players like Flacco, Cutler, Glennon and Eli Manning got.

That is an interesting idea.   Would really be best to just look at it since the last CBA.  Rookie wage scale really altered the value of a rookie QB with such a low cap number for those 4-5 years.  

[biletnikoff]

6 hours ago, Yin-Yang said:

I understood your point just fine. You may be the most intelligent guy on this board - maybe even the whole interwebz - but we can do some long addition here. Our gap isn’t that big, mathematically speaking. 

I didn’t even use a calculator for that.

 

abacus ?

[biletnikoff]

8 hours ago, Non-Issue said:

This word, "Reality." I am not sure it means what you think it means. 

A kid throwing a ball is generally worth nothing or next to nothing. For professional athletes and team owners, throwing a ball is , in reality, worth millions. I can provide you evidence if you doubt that. 

seriously? you cant grasp the basic concept? throwing a ball is a useless act to society. It serves no valuable purpose.

it doesnt matter who's throwing it or why. Its still nothing more than throwing a ball. It has no value. You choose to believe and give it value.

Quote

I can provide you evidence if you doubt that. 

all you can provide is that a construct was carried out and people bought into it. That doesnt give it actual important/valid/needed value.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[biletnikoff]

9 hours ago, Non-Issue said:

I dont need to make 80 million dollars to talk about if a QB is worth 80 million dollars. I can just consult what the market tends to pay similar QBs. 

Who is talking about it like their opinion matters to billionaire owners? Or is that just you trying to push some ridiculous narrative involving irrationality/naivete/narcissism?

Why are you talking about it like your opinion matters to any of us??? We are all doing what the website encourages us to do. Discussing footballs future. If it aint your scene, I am sure there is some emo thread somewhere where people are discussing how stupid and pointless everything is. Why waste all that teen angst here?

lol at comparing critical thinking to childish emo behavior. I'm educating you on what sports really is.

 the only naive people are the ones who think they are watching random competition. I'm the least narcissistic. Thats why I'm able to see outside the box.

 

 

[riceman80]

I personally dont get alot of franchise QBs thinking and dont see how it cant bother them. I realize guys want to get paid but for example, ill pick Flacco.

If youre aging, you have an average O-line, limited running back talent, and no receivers to throw to. Why not agree to a restructure, especially considering youve already made $100+ million dollars in your career so you're MORE than set for life. Instead of being like well we suck on offense and have no chance of winning a SB but hey at least im getting a king's ransom. Just seems way overly selfish to me.

Even as somebody like Derek Carr, what about putting a clause in your contract like i'll give up 5 mil a year if you re-sign Cooper or Mack. Easy way of still getting paid alot while rewarding the front office with cap flexibility if they make sure key players that contribute highly to the team's success and your own are retained. Seems like a win-win to me.

Imo, anyone who claims that they NEED to be paid $20+ million a year is a greedy person. Like when is enough money enough money?

[Soko]

4 hours ago, biletnikoff said:

abacus ?

Abacus, what’s that some sort of South American flower? What, we can’t do math or read???

You’re hopeless.

[Jlowe22]

4 hours ago, biletnikoff said:

seriously? you cant grasp the basic concept? throwing a ball is a useless act to society. It serves no valuable purpose.

it doesnt matter who's throwing it or why. Its still nothing more than throwing a ball. It has no value. You choose to believe and give it value.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's worth a lot actually.  A life with zero entertainment isn't a life worth living.  Anyone who's been severely depressed for a long period of time or in severe pain can tell you, they're no longer afraid to die and even welcome it.  Such a life all of a sudden gives a lot less value to doctors and ambulance drivers, etc that help prolong life.  Those professions are only valuable when life is worth living.

It's not enough to just survive, and all the little(and big) things that make life worth living are priceless.

[Malik]

Unless you have an all-pro caliber QB it is not worth it. The vast majority of QBs in the league are interchangeable with each other and would yield the same results if swapped to different teams. There's no reason Mike Glennon should have been offered that monstrous contract. The same type of contract that the Jets gave Fitzpatrick to come back when they were bidding against themselves.

[childofpudding]

4 hours ago, riceman80 said:

I personally dont get alot of franchise QBs thinking and dont see how it cant bother them. I realize guys want to get paid but for example, ill pick Flacco.

If youre aging, you have an average O-line, limited running back talent, and no receivers to throw to. Why not agree to a restructure, especially considering youve already made $100+ million dollars in your career so you're MORE than set for life. Instead of being like well we suck on offense and have no chance of winning a SB but hey at least im getting a king's ransom. Just seems way overly selfish to me.

Even as somebody like Derek Carr, what about putting a clause in your contract like i'll give up 5 mil a year if you re-sign Cooper or Mack. Easy way of still getting paid alot while rewarding the front office with cap flexibility if they make sure key players that contribute highly to the team's success and your own are retained. Seems like a win-win to me.

Imo, anyone who claims that they NEED to be paid $20+ million a year is a greedy person. Like when is enough money enough money?

While I broadly agree with you, theoretically/philosophically speaking it all depends on how that QB spends that extra money in relation to their values. Look at Chris Long donating his base salary to charity. If Flacco were to spend the extra $5m a year on thousands of mosquito nets that actually saved hundreds or thousands of people's lives, that's a lot more valuable than having a better team around you to have a better chance at winning a Super Bowl. That's almost purely a theoretical discussion, though, as many/most of these players just blow their savings on ****ty real estate investments. So I'm not sure of the point of this post. Oh well, I'm out!

[TecmoSuperJoe]

5 hours ago, riceman80 said:

I personally dont get alot of franchise QBs thinking and dont see how it cant bother them. I realize guys want to get paid but for example, ill pick Flacco.

If youre aging, you have an average O-line, limited running back talent, and no receivers to throw to. Why not agree to a restructure, especially considering youve already made $100+ million dollars in your career so you're MORE than set for life. Instead of being like well we suck on offense and have no chance of winning a SB but hey at least im getting a king's ransom. Just seems way overly selfish to me.

Even as somebody like Derek Carr, what about putting a clause in your contract like i'll give up 5 mil a year if you re-sign Cooper or Mack. Easy way of still getting paid alot while rewarding the front office with cap flexibility if they make sure key players that contribute highly to the team's success and your own are retained. Seems like a win-win to me.

Imo, anyone who claims that they NEED to be paid $20+ million a year is a greedy person. Like when is enough money enough money?

A football career has a very short shelf life. You get as much money as you can. It's not Joe's responsibility to give his team a break. It's the Ravens responsibility to fill holes on the roster, regardless of the cap situation. It's the Raven's responsibility to hit on their draft picks. Everyone is a self contractor in the NFL. That's why you never see a player give their team a "hometown" discount. That would be stupid. Tom Brady is probably the only big name guy that has restructured his contract over and over again. Who his wife is and Tom's other endorsements probably help with that. 

It's not about needed to get paid a certain number. It's about getting paid what you feel you're worth on the market compared to everyone else. The number is irrelevant since it's ever changing. 

[Pugger]

1 hour ago, Malik said:

Unless you have an all-pro caliber QB it is not worth it. The vast majority of QBs in the league are interchangeable with each other and would yield the same results if swapped to different teams. There's no reason Mike Glennon should have been offered that monstrous contract. The same type of contract that the Jets gave Fitzpatrick to come back when they were bidding against themselves.

Indeed.  Because this is a QB driven league and superior QBs are few and far between guys like Glennon get ridiculous contracts from desperate GMs/owners.  

[DLF54927]

Basically, almost no one drafted in the last decade should have been extended, and especially Matt Stafford, amirite?  I mean, look at this disparity between season averages of no-brainer extensions and Stafford since 2010:

16 starts, 65.9%, 4430 yards, 28 TDs(4.7%), 13 INTs(2.1%)

16 starts, 64.7%, 4425 yards, 30 TDs(5.2%), 15 INTs(2.6%)

14 starts, 64.9%, 4080 yards, 25 TDs(4.9%), 12 INTs(2.3%)

14 starts, 62.7%, 4060 yards, 25 TDs(4.5%), 12 INTs(2.2%)

How can you win with those type of Stafford numbers?  What's the point of discussing surrounding talent, the run game, coaching and the like with numbers like that?

Easily upgraded. 

[childofpudding]

22 hours ago, squire12 said:

That is an interesting idea.   Would really be best to just look at it since the last CBA.  Rookie wage scale really altered the value of a rookie QB with such a low cap number for those 4-5 years.  

Just looked at 2013-17, so it's a small sample size. That's as far as spotrac goes back for positional spending, which I figured was more accurate than just looking at the highest-paid QB on the team. Otherwise you could skew the stats if a team has two QBs, each of whom is taking up, say, $7m in cap. I saw this early on with KC having Orton and Cassel in 2011, so I steered away from it.

Anyway, it was a positive, but weak, correlative factor of 0.275 between QB spending and win%. Again, granting the small sample size.

Also, I did not separate out rookie contracts, so the correlative factor would skew higher if you removed those. For example, the Rams and Eagles were 22nd and 27th in QB positional spending in 2017.