So if another team is willing to pay above market value, he should then pay over the overpay? From a business man I would think you would know better.
By definition, whatever a team is willing to pay IS market value, so that question is a non-issue in real life.
So by definition no team can ever overpay for a FA, and no draftee is ever overdrafted in your opinion?
Bears did not overpay for Llamar Houston, they merely paid market value and therefore it was okay? They didn't overpay for Allen, or Orlando Pace; they just paid market value and therefore it's okay right?
By definition, whatever a team is willing to pay IS market value, so that question is a non-issue in real life.
So by definition no team can ever overpay for a FA, and no draftee is ever overdrafted in your opinion?
Bears did not overpay for Llamar Houston, they merely paid market value and therefore it was okay? They didn't overpay for Allen, or Orlando Pace; they just paid market value and therefore it's okay right?
No... those comments only serve to further your position and are nothing that I said. What I said was that by definition what a team is willing to pay a player in the open market IS the market value. That can't be denied. It is the textbook definition of market value.
When people say someone is overpaid, it is always by their own internal perception of what the market is. The market is what the guy was paid. However, that never seems to help re-calibrate those peoples determination that THEY know the market.
Post by brasilbear on Apr 30, 2017 10:39:29 GMT -6
I felt that JA and Emery also has the team on a positive path so what do I know. I think Pace spent 3 FA sessions and 2 drafts setting a floor. Some of that was self inflicted, and he still hasn't proven he's fix the hole at WR, TE and QB. The OL and running game are in good shape. The DEF is looking up and many in the national media are going to be surprised that the Bears DEF is good, top 10 maybe.
But this team still has a ways to go and the depth esp on DEF leaves a lot to be desired.
However all in all, they should at least double the win total formats year.
So by definition no team can ever overpay for a FA, and no draftee is ever overdrafted in your opinion?
Bears did not overpay for Llamar Houston, they merely paid market value and therefore it was okay? They didn't overpay for Allen, or Orlando Pace; they just paid market value and therefore it's okay right?
No... those comments only serve to further your position and are nothing that I said. What I said was that by definition what a team is willing to pay a player in the open market IS the market value. That can't be denied. It is the textbook definition of market value.
When people say someone is overpaid, it is always by their own internal perception of what the market is. The market is what the guy was paid. However, that never seems to help re-calibrate those peoples determination that THEY know the market.
Can someone have over estimated market value; and therefore have paid more then necessary? If so was their determination of market value have been wrong?
Think Glennon. Of the teams wiling to pay, 3-4 weren't willing to pay 15mil a year for him does that mean that Pace over estimated market value and then over paid?
I would say that NE over paid for Gilmore, and I would bet no other team was close to giving him that same deal. Would that mean NE over estimated his value; or at least was willingly okay w/paying more then his true value?
This video is about the TE Shaneen, but in this video it gives us a glimpse of Pace's vision for the Chicago Bears. If you watch this video along with the one in the previous post (on why he drafted Trubisky) you get a great overview of his vision for the team. I'll be honest, I really really like his vision. He says in that first video that he doesn't want the team to be ordinary. He is driven to build a great team with young players with upside and high-ceilings.
In the past several years it seemed like the Bears just patched things together. Too many players were older guys on the way down in their careers. I couldn't understand "the plan" because we seemed to just lurch from season to season. We didn't even TRY to draft a QB high in the draft. Year after year we just ignored the position in the draft... at least not in the early rounds. But now we have a guy who "gets it" that the QB position is (as he says) "the most important player position in professional sports."
I think this guy is gonna get it done for us and ultimately deliver a championship caliber team. It won't be this year. And fans will hate on him. But I like his vision for the Bears. It is going to be VERY exciting to watch this young team learn, develop and come together (with all 3 years of his young players) to become a great team. I believe it will happen.
Go Bears!
JABF, looking back, I think he didn't try because he didn't have the draft pick to have decent odds. To be fair, we also apparently did not have much better of a scouting staff as anyone else did because we did not see Prescott being a good pick either. So barring that, you need a high pick.
When we finally had one, he pounced. I like it. It really is a progression in planning. You have to understand what you need to get the QB, and it's a high pick. Unfortunately, you really can't plan for a high pick. You do your best and either you get one or you don't. I look at last years losing season as a blessing, I really do. It is exactly what the Bears needed to take the next step they needed which was to get a QB.
We have all been debating and bitching about the QB situation forever. How the Bears haven't addressed the position, how we haven't had a good one since Jimmy Mac, blah blah, blah
I'm so sick of it and talking about it. I'm sure you guys are too. Well, finally now we have a legit "QB room" of 3 young guys with promise (I'm ignoring Sanchize cuz he's a glorified coach):
Mike Glennon is 27 has legit starting talent and is a low-mileage young vet with some experience but also some upside Mitch Trubisky is only 21 and was the highest ceiling QB in this draft. He will need 1-2 years of development time and he's a guy multiple other teams were interested in at #2 so clearly there's franchise potential here. Connor Shaw is only 25 and showed well last preseason before a cheap shot injury ended his year. The team liked what they saw enough to bring him back. His ceiling is probably as a backup but that's still a good find for a UDFA on an inexpensive contract.
We FINALLY have something to work with at the league's most important position. It's a breath of fresh air. And I say this as someone who was all in on Solomon Thomas for the Bears at #3.
Before the meatball fans get all jealous of some other QB-needy teams' picks and draft haul, consider this: San Fran & NY Jets both STILL have nothing but hot garbage at the position with little in the pipeline...and the Buffalo Bills just canned their GM and scouting staff one day after the draft. Unbelievable!
JABF, looking back, I think he didn't try because he didn't have the draft pick to have decent odds. To be fair, we also apparently did not have much better of a scouting staff as anyone else did because we did not see Prescott being a good pick either. So barring that, you need a high pick.
When we finally had one, he pounced. I like it. It really is a progression in planning. You have to understand what you need to get the QB, and it's a high pick. Unfortunately, you really can't plan for a high pick. You do your best and either you get one or you don't. I look at last years losing season as a blessing, I really do. It is exactly what the Bears needed to take the next step they needed which was to get a QB.
We have all been debating and bitching about the QB situation forever. How the Bears haven't addressed the position, how we haven't had a good one since Jimmy Mac, blah blah, blah
I'm so sick of it and talking about it. I'm sure you guys are too. Well, finally now we have a legit "QB room" of 3 young guys with promise (I'm ignoring Sanchize cuz he's a glorified coach):
Mike Glennon is 27 has legit starting talent and is a low-mileage young vet with some experience but also some upside Mitch Trubisky is only 21 and was the highest ceiling QB in this draft. He will need 1-2 years of development time and he's a guy multiple other teams were interested in at #2 so clearly there's franchise potential here. Connor Shaw is only 25 and showed well last preseason before a cheap shot injury ended his year. The team liked what they saw enough to bring him back. His ceiling is probably as a backup but that's still a good find for a UDFA on an inexpensive contract.
We FINALLY have something to work with at the league's most important position. It's a breath of fresh air. And I say this as someone who was all in on Solomon Thomas for the Bears at #3.
Before the meatball fans get all jealous of some other QB-needy teams' picks and draft haul, consider this: San Fran & NY Jets both STILL have nothing but hot garbage at the position with little in the pipeline...and the Buffalo Bills just canned their GM and scouting staff one day after the draft. Unbelievable!
^^^This should be put on the front page of this site, and everyone should be required to read it from now until the end of the season.
No... those comments only serve to further your position and are nothing that I said. What I said was that by definition what a team is willing to pay a player in the open market IS the market value. That can't be denied. It is the textbook definition of market value.
When people say someone is overpaid, it is always by their own internal perception of what the market is. The market is what the guy was paid. However, that never seems to help re-calibrate those peoples determination that THEY know the market.
Can someone have over estimated market value; and therefore have paid more then necessary? If so was their determination of market value have been wrong?
Think Glennon. Of the teams wiling to pay, 3-4 weren't willing to pay 15mil a year for him does that mean that Pace over estimated market value and then over paid?
I would say that NE over paid for Gilmore, and I would bet no other team was close to giving him that same deal. Would that mean NE over estimated his value; or at least was willingly okay w/paying more then his true value?
Ric -- it doesn't matter.
The market value of anything is what a buyer openly and without any duress or pressure is willing to pay a seller for that item in a free market. It may be more than anyone else is willing to pay, but that then becomes the market value AT THAT POINT IN TIME. The next time a similar commodity comes on the market, the price may well be lower. That is because you do not have the same market environment (same motivated buyers, same economic climate or any other number of factors). Then THAT price is the market price AT THAT POINT IN TIME. Market value is a fluctuating value. At the time that FA was going on, the prices paid WERE the market value. That is not opinion. That is fact. Now, someone can say that is more than they want to pay, or it's more than the value of that commodity IS TO THEM, but it does not change the fact that it was the market value at that point in time.
lol... or pay market value if market value is above what he feels market value should be.
So if another team is willing to pay above market value, he should then pay over the overpay? From a business man I would think you would know better.
I never said that either. What I said is that is the market value. Every potential buyer needs to determine the return on investment ROI at that particular purchase price. There is a lot of guesswork even in the best of cases where you are buying a piece of machinery with a known capacity. You still have lots of variables even though you know you can produce X with that machine. Can your vendors feed you the amount of raw material at that quantity? How long do you have guaranteed pricing for? What might the price move to? Can your people be trained enough to produce at those numbers? What would be your ramp up time? Those factors (and many more) need to be considered.
Now you are talking about an individuals performance, and no one knows what top level performance of that individual will be, and even if they did, what that performance will mean in terms of wins and losses, so no matter how good businessmen they ear, they do much by instinct and more than they want to admit, how much they hope will happen (potential). So every persons number is going to differ by how much they need that position, how much they think that person will perform, and where that team is in relation to a SB both with and without that performance. In other words, that person is going to be valued differently for almost everyone. Whatever the highest bid is, that is the market value. No where does it say you have to pay more than that. But if you want that person AT THAT SAME POINT IN TIME that a team is willing to pay X, then YES, you will have to pay X plus to get that commodity, and then THAT is the market value. Because it was the value to you (what assets you gave up) to willingly pay that. That is the market value at that time.
It's just the way things work. Not saying you should or should not pay more than the current highest bid. It depends on the perceived value of that asset to you.
Pace determined that those assets were not worth it to him at those numbers. Fine. But those numbers were still the market value.
