Free Agency: Buyer Beware

[CaliforniaCheez]

Partial,

Jared Allen was a first round pick and two third round picks.

Then they gave him the highest salary in the history of professional football for a defensive player.

Not much of a bargain.


Now the thread is off target talking about different topics.

[Fritz]

The Packers currently have 20 of 53 players aquired from means other than free agency or 38% of their team. I would guess they are in normal territory as far as draft/alternative roster content.

They have cap space because they had a talent dearth after several bad drafts leading to Thompsons inheritance of the team. As such, they are pushing forward rather than simply "spending to spend" as Brandt illuded to being smart in his article. The impression of our roster, how it got there and where it's going tends to be skewed by a small but vocal minority here at Packerrats. Often times this small, radical, emotion driven group is inspired by a hero they cannot let go of and as such they fail to see reality. Instead they focus on the fairytale they want to believe in their little heads.

As evident by some recent polls, I'd say Partials opinion is pretty much a stand alone extremist opinion, not shared by many nor convincing to any. Don't, any of you, take his words to heart. They're pretty much meaningless and starting to appraoch tank-like lunicy.

What the fuck are you talking about? My point is extremely valid. You can't say this free agency is good, but this free agency is bad. FA is FA is FA is FA.

It's all about making smart decisions. If Tom Brady were a FA, I'd throw the biggest contract in football history at him. Would that be a dumb decision? Maybe to you, but I like winning, so hell yeah I'd take him on my team. FA is the open market, and players tend to earn what they're worth in FA.

TO was a high priced FA and I'd say he has worked out very well for the Cowboys. Jared Allen was essentially a free agent and he signed a HUGE contract that many have criticized. Yet the dude has produced and has shown to be a great deal to this point.

The Jets made some big deals this off-season and in contention in the AFC.

Willie Roaf was one of the best free agency signing ever by KC.

Chuck was signed to what everyone thought was a ridiculously high deal and he has been a stud.

It's all about evaluating talent.. period. It doesn't matter how you acquire the talent, its about how much talent you can acquire and make work in the framework of a team. Saying anything less is completely ignorant. There is not a doubt in my mind that TT missed out of some of the higher priced FA who turned out to be a bargin and could have put our team over the top last year.

Partial, I'm not here to get into the middle of your squabble with JH, but please at least use facts if you're going to throw examples around.

Jared Allen was NOT "essentially a free agent," unless you're trying to say that giving up a first round and two third round picks is "essentially a free agent." If you're making that claim, can you please explain how giving up a first and two thirds is "free"?

I lump in any sort of player addition from the outside in the same boat. Say they traded for jared allen for only a 1st round pick and a small salary... still a risk. Not a lot different imo.

Then why did you say "FA is FA is FA"? If you're going to argue about free agency, then do so. But don't try to shift the grounds of the argument because you got caught trying to throw in an example that doesn't fit. At all.

I'm sorry Partial, but you tried to throw Jared Allen in as an example of a free agent to support your argument, but Jared Allen WAS NOT A FREE AGENT. He cost the Vikes a first and two thirds.

[Fred's Slacks]

It's all about making smart decisions. If Tom Brady were a FA, I'd throw the biggest contract in football history at him. Would that be a dumb decision? Maybe to you, but I like winning, so hell yeah I'd take him on my team. FA is the open market, and players tend to earn what they're worth in FA.

Correct. It is about making smart decisions. The Brady example is perfect. Now this is all just a hypothetical but say the Patriots doctors say: "We don't think he'll be the same player after this injury." So the Patriots decide (again this is hypothetical) to cut him and now he is a free agent. Would you then decide to give him the biggest contract in history? Probably not, unless you had a very reliable doctor tell you he's going to be fine. Even then you'd want a second opinion.

Two points can be made about this example:
1. There is a reason that hes a free agent and his current team doesn't want him and its not usually because they can't afford the guy. This is the case with (almost) all free agents. Teams don't usually let great players walk away for nothing. If they get to free agency, there's a reason. These reasons make acquiring free agents more risky.
2. You have to do your research and be smart before serving up the huge contract. If Tom Brady is a Free Agent you better find out why and if you can correct or compensate for it. Otherwise your just going to tie up your cap.

It's all about evaluating talent.. period. It doesn't matter how you acquire the talent, its about how much talent you can acquire and make work in the framework of a team. Saying anything less is completely ignorant. There is not a doubt in my mind that TT missed out of some of the higher priced FA who turned out to be a bargain and could have put our team over the top last year.

You're correct again that the name of the game is acquiring talent. But to imply that FA and the Draft are equal means for doing this is what's completely ignorant. The draft is your opportunity to grab the absolute best young talent available. Every player that has ever played in the modern era of the NFL had to declare for the draft (or the supplemental draft) in order to enter the league. You can fully evaluate every player and you can do whatever you feel is worth it to get whoever you want. You also start with 7 picks every year and they are at bargain prices (save the first few picks). In FA on the other hand you only get players whose own team decided they weren't worth keeping around. The fact that any team can bid on their service brings the price up and in a big year you might get 4 FAs that sign for more then the minimum. Which sounds like the better medium for acquiring talent?

I know there are positives to FA. Like getting proven, experienced talent. That's why you don't totally ignore it, but since the risk is greater it makes sense to be careful about your FA spending and focus more on the draft.

[bobblehead]

I lump in any sort of player addition from the outside in the same boat. Say they traded for jared allen for only a 1st round pick and a small salary... still a risk. Not a lot different imo.

So, Ryan Grant counts as a FA acquisition in your mind?

Grant, Ruvell Martin, Atari Bigby, Charles Woodson, Chillar, Picket, Bush, Tramon Williams are all FA. Man, TT has been pretty fucking active in Free agency hasn't he.

edit: and john kuhn.

[SMACKTALKIE]

Partial,

Jared Allen was a first round pick and two third round picks.

Then they gave him the highest salary in the history of professional football for a defensive player.

Not much of a bargain.


Now the thread is off target talking about different topics.

If you think he is being overpaid remember that tends to be a temporary label in the NFL. I remember when the Vikings signed Hutchinson it was considered an extreme contract. Now it seems to be the norm for a descent Guard.

Big contracts, wheather for FA's or traded players, are a part of modern-day pro football.

[Partial]

I lump in any sort of player addition from the outside in the same boat. Say they traded for jared allen for only a 1st round pick and a small salary... still a risk. Not a lot different imo.

So, Ryan Grant counts as a FA acquisition in your mind?

Yes. He was a free agency pick-up was he not?

[Noodle]

But to imply that FA and the Draft are equal means for doing this is what's completely ignorant. The draft is your opportunity to grab the absolute best young talent available. Every player that has ever played in the modern era of the NFL had to declare for the draft (or the supplemental draft) in order to enter the league. You can fully evaluate every player and you can do whatever you feel is worth it to get whoever you want. You also start with 7 picks every year and they are at bargain prices (save the first few picks). In FA on the other hand you only get players whose own team decided they weren't worth keeping around. The fact that any team can bid on their service brings the price up and in a big year you might get 4 FAs that sign for more then the minimum. Which sounds like the better medium for acquiring talent?

I know there are positives to FA. Like getting proven, experienced talent. That's why you don't totally ignore it, but since the risk is greater it makes sense to be careful about your FA spending and focus more on the draft.

I have to disagree. If there is more of a high-risk proposition than the draft, I don't know what it is. At least in FA you've been able to see guys at the NFL level playing NFL schemes against NFL talent. College, not so much.

I included your whole quote, because I don't want to take you out of context. I just disagree about your risk analysis.

What I get crabby about is the notion that a guy in FA costs "too much." The only relevant measure is percentage of salary cap, and that cap will go up. Yeah, these guys cost more than I make times 1000, but so what? They should make a ton of cash -- they're the reason we watch the game, and they're the ones out there bleeding and playing through hits that would kill most of us.

And the notion that FA is risky because an FA's current team has given up on the guy does not work for me. Teams make decisions for all sorts of reasons, particularly their own cap situation. But that doesn't mean an FA is overpriced, because other teams are not similarly constrained.

[retailguy]

I lump in any sort of player addition from the outside in the same boat. Say they traded for jared allen for only a 1st round pick and a small salary... still a risk. Not a lot different imo.

So, Ryan Grant counts as a FA acquisition in your mind?

Yes. He was a free agency pick-up was he not?

Um. No. We gave up a 6th round pick for him.

[retailguy]

Well, I've watched for a few days and am amused by some of the responses on both sides.

Harvey bumped the Ahman Green thread, and I must say I was FURIOUS about the way Green was treated. Still am, even though I now must say he wasn't worth retaining (as much as that hurts).

Someone stated that signings in FA are like gambling. Yep, I agree. I would also say that draft picks (even the high ones) are also like gambling. So, it really isn't any different. With FA, you sometimes get a proven track record, but you don't know how long it'll continue. With the draft, you get potential but you don't know how it'll perform either.

I firmly believe that Ted has been too quiet in FA. That being said, I don't want him to sign players like the Vikings and Raider do either. Can't we have a balance?

Couldn't we have brought in a couple of guards over the last two years to push these young guys a bit? Wasn't there a little room for a fullback, or a TE?

I'm not talking about big "marquee" signings. But, how about a couple of "proven lunch pail guys"? Do we really have to have the "youngest" team every year, three years running? Would that really have retarded our development of young guys? I don't think so. Brandon Chillar has been a great pickup for us. So has Pickett. Wouldn't two or three more of those guys over the last couple of years have helped this team?

I think so.

[RashanGary]

I'm not talking about big "marquee" signings. But, how about a couple of "proven lunch pail guys"? Do we really have to have the "youngest" team every year, three years running? Would that really have retarded our development of young guys? I don't think so. Brandon Chillar has been a great pickup for us. So has Pickett. Wouldn't two or three more of those guys over the last couple of years have helped this team?

I think so.

RG, I'm honestly shocked that you feel this way. IMO you're a smart, practical person. From what I've gathered over the last couple years, you have a background in finance. You've seen many people build wealth and piss it away and have very valuable personal experiences, just in your own life, to draw off of and use as examples of how to do things, etc. I admire that, esspecially the ability to avoid temptations that would lead to less, not more.

With all that said, I'm shocked that you say the things you're saying. The Packers had 4 pretty bad drafts in a row, esspecially with the way Javon Walker blew up. How many people do you think could walk in, after years of bad decisions and "boom" make it happen quickly like you expect out of this GM. Don't most good things in your experience tend to come from many years of good decisions and avoiding the really costly traps?

This is really not all that different. The Packers are trying to build something real. They don't want to run out of cash before it gets there. They want to lay the base the right way and avoid the false feeling of "everythings OK" by going out and spending money when you know it might not be the best value to your overall goal of building the best. Of all poeple on here, I'm just shocked that you don't relate that way. I'm somewhat shocked that you don't relate more to Ted. Honestly, after meeting you, I think you, you're whole life, is more like Ted than anyone on here and I respect that. I'm just shocked that you don't see it or appreciate where it's obviously going - UP.

[Partial]

I lump in any sort of player addition from the outside in the same boat. Say they traded for jared allen for only a 1st round pick and a small salary... still a risk. Not a lot different imo.

So, Ryan Grant counts as a FA acquisition in your mind?

Grant, Ruvell Martin, Atari Bigby, Charles Woodson, Chillar, Picket, Bush, Tramon Williams are all FA. Man, TT has been pretty fucking active in Free agency hasn't he.

edit: and john kuhn.

Damn striaght, those are solid signings. Except for Kuhn. He's a guy.

[Rastak]

Ok, I'll throw in my 2 cents....

rastak point #1:
FA is definately a gamble. A bit less in some respects than the draft but WAY more expensive outside of the top 5 draft picks.

rastak point #2:
You have to look at the relative risk of a big FA signing. How will it affect your cap down the road? Fred Smoot for the Vikings was a deal that entailed a bunch of money in year one and not much after that. He failed, they did not suffer future issues. Darren Sharper from looking at his contract when it was signed seemed to me if he was really falling off like he seemed to be in Green Bay was a really bad deal. It was fortunate for the Vikings he played well, long enough where the deal wasn't a bad one.


rastak point #3: FA is still hit and miss but at least you have plenty of NFL film to watch.

rastak point #4: If a guy is available there is either something wrong with him which means there is some risk or he ain't wanted by anyone. I guess that goes slightly back to #1 about a gamble. Rarely is a guy who is perfect in every way available.

[Fred's Slacks]

I have to disagree. If there is more of a high-risk proposition than the draft, I don't know what it is. At least in FA you've been able to see guys at the NFL level playing NFL schemes against NFL talent. College, not so much.

Okay, you're right, the draft is also risky but we're talking about two different risks. Your referring to the risk that the player won't pan out. Definately draft picks are more risky. I'm talking about the risk of hurting the long term health of your team. In that respect, unless your talking a top 10 pick, there is little to no risk in the draft. As long as you hit on the majority or at least close to the majority of your picks, you aren't going to even notice the guys you miss on. But when you miss on a big FA signing, you're going to feel the cap affects for some time. If you can do it in a way that allows you to end the deal with little long term affects by front loading or using roster bonuses instead of signing bonuses, then you're pretty safe. But you can't sign alot of guys doing that every year. Sooner or later you run out of room.

I included your whole quote, because I don't want to take you out of context. I just disagree about your risk analysis.

What I get crabby about is the notion that a guy in FA costs "too much." The only relevant measure is percentage of salary cap, and that cap will go up. Yeah, these guys cost more than I make times 1000, but so what? They should make a ton of cash -- they're the reason we watch the game, and they're the ones out there bleeding and playing through hits that would kill most of us.

I guess I should clarify. I don't mean to say they make "too much" (I don't think I said that anyway), but the nature of free agency drives up the price of a player. I think it's obvious that, in general, a player will take a little less to stay with his current team than what he can command on the open market and for good reason. The player, just like any of us, probably doesn't want to move and relocate his family. He doesn't want to learn a new system a new city, new coaches, new team mates. If he's doing well were he's at he wants to stay there to build off of what he started. It's worth taking a little less money and he has a better chance of playing out his contract by staying put. So my point is not that anyone makes "too much", only that FA is more expensive than drafting well and keeping your own.

And the notion that FA is risky because an FA's current team has given up on the guy does not work for me. Teams make decisions for all sorts of reasons, particularly their own cap situation. But that doesn't mean an FA is overpriced, because other teams are not similarly constrained.

Yeah sure, but how often do teams let great players walk away for no reason? Cap casualties is one thing but how many of those have there been lately? Teams have gotten smarter about that. Instead of letting young promising players walk they cut old guys with huge contracts or they restructure someone else. I can't think of one big cap casualty from the last few years who wasn't well past his prime.

[RashanGary]

EXCELLENT post, Fslacks. Great points.

[Lurker64]

Someone stated that signings in FA are like gambling. Yep, I agree. I would also say that draft picks (even the high ones) are also like gambling. So, it really isn't any different. With FA, you sometimes get a proven track record, but you don't know how long it'll continue. With the draft, you get potential but you don't know how it'll perform either.

I firmly believe that Ted has been too quiet in FA. That being said, I don't want him to sign players like the Vikings and Raider do either. Can't we have a balance?

Couldn't we have brought in a couple of guards over the last two years to push these young guys a bit? Wasn't there a little room for a fullback, or a TE?

I think the problem, in recent years, is that teams have become better and better about not letting their best players ever see free agency, through increases in the cap, smarter contracts, and more liberal use of tags to control player movement. There's also been an uptick in player trades which used to be virtually unheard of, largely to move players who were unlikely to be resigned (e.g. Corey Williams).

So as a result there's no guarantee that there's any reasonably high quality free agents in any given position in any given year. Generally if a player is being allowed to hit free agency these days it's because the player's former team is either incompetent or thinks that the player isn't that good and is ultimately expendable.

So the issue you get into in modern free agency is largely "Team A has a need at position x. There are players available at position x, but none of them will be dramatically better than players already on the roster at that position. They will be slight upgrades but at significant cost, at what exchange rate is the increase in quality at the position worth the additional cost, particularly when money saved can be used to keep valued members of Team A from leaving free agency."

While Ted has been largely quiet in free agency, I can't say that he's really mismanaged most positions. The really dire needs have been filled for the most part, and few of the FAs he passed on turned out to set the world on fire elsewhere. If "not signing a FB a couple years back" makes it easier to sign Jennings to a long term contract, I'm all for the neglect to this point.