Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt Classic
So he only counts if a few people on here were clamoring for him to be signed? Whatever to you, dude. He was out there and available but the Colts didn't even kick the tires on him. The Colts don't need our permission. You asked in another thread for examples of who should've been targeted--there's one. Again, the article is skewed toward giving high marks for a low cost signing so of course the Colts will be at or near the top of such a ranking.
|
You missed the point of my post – please go back and read it again. I was listing the free agents that I recalled Colts fans hoping we would sign. No doubt there were others that, in retrospect, would have been good for us– but it’s not like I was trying to say the Colts signed the
only free agents that could help.
With regard to your statement that it’s easier to find good value in “bargain basement low risk contracts”, I agree with you. Isn’t that basically the conclusion to be drawn from the article (assuming you agree with the author’s analysis)? You get a lot more bang for your buck at the lower end of the spectrum.
While I’m fairly certain you’ll respond by saying something like, “but you can’t get impact players that way”, I don’t really agree and it probably depends on what you mean by “impact players”. The truth is, as last season’s free agency class will readily demonstrate, it’s tough to get All-Pro players in free agency even when you spend through the nose to do so. Very few of the high end free agents have played up to their contracts, and in most cases I’m guessing the teams that signed them aren’t pleased with their investments. However, you certainly can get people who make a positive “impact” on the team via a low or mid-tier signing like Eric Ebron. That’s exactly what I take from the article. Do you agree with it? If not, why not?