Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Lazard Situation...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Voyageur" data-source="post: 990008" data-attributes="member: 17953"><p>We can suggest what a player is worth, in our minds. That doesn't really indicate the relative value to other teams, other than what we see, for the Packers. To a team with adequate cap room, the $11 mill idea might be easy enough to manage, if they know they can then spend draft capital on a player to really bolster another position of need.</p><p></p><p>Way too often we look at what a player gets in a FA contract and want to believe the player was over paid, when it reality, it's easily within budget for the other team, and a load off their mind knowing they have a player with as much ability as the one they grabbed.</p><p></p><p>If you look at what the charts say, about what the relative value of a player is by position, it tells you that it's more about slotting than it is about what the high side is for the player. The belief is that they fit into that particular slot, based on peer talent, and that's what it is.</p><p></p><p>That's why so many free agents are overpaid, and end up where everyone talks about how that was a mistake on the part of the signing team. The money appeared to be there at the time, and it was spent, to fill a need, and that chart of relative value was ignored.</p><p></p><p>I look back, and thank my lucky stars that happened with a few players on the Packers, like Charles Woodson and Reggie White. Although overpaid by chart standards, what they brought to the team was essentially a winning attitude. At the same time, I look at some of the ovepaid talent we've had, by giving out contracts to players already on the team, to keep them, and I wonder what went wrong in everyone's head, that made them fall so much in love with the concept of keeping a guy who essentially wants to be paid two to three times what he's worth.</p><p></p><p>Right now, I look at Rodgers and Bakh, and ask... "What happened here?"</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Voyageur, post: 990008, member: 17953"] We can suggest what a player is worth, in our minds. That doesn't really indicate the relative value to other teams, other than what we see, for the Packers. To a team with adequate cap room, the $11 mill idea might be easy enough to manage, if they know they can then spend draft capital on a player to really bolster another position of need. Way too often we look at what a player gets in a FA contract and want to believe the player was over paid, when it reality, it's easily within budget for the other team, and a load off their mind knowing they have a player with as much ability as the one they grabbed. If you look at what the charts say, about what the relative value of a player is by position, it tells you that it's more about slotting than it is about what the high side is for the player. The belief is that they fit into that particular slot, based on peer talent, and that's what it is. That's why so many free agents are overpaid, and end up where everyone talks about how that was a mistake on the part of the signing team. The money appeared to be there at the time, and it was spent, to fill a need, and that chart of relative value was ignored. I look back, and thank my lucky stars that happened with a few players on the Packers, like Charles Woodson and Reggie White. Although overpaid by chart standards, what they brought to the team was essentially a winning attitude. At the same time, I look at some of the ovepaid talent we've had, by giving out contracts to players already on the team, to keep them, and I wonder what went wrong in everyone's head, that made them fall so much in love with the concept of keeping a guy who essentially wants to be paid two to three times what he's worth. Right now, I look at Rodgers and Bakh, and ask... "What happened here?" [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
Top 30 Visits 2025
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 11:55 PM
Draft Talk
The 80th Annual Amish Mafia Draft Contest
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Yesterday at 11:26 PM
Draft Talk
Always Fun To Read These Stories
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 11:03 PM
Brett Favre Discussion
Dome over Lambeau?
Latest: gopkrs
Yesterday at 6:17 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Bucks 2024-25 Season Thread
Latest: Voyageur
Yesterday at 3:59 PM
Milwaukee Bucks Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Lazard Situation...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
