Quote:
Originally Posted by Colt Classic
The only correct answer to Chaka's circular argument is to just assume that who is currently on the roster is the best now and in the future. Anyone else on the market is at best a coin flip that likely adds nothing to the team. McCoy was going to get a one year contract which MEANS NOTHING to anything related to the future cap space. You could pay the man 30 million dollars and still be flush with cap space that all comes back next year since his contract would be finished, but since it takes snaps from the good enough gang and might upset one of them to the point of not re-signing here when their contract is up, the whole idea of bringing McCoy in is, in Chaka's world, a foolish notion.
When you have as much cap space as the Colts have AND you have Andrew Luck, every year should be a year in which you are going for it. Fine, McCoy didn't even have us as a legitimate option, but to summarily dismiss the idea that he could help the team? Unacceptable.
Finally, Chaka's zero-sum argument is acceptable as long as he can also go along with the idea that an 8-sack season from Houston doesn't make it a good signing if he is a complete non-factor in a playoff loss where the opposing QB had all day in the pocket.
|
Dude, I’m honestly having a difficult time following what you’re saying. What is “circular” about what I’ve said? In no way does Ballard’s approach mean that you don’t sign any outside free agents or that they can’t improve your team. It’s only that you rarely find VALUE in the high end or big name free agents when you consider their contract price. That money would be better spent signing your own players who: (1) you are more familiar with, (2) have proven themselves in your schemes, and (3) provide team continuity, identity and character.
Do you ever consider the fact that the best players rarely reach free agency? They are resigned by their teams. The vast majority of the free agents are players that their former teams didn’t want at the price they’d command on the open market (i.e. the same price you’d have the Colts pay). And yes, I know that every team is different, and because a player doesn’t fit with his original team doesn’t mean he won’t fit with the Colts, but what I’ve said is true of a overwhelming majority of free agents.
And I think that its far more likely that a free agent will underperform rather than overperform. That likelihood is compounded when you are signing a guy who’s already on the downside of his career, like McCoy. Add to that the uncertainty that is created when you ask a player to move to an entirely new team/scheme - an uncertainty that doesn’t exist, by the way, when you sign your own free agents. In short, spending money on your own players isn’t exciting, but it will likely yield far better returns than spending money on outside free agents. If you maximize value, the wins will come.
All of this boils down to the fact that everyone’s typically happy when the free agent is signed, but usually will end up feeling buyer’s remorse. Given this, I’ve liked Ballard’s free agent approach – mining the middle and lower tier free agents for value, and with a much smaller downside.
06-05-2019, 08:48 PM
Linear Mode
