Free Agency: Buyer Beware

[RashanGary]

I fought through 4-12, keeping an eye on the big picture and vision when doubters wanted to write the Thompson lead Packers off. I argued that things were still swinging up after the 8-8 season. Just last week I fought the sarcastic one liners claiming the Packers were all done and now I fight those who say Thompson will always be 8-8 or 9-7.


The one piece of the puzzle that I think the doubters are missing is just how low of a starting point Thompson had. Sherman had driven this team into the ground. He made one false patch after another and eventually it all crumbled. From there, Thompson has instilled a focus on taking advantage of the draft, bringing in many lower tier guys to let teh cream rise to the top and sparsely but effectively using UFA (like discussed in this article). His motto has been to avoid desperation adn continue to put one foot in front of the other. I believe depseration is what makes smart people make bad decisions so by simply avoiding that, I think he can be really good. He's not just even keeled and methodical in his approach to winning though. He's also a football guy who's been around some of the leagues best. He's a guy who's played and scouted his way to the top. He's not a "kiss the big guys" ass, raw raw, wanna be leader type that can talk his way to the top. He's the "self made" type that had to produce his way to the top. I think Ted Thompson is doing a great job and I think it will be proven out over time.

[Lurker64]

You could probably write a similar article about how stupid it is to have picks 1 through 3 in the draft -- the kids will cost you tons of doe re me and my lord look at all the washouts.

I've actually read a number of articles about that already. Mostly about how top five picks are horrible to have and teams would almost always love to trade out of that position, and how the maximum value (in terms of production vs. investment) in the NFL draft falls in rounds 2 and 3.

This is partly why people seem so keen to create a rookie salary structure, to combat the ridiculousness and actually not hamstring bad teams with huge contracts. I mean, Jamarcus Russell is the fourth highest paid player in the NFL right now. Are there four teams in the league who would rather have Jamarcus Russell than their current QB?

[pbmax]

Tell that to the Patriots who rode smart free agency decisions to becoming a dynasty... Even last year they retooled through free agency and trading (essentially same thing) to build one of the greatest teams ever.

Surely, NE will do the same this off-season once again and be poised to make another run with a healthy Brady.

Until Welker and Stallworth, the Patriots had steered clear of the wild money weeks in Free Agency. The bulk of their FA's that were supposedly the new model of a smart franchise (that led to the first Super Bowl win) were mid level guys or older vets who took less money. Just like trading down, its gives you more chances to hit on a few good pick ups. Not every single one of their signings worked that year, though it seemed most did.

But even on Welker and Stallworth, they risked very little money long term. Welker was a mid level guy that everyone thought got overpaid. Stallworth was supposed to be the top WR in his class and got bupkus in the way of big offers. And a trade is not like top shelf FA, especially since it was a 4th rounder and Moss took a below market contract to get a chance to sign a totally new deal after one year. Moss' trade was less like FA and more like renting Sabathia for the balance of the year.

[BobDobbs]

[quote="Lurker64"]

This is partly why people seem so keen to create a rookie salary structure, to combat the ridiculousness and actually not hamstring bad teams with huge contracts. I mean, Jamarcus Russell is the fourth highest paid player in the NFL right now. Are there four teams in the league who would rather have Jamarcus Russell than their current QB?

I hear you on the rookie salary cap. But there's a reason that teams don't trade out of those upper spots very often unless they receive major compensation. The same draft that Russell was drafted at the top pick the vikes took AP with the seventh pick and how many teams are there that would rather have him than their current running back. Probably around 31?

As far as Brandt's article he was pretty middle of the road. He pointed out that fans get way too excited about Free Agency. TT has been building for the long term and by not signing a ton of free agents we can now shell out a lot of cash next year to keep some of these guys on our team that will become free agents. I'd like to see Jennings, Collins, and T Will around for a lot more years.

[Partial]

Tell that to the Patriots who rode smart free agency decisions to becoming a dynasty... Even last year they retooled through free agency and trading (essentially same thing) to build one of the greatest teams ever.

Surely, NE will do the same this off-season once again and be poised to make another run with a healthy Brady.

Until Welker and Stallworth, the Patriots had steered clear of the wild money weeks in Free Agency. The bulk of their FA's that were supposedly the new model of a smart franchise (that led to the first Super Bowl win) were mid level guys or older vets who took less money. Just like trading down, its gives you more chances to hit on a few good pick ups. Not every single one of their signings worked that year, though it seemed most did.

But even on Welker and Stallworth, they risked very little money long term. Welker was a mid level guy that everyone thought got overpaid. Stallworth was supposed to be the top WR in his class and got bupkus in the way of big offers. And a trade is not like top shelf FA, especially since it was a 4th rounder and Moss took a below market contract to get a chance to sign a totally new deal after one year. Moss' trade was less like FA and more like renting Sabathia for the balance of the year.

No doubt about it. It just goes to show that FA is a valuable tool.

[Fred's Slacks]

Tell that to the Patriots who rode smart free agency decisions to becoming a dynasty...

Smart is the key word. The reason the Patriots have been good for so long is because they were smart in FA. Save last year, they were never the team out there signing the big names. Instead they were grabbing lesser known players at value prices who could come in and compliment the talent they added through the draft.

Nobody is saying to avoid FA entirely, or even not to offer them big contracts. All that Brandt is saying is that you need to be selective in who you offer it too. You have to make sure the player isn't over rated due to the system they play in and at the same time, make sure they fit the system you run. How will they adjust to your City/Team/Locker Room/Coaches? When you pull someone from another team there are a lot more things that can go wrong then when you extend someone already familiar with all these things.

[Partial]

Smart free agency is a hindsite statement. If trading for Welker or Moss resulted in an over-priced slot receiver and a washed up Moss, that would have looked like a horrible deal.

Adlius Thomas signed for pretty big bucks. Had he stopped working hard once he got his pay day that move would have looked bad as well.

They're pretty big players in the game of bringing in players from the outside and have had a good amount of succeed with it.

Ultimately, I think scouting (not just college, but other teams as well) and the ability to pick out players ( you could sign someone to a massive contract but if they played well, it'd look great in hindsite!) is what results in a good team.

[HarveyWallbangers]

New England won their first Super Bowl title with very few UFAs (same with Indianapolis and Pittsburgh). They won their second and third Super Bowl titles with middling UFAs. They haven't won a Super Bowl since they started hitting the high-priced UFA market. Bad example.

[Fred's Slacks]

You can say its hindsite. Or maybe the teams that do more research and are more selective wind up hitting on a higher percentage. Why is it that a higher percentage of FAs have worked out for teams like the Patriots, Giants, Steelers, and Packers then for the Cardinals, Raiders, Texans and Lions. Are they just luckier? Or are they smarter about the FA's they acquire?

[Partial]

New England won their first Super Bowl title with very few UFAs (same with Indianapolis and Pittsburgh). They won their second and third Super Bowl titles with middling UFAs. They haven't won a Super Bowl since they started hitting the high-priced UFA market. Bad example.

Wasn't it you who posted they crafted much of their original super bowl roster with FA additions? I'm pretty sure it was you or Patler, and the number was 29 of the 53 players were obtained through means other than the draft.

[Partial]

You can say its hindsite. Or maybe the teams that do more research and are more selective wind up hitting on a higher percentage. Why is it that a higher percentage of FAs have worked out for teams like the Patriots, Giants, Steelers, and Packers then for the Cardinals, Raiders, Texans and Lions. Are they just luckier? Or are they smarter about the FA's they acquire?

Which all comes back to scouting, like I said. The problem isn't free agency, it is paying the wrong people.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Wasn't it you who posted they crafted much of their original super bowl roster with FA additions? I'm pretty sure it was you or Patler, and the number was 29 of the 53 players were obtained through means other than the draft.

Nope. Guess again.

[HarveyWallbangers]

http://packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=5189&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=40

[Partial]

http://packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=5189&postdays=0&postorder=asc&star t=40

See Red's response. Much of that team was acquired through free agency, much like some of their biggest contributors last year were free agency signings or trades.

[HarveyWallbangers]

http://packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=5189&postdays=0&postorder=asc&star t=40

See Red's response. Much of that team was acquired through free agency, much like some of their biggest contributors last year were free agency signings or trades.

See my response to Red's response.

The 2004 Pats was made up similarly to the Packers. The 2006 Colts and 2005 Steelers Super Bowl champions were made up similarly. The 2002 Pats had more FAs, but they were all middling or street FAs. Mike Compton was probably their biggest name FA. Ever heard of him? Many of those guys were on the level of Atari Bigby, Adrian Klemm, Brandon Chillar, and Marquand Manuel.