Quote:
Originally Posted by testcase448
We better be looking for another franchise QB because this one isn't going to survive the half a decade this is going to take. IF it it pans out
I've actually advocated for building through the draft, but they should sell off Luck to expedite the process, this is just backwards. Ballard is writing off the next three years at least, why keep Luck?
The Hankins move and Melvin moves were stupid, you ADD players to existing core.
|
I don’t think this is true at all. To begin with, neither free agency nor the draft is complete, so you don’t really know what the team will look like on opening week of the season. You are panicking. There are all sorts of opportunities out there – restricted free agents, trades, draft etc. Yes, most of the big names are gone, but I don’t think these guys necessarily fit Ballard’s long term strategy anyway.
Second, Ballard isn’t writing off three years – he can’t in this era of free agency. In three years, many of his draft picks will be gearing up for their own free agency, and I think its critical to his strategy that a large proportion of the team continue to be on their rookie contracts.
Third, what do Hankins/Melvin have to do with Luck anyways? By your line of thinking, a weakened defense will actually protect Luck because he won’t be able to be on the field as much. So you should celebrate their absence! Regardless, the Hankins/Melvin decisions were undoubtedly driven by Ballard’s cost/benefit analysis. By not spending on them now, he can use their salaries later on players who better fit the schemes – and before you start talking about how much cap space they already have, remember that the cap minimums are judged on a four year basis. Even if he doesn’t spend the savings this year, he can still bank it for a later year to spend on our own free agents or on an outside free agent. The game is to maximize your cap currency, not simply to spend like a drunken sailor on leave – and that’s what I personally believe paying Melvin $10M+ would be a fair comparison to. Nice player, no question, but if you pay enough Melvins you won’t be able to pay the truly special players too - there’s always going to be Melvin/Moncrief/Grant types available, but it can be devastating to overpay them. To just complain that we lost Melvin or Hankins is meaningless unless you can also make the case that their salaries are justified as well. The two go hand in hand.