Paying one thats already elite gives you an elite WR. Drafting one gives you a chance at one. You pay the elite one every single time.
It's not that simple. The argument is not that Wilson/London/Williams will be better than Deebo, they probably won't be. However, there's a pretty good chance they'll be, let's say, 70-80% as good as Deebo, and we know for a fact they'll be 25% as expensive as Deebo over the next 5 years. What signing Deebo would do is make the team better during the next 2 years at which point we'd realize his contract means we can't afford to sign or retain enough guys to put us over the top and actually win a Super Bowl. Drafting a WR at 10 would make the team better during the next 2 years (not quite as good as with Deebo) but we'd still have the cap space to keep retaining and adding talent at that point, giving us a real chance to go all the way or at least stay competitive year after year. It's a move intended to save a GM's job rather than give the team the best chance possible at becoming a consistent contender.
Some people just have different beliefs. They think the 3rd best prospect = 3 rd best WR They think salary cap is rigid and can’t be managed. They don’t realize GMs on their 1st year like the one in LV and GMs in their 6th+ year like the one for the Dolphins would absolutely trade for a top WR. Some people just don’t get it. *full disclosure I’d prefer to rely on my scouting dept, trade out of 4 and 10 and wait till the 2nd for a WR ….. but I understand and don’t disagree with the appeal of trading for a proven top WR.
This is your opinion backed up only by your opinion. I think there is quite a bit that says this is a smart move by a GM that is building a team that will support its young QB’s development while also keeping an eye on the future. You can pay Deebo and draft stars. That’s on the table. You can get three starters in the first two rounds while also acquiring an elite WR. By this logic, if we draft a star that’s due a payday in four years then we shouldn’t pay him because we could use that money elsewhere and draft his replacement.
Facts are not = truth. If all you're relying on is stats - which you are - you're ignoring a whole lot of other things that comprise his performance. But we've been round and round on this multiple times. You're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you.
Pretty f’ing simple isn’t it. No essays talking about salary cap implications 5 years in the future. No guessing about what percentage of blah blah blah. If you want an elite player, you pay an elite player.
The equation couldn’t be clearer in the year 2022. You have to acquire stars and worry about the money later. And wouldn’t you know it, the same teams acquiring stars magically find ways to have cap space when they need it.
Tweeter is not something I use, just read it occasionally, but you are right, should google rumors first. This year I feel the element of surprise will be huge within the first round. Not just for us, but there is really no sure lock for even the number one pick, but instead multiple options for key contributors/starters on both side of the ball all across the first and second round. I say OT, Edge, WR or CB could be taken with the first two in no particular order, add C and LB as options with the 10th.
There is a certain team in our division that has basically lived by this principle actually, and they've been pretty good over the last 20 years or so.
I know this is a Deebo thread, but have AJ Brown and DK Metcalf been ruled out at this point? Is is Deebo or nothing?
Teams that spend big in free agency usually improve the next season but then decline in the seasons after as the money piles up: https://www.the33rdteam.com/free-agent-spending-vs-long-term-success-part-1/#:~:text=Last year, the Patriots uncharacteristically,second leading spender that year If we sign Deebo we'd better win the Super Bowl next season, because the most common outcome after that is we'd be right back where we are now.
This graph kinda means dick, no offense. That’s teams that spent the most overall, not teams that handed out one big contract. Big difference. And that’s the same difference Douglas clearly spelled out… or at least I thought it was clear.
Are these results after ONE high priced signing, or does it reflect when a team spends a boatload on multiple high priced signings? And would we have to pay Deebo now, or after 2 years, at which time we could also not sign him?
Cooper wasn't an option BTW, wouldn't do an extension. Would have been a terrible one year rental for us and glad we passed.
The salary cap and honestly all the numbers can 100% be manipulated and managed. The Cowboys signed A. Cooper to a 5 yr $20mm/yr extension. They got him for 4 years at an average of $14mm per year.
It looks at teams that spend the most in free agency. I was just pushing back on the notion that spending a lot of money is how you build a sustainably good team. I'm well aware Belichick bucked his usual trend last offseason. We'll see how the Patriots fare over the next couple years. Regardless though, I'm not talking about outliers. I'm talking about what usually happens to most teams that spend a lot.
