EXPERT ANALYSIS OILERMAN BLOG: Free Agency

[Number9]

@Number9 9

"I believe that once an NFL player gets the monetary security they all seek it's almost impossible to work as hard and play with the reckless abandon they did in order to get the money."

If that made sense at all, then why sign any player long term, whether they are on your team or not?  Why sign Casey long term?  Why franchise Verner?  Why not let them walk, become paid slackers elsewhere and fill the roster with drafted, motivated labor?  Yeah, because the Pro Bowl, for years, has been filled with cheap labor. Yeah, Delanie Walker stopped playing because he got a contract too, right?

I think what @OILERMAN was saying is players don't usually give the same effort that got them the big contract. The term "contract year" is derived from players giving 110% to get the big payday. There are a lot of reason why, but you do see a drop off from the majority of players who get the monster deal from a new team. CJ does not look like he is putting his pre-contract effort out every game.

[Face]

The best point here is using the franchise tag which I totally agree with. I understand team's aversion to using it, as you do wind up overpaying a little & you would think you'd rather have guys locked up for multiple years. But like O-Man pointed out, you almost always get the best production when money is on the line. Of course, there's a few players who are high character guys & are intristically motivated who will give you your money's worth. I happen to think Verner is one of them. But alot aren't, and it's difficult to judge, especially if the guy is coming from another team. Also, even if you have a guy who is, it's also human nature. These guys have been playing football most of their lives, alot of it high level. They're bodies are beaten down, they're in constant pain, the practices & training camps become drudgery. Sure they're lives seem great to most but like everything it's relative. For these guys their huge contract is their pinnacle of what they worked so hard for. I'm sure after getting paid it becomes alot tougher to leave your wife, kids, and huge mansion to go to training camp every year.

[wiscotitansfan]

I'm not sure where I fall on this spectrum. Obviously most first hour signings end up biting the team in the ass but the question is... Would you rather have a larger ROI on less impact players or overpay for a high impact guy. Not saying that it always works out this way but the guys who can be true difference makers and dictate O or D's usually are overpayed by a hefty amount.

[code]

It would be awesome to agree or disagree with Oilerman.

 

I just am very uncertain in terms of where the team is heading and how they plan to use personnel.

 

In general, I agree that superstar splash signings are fraught with risk. That said, our defense with Mario Williams would have been significantly better than without him.

 

In general, I agree that you build through the draft, filling out short term gaps in free agency, particularly in areas where the draft is weak.

 

When you consider the four guys Oilerman specifically mentioned ... here are my initial thoughts:

> Wimbley in last year's defense was a bust. With the switch to the 3-4, his value may be increased. Is it increased to the level of his current contract? No idea, but tend to think no.

> Washington. Important piece in the offense and a veteran presence. That said, this is an incredibly deep draft for WRs. We don't necessarily need his cap savings. The future, in theory, is Wright and Hunter. I would rather see us spend the money to lock up a younger Damian Williams for three years rather then hold on to Washington. I will say that Derrick Mason proved that an older vet has his value when we let him go to the Ravens.

> CJ. Running back is just a diminished value position in the NFL. I don't think committee approach will be a lasting trend. But I think that there are enough locker room mitigating circumstances that end CJ's tenure here.

> Verner. Very tough. He is entering his prime. Despite some limitations, he has been very productive. We have the cap room. And I don't think he is the type of guy who would cause problems under the franchise tag.  On the flip side, Sensabaugh may be every bit as good, and Wreh Wilson was drafted I think specifically to take AVs spot.  I guess the decision is made based on coaching staff perception of Sensabaugh and Wilson and I have no idea where that evaluation comes out. If we were tight to cap I would think AV would be gone. But we aren't, and a 1-year commitment makes some sense. This may come down to whether the staff wants new veteran leadership on both sides of the ball, and what Pollard is asking for to re-up.   Got no strong opinion one way or the other.

[Righteous]

I think what @OILERMAN was saying is players don't usually give the same effort that got them the big contract. The term "contract year" is derived from players giving 110% to get the big payday. There are a lot of reason why, but you do see a drop off from the majority of players who get the monster deal from a new team. CJ does not look like he is putting his pre-contract effort out every game.

 

I think what @OILERMAN was saying is players don't usually give the same effort that got them the big contract. The term "contract year" is derived from players giving 110% to get the big payday. There are a lot of reason why, but you do see a drop off from the majority of players who get the monster deal from a new team. CJ does not look like he is putting his pre-contract effort out every game.

 

I understand the point.  But it is dependent upon the player.  Using CJ or any other FA busts to justify that  reasoning is very one sided.  I could name several players who performed at a high level even after the big contract.  That alone does not mean we should go out and spend wildly on Fa's.  Building a competitive team in today's climate requires both great drafting, great FA spending, as well as a lot of luck.   Let face it , that is the blueprint which lead to Seattle's championship and not just drafting alone.

 

And remember, Oilerman said that you often luck into a franchise QB.  You often have to be just as lucky to get great players at all positions.  Andre Woolfolk, Kevin Dyson, Bryant Mix, Kenny Britt, Sen'Derrick Marks, Jared Cook, Ben Troupe, Antwan Odom, Tyrone Calico, Pacman Jones, travis Laboy...anybody!

Edited February 27, 2014 by Righteous

[NashvilleNinja]

I'm all for these ideas. Lock Casey up long-term now, front-loading the deal as much as possible/feasible, and tag Verner and see if something long-term can be worked out later.

Also, keep in mind that if Locker is kept and he has a breakout year he's probably going to be getting a raise, although hopefully not without an incentive-packed deal.

[freakingeek]

It's hard enough to hit on great draft picks but to hit on one and let them walk after their rookie contract is up is nonsense.You extend them a year or two before their contracts are up so they are affordable and cap friendly, just like we did with McCourty. Every position EXCEPT RB. RBs are not that hard to replace. You build a team through the draft. You fill out your roster holes with free agency. Verner should have been extended before this past year. He showed his playmaking ability early on, but who knew he would play that well at CB. Bottom line is you build through the draft. IIRC, the year we went to the Superbowl, 18 out of 22 starters were drafted by the team. That's also why the Patriots continue to compete without being big free agency spenders.  

[OILERMAN]

A few points

 

* Bennett and Avril are exactly the type of contracts I'm for. Short low risk deals for veterans

 

* Harvin was def a bust this season despite a solid SB, he played in like 3 games for God's sake and got a huge deal and the team traded away a ton.

 

* Teams probably do sign too many of their own guys to extensions. But as long as it's a core guy at least he's been successful and the team knows him very well.

 

* One season in Levitre is most def a failed signing.

[OILERMAN]

Wimbley and Washington are going nowhere.

 

They are if they don't lower their cap numbers greatly, Wimbley for damn sure.

[Guest]

They are if they don't lower their cap numbers greatly, Wimbley for damn sure.

 

I know everyone missed it, but Wyatt came out and said that Washington is safe and doesn't need to adjust his cap number. 

[OILERMAN]

I know everyone missed it, but Wyatt came out and said that Washington is safe and doesn't need to adjust his cap number. 

 

In that case he's 100% cut

[Face]

A few points

* Bennett and Avril are exactly the type of contracts I'm for. Short low risk deals for veterans

* Harvin was def a bust this season despite a solid SB, he played in like 3 games for God's sake and got a huge deal and the team traded away a ton.

* Teams probably do sign too many of their own guys to extensions. But as long as it's a core guy at least he's been successful and the team knows him very well.

* One season in Levitre is most def a failed signing.

Good post. Avril & Bennett were awesome signings. Besides the fact that Seattle signed 2 quality pass rushers, getting them for one year was huge. They were playing for a contract again, and didn't do much against the cap. I mentioned in other threads if we did this we would have made the playoffs. I also doubt Seattle signs one of these guys long term, and there's no chance they'll sign both. They'll probably find cheaper options. Seattle has gotten a bit lucky, which all good teams do. No one could have called Sherman & it's tough to predict Wilson would be this good, even from his supporters. But it's clear they're a team that gets it, they know how to allocate their resources.

I think you're being a bit hard on Levitre. There's a huge bust % among FAs & atleast he was actually helping the team, the guy was a quality guard. There's no doubt he was massively overpaid for his performance though, and I have a bad feeling his mystery knee injury that he played with is going to give fans false hope. I'm expecting a similar season to last.

Overall I agree with your premise & it's a fresh way of looking at FA. Obviously AH is an extreme example & Shanahan & Snyder are easy guys to dislike but I'm pretty sure AH would have finished up with the Titans in just about the same way. Maybe not with the constant bickering in the media, but pretty assuredly with the same lack of effort, production, and constant injuries. The guy just didn't give a shit, and no one was changing that.

[wiscotitansfan]

It makes no sense to me how someone can say that Levitre wasn't a bust at this point. He may have a solid career with us but this past year was a huge disappointment no ifs, ands or buts.

[reo]

It makes no sense to me how someone can say that Levitre wasn't a bust at this point. He may have a solid career with us but this past year was a huge disappointment no ifs, ands or buts.

 

b/c you're adding the tag "at this point." They're saying the signing was a bust. End of story. It's too soon to call it a bust.

[ZEPPELIN]

I know everyone missed it, but Wyatt came out and said that Washington is safe and doesn't need to adjust his cap number. 

 

Considering that WRs are the third highest paid position ($11.5 million tag), paying a consistently productive veteran who is a great locker room guy $4.8 million is totally reasonable IMO.  I think Nate is an above average receiver, based on his production the last three years, and we definitely need his veteran leadership.  If they can negotiate a one or two-year extension resulting in less money per year, great.  I think he has 2-3 years left barring a major injury.  I don't think he will agree to a restructure without an extension and some additional up front money.  He is not breaking the bank no matter what.