Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2017 9:06:39 GMT -6
Nov 21, 2017 7:59:33 GMT -6 @bearsinhouston said:
There are too many generalizations being thrown around here. This is not about generalizations. It is about specifics. There are ALWAYS difference makers in FA. ALWAYS. sometimes they are guys that fly below the radar and do not cost too much. Sometimes they are very expensive veterans. No... just throwing money into a pool of players and expecting results doesn't work. As a matter of fact, I would argue that is exactly what Pace did in this FA.
You have to scout and get the right guys. How you are able to scout college guys better than NFL guys is beyond me, but that is exactly what I see Pace doing.
And this whole nonsensical thing about FA being just for teams that need one or two players is pure crap. There are essentially two ways to improve your team (trades not included because they happen so infrequently). If you do not use one of them, you are a dummy. You need to use it, but use it right. Get the right guys. If that means spending a little, fine. If that means spending a lot, then fine too.
I am not advocating spending a lot because that is the way to get difference makers. I am advocating to target the difference makers and then getting them whatever it takes (within reason).
okay again, how do you look at and confirm something like that on a macro level. Looking at just one team and saying they muffed up FA doesn't mean anything unless you can point to a group of teams and say, see here are the teams that do FA right, here is how they go about it.
Then show that difference makers make a difference for their new teams. And don't cherry pick, so teams that got the top FA's and how that team performed that season b/c of that FA. Everyone insisted that Stephon Gilmore is a difference maker. So far he has done jack squat for the patriots.
FA sounds great as a tool, but in reality there is nothing I can point to that shows it's a key indicator. Not in total or avg $'s spent, not in # of players targetted. You might be able to point to one season, but over the course of the last 3 years none of it has mattered.
What I was trying to say was that there are primarily 2 ways to build teams (once again, discounting trades because of the rarity). So I said that FA represents 50% of the avenues a GM has to make his team better. Then I want back and inserted a token 5% for trades and came up with FA being 45% of what a GM has to work with in bettering his team.
To not take advantage of that is negligent. I really believe that. And I think we have an opportunity here. Most GMs suffer from groupthink or strategies from 15 years ago that they can't move on from. Many teams get burned from FA (it really is shark infested waters, especially considering the money required to play) and so won't wade into it. Many have that same notion bandied about that you only use it when you are a player or two away from a SB.
IMO, those are bogus. You only have a few ways to improve your team. FA and the draft are different. You need to be good at both. And if the other teams are not good at it, then even more reason for us to become good at it to gain a competitive edge. There ARE people in FA every year that can help. We need to use that tool. Don't just leave that tool on the table like most teams do.
