Noticing a pattern with these signings

[Narcosys]

What i find funny is that while most teams are only signing 1 or 2, we signed six and still have HALF our cap. Regardless if they don't pan out, meaning we don't pay them, then it's still a good job by Grigson.

[Jay Kirk]

Acording to NFL network Avril has no real offers

[Jason_]

Okay, that's not strictly opinion, but a fairly reasonable assumption. Have you seen the way the deal has been treated by pretty much everybody? Unless every GM in the league lives in a very tiny bubble with completely different views from everybody else in the world, it's seen as paying him more than he should have got. 

 

Otherwise, following the same logic, would you be surprised if with the #2 pick, Jaguars selected, say, Stephan Taylor? You'd surely argue his value on that, not least because they could have taken him almost definitely in the second. Or would you disagree with that because it'd be impossible to tell where other teams would have taken him? 

 

Well the draft is a very different animal than FA because you have hundreds of draft sites, draft gurus (Todd McShay, Mel Kiper, Mike Mayok etc etc) all giving their respective values on each player, so when the draft comes around we, the public, have a better idea of the value of the players.  Even with that said, different GM's and scouting teams will value each player differently.  Grigson may consider a guy like Margus Hunt as a value in the first round whereas, say, Tom Telesco may feel that Hunt is only a value in the 2nd round.  

 

Still, that's all besides the point.  Sure, we all have the right to express our opinions, but making a statement like "because they're certainly not highly rated through the rest of the league, so how much leverage could they possibly have?!" makes it sound as if you're claiming to know exactly how the other 31 GM's in the league feel about these players.  Hence the comment "what team are you gm for again?"  

 

Everyone has an opinion and everyone has the right to state their opinion, but when you start making comments claiming to know what value all GM's in the league place on certain players, then be prepared for some sarcastic responses.  

[Jason_]

Love that strategy....but....

 

We have A LOT of money....

Draft picks aren't a gaurantee....

Luck cannot get hit like last year....

 

That's very true.  We do have a lot of money, and we still have a lot left and there are still some top names available.  That's why I said I still expect to see a playmaker or two.  And they're addressing Luck getting hit, we've already signed a new OG and RT and there are still several quality OL FA's left.

[AntonMcG]

Okay, that's not strictly opinion, but a fairly reasonable assumption. Have you seen the way the deal has been treated by pretty much everybody? Unless every GM in the league lives in a very tiny bubble with completely different views from everybody else in the world, it's seen as paying him more than he should have got. 

 

Otherwise, following the same logic, would you be surprised if with the #2 pick, Jaguars selected, say, Stephan Taylor? You'd surely argue his value on that, not least because they could have taken him almost definitely in the second. Or would you disagree with that because it'd be impossible to tell where other teams would have taken him?

You are in no way following the same logic there as they are two completely different scenarios and not comparable. The draft is a level playing field, the salary of the first-pick, regardless of who it is, is pretty much pre-defined, and that trend continues all the way until the seventh round, the players do not have a choice of where they go to.

In Free Agency, the player can take or leave any offer they choose, they can go anywhere they want, and teams may be forced to pay over the odds because they have competition for certain players.

So to compare the two makes absolutely zero sense and somewhat demeans your argument.

[BrentMc11]

Acording to NFL network Avril has no real offers

Last night it was Rams/Colts....time to start wondering....HMMMMM...where will Avril go....?  I have to wonder if the Ravens feel so thin at OLB they take a flyer...since they do actually have money to pay him 'now.'  Then again, he has not played OLB since Purdue....was always and still is a concern of mine!!

[BrentMc11]

That's very true.  We do have a lot of money, and we still have a lot left and there are still some top names available.  That's why I said I still expect to see a playmaker or two.  And they're addressing Luck getting hit, we've already signed a new OG and RT and there are still several quality OL FA's left.

Not to mention....OGs in the draft work better than tackles in the draft....good points Jason.

[Jay Kirk]

Last night it was Rams/Colts....time to start wondering....HMMMMM...where will Avril go....?  I have to wonder if the Ravens feel so thin at OLB they take a flyer...since they do actually have money to pay him 'now.'  Then again, he has not played OLB since Purdue....was always and still is a concern of mine!!

NFL network anylys ,saying Colts wont be interested now that we have Walden

[Dan]

Well the draft is a very different animal than FA because you have hundreds of draft sites, draft gurus (Todd McShay, Mel Kiper, Mike Mayok etc etc) all giving their respective values on each player, so when the draft comes around we, the public, have a better idea of the value of the players.  Even with that said, different GM's and scouting teams will value each player differently.  Grigson may consider a guy like Margus Hunt as a value in the first round whereas, say, Tom Telesco may feel that Hunt is only a value in the 2nd round.  

 

Still, that's all besides the point.  Sure, we all have the right to express our opinions, but making a statement like "because they're certainly not highly rated through the rest of the league, so how much leverage could they possibly have?!" makes it sound as if you're claiming to know exactly how the other 31 GM's in the league feel about these players.  Hence the comment "what team are you gm for again?"  

 

Everyone has an opinion and everyone has the right to state their opinion, but when you start making comments claiming to know what value all GM's in the league place on certain players, then be prepared for some sarcastic responses.  

 

It's a very different animal, of course, but the basic point remains - both statements would require assumptions of knowledge as to the thoughts and judgements of the other 31 teams. While there's nothing quite as clear cut as mock drafts etc with quantified values, it's very easy to feel expected value of a player. Especially when you compare it to what other players are being paid! Players of Walden's standards are not paid that kind of money (of course, I'm willing to backtrack on this when we find out exactly how easy it is to get out of - if he's on very little for two years and we can cut him without huge loss, then my complaints will simmer down accordingly).  I just find it impossible to argue that $4m a year for Erik Walden is good value, when you compare it to how he's rated by the general public and media (if not specifically GMs ;)) and what other players are being paid. 

 

You are in no way following the same logic there as they are two completely different scenarios and not comparable. The draft is a level playing field, the salary of the first-pick, regardless of who it is, is pretty much pre-defined, and that trend continues all the way until the seventh round, the players do not have a choice of where they go to.

In Free Agency, the player can take or leave any offer they choose, they can go anywhere they want, and teams may be forced to pay over the odds because they have competition for certain players.

So to compare the two makes absolutely zero sense and somewhat demeans your argument.

 

Nothing like openly attempting to denounce someone's argument to make your point stronger, eh? 

 

Obviously the two situations aren't exactly the same, but as I said above, both the Walden situation and my example rely on, to differing degrees, assumption of higher knowledge, which nobody has completely, but it doesn't take a genius to make that general, vague assumption.

[BrentMc11]

NFL network anylys ,saying Colts wont be interested now that we have Walden

I may be the only one who still thinks he is a possibility....that right side needs solidified.  Huges can play the Mathis role much better than the 'rush.'  Grigson is a Purdue boy...I am not ruling it out....

[Jay Kirk]

I may be the only one who still thinks he is a possibility....that right side needs solidified.  Huges can play the Mathis role much better than the 'rush.'  Grigson is a Purdue boy...I am not ruling it out....

Im for it myself,wouldnt mind Landry either

[BrentMc11]

Im for it myself,wouldnt mind Landry either

You get Landry...you do not need a safety....unless one of the studs fall.....

 

OL, DT, and another young OLB...rush...(dare I say corner in this forum?)  

[AntonMcG]

It's a very different animal, of course, but the basic point remains - both statements would require assumptions of knowledge as to the thoughts and judgements of the other 31 teams. While there's nothing quite as clear cut as mock drafts etc with quantified values, it's very easy to feel expected value of a player. Especially when you compare it to what other players are being paid! Players of Walden's standards are not paid that kind of money (of course, I'm willing to backtrack on this when we find out exactly how easy it is to get out of - if he's on very little for two years and we can cut him without huge loss, then my complaints will simmer down accordingly).  I just find it impossible to argue that $4m a year for Erik Walden is good value, when you compare it to how he's rated by the general public and media (if not specifically GMs ;)) and what other players are being paid. 

 

 

Nothing like openly attempting to denounce someone's argument to make your point stronger, eh? 

 

Obviously the two situations aren't exactly the same, but as I said above, both the Walden situation and my example rely on, to differing degrees, assumption of higher knowledge, which nobody has completely, but it doesn't take a genius to make that general, vague assumption.

I denounce your argument because the logic is flawed, and therefore your argument is flawed.

You use the outlandish example of Stepfan Taylor going number 2 to support your argument, as if that is a fair reflection on perceived value. Your argument insinuates that teams do not reach in the draft... no they do not reach to the degree where Taylor goes #2, the same way in Free Agency, Erik Walden isn't getting $12mill a year. But the fact remains that teams do, every year, reach in the draft... and players get over paid in free agency.

The difference between the two is, and where your argument fall short, GMs cannot measure other team's interest in a player in the draft (unless of course they get hold of their big board). But in FA, there is some degree of measurement involved in how other teams value players because they can literally go wherever they have an offer for, and a lot of the time it will be to the highest bidder.

[Jay Kirk]

You get Landry...you do not need a safety....unless one of the studs fall.....

 

OL, DT, and another young OLB...rush...(dare I say corner in this forum?)  

Lets see what plays out here,but its deffinately going to have a major roal in shaping our draft.EXCITING TIMES IMO :dancing:

[Jason_]

It's a very different animal, of course, but the basic point remains - both statements would require assumptions of knowledge as to the thoughts and judgements of the other 31 teams. While there's nothing quite as clear cut as mock drafts etc with quantified values, it's very easy to feel expected value of a player. Especially when you compare it to what other players are being paid! Players of Walden's standards are not paid that kind of money (of course, I'm willing to backtrack on this when we find out exactly how easy it is to get out of - if he's on very little for two years and we can cut him without huge loss, then my complaints will simmer down accordingly).  I just find it impossible to argue that $4m a year for Erik Walden is good value, when you compare it to how he's rated by the general public and media (if not specifically GMs ;)) and what other players are being paid. 

 

 

Nothing like openly attempting to denounce someone's argument to make your point stronger, eh? 

 

Obviously the two situations aren't exactly the same, but as I said above, both the Walden situation and my example rely on, to differing degrees, assumption of higher knowledge, which nobody has completely, but it doesn't take a genius to make that general, vague assumption.

 

How a player is rated by the general public and media mean less than nothing.  The media makes things up as they go along and the general public is even less informed.  I'm not arguing that, on the surface, it looks like Walden might have been overpaid, but at the same time we don't know the specifics of the structure of the contract.  It could well have been setup so that the Colts can release him after one year if he doesn't pan out with minimal cap hit, and rumors so far are indicating that to be the case.  So people are getting all worked up over Walden getting paid "$4 mil per year" when he may never see anything close to that.  

 

Also, it's not you expressing the opinion or even taking some assumption in regards to a player's perceived value, it is, I believe, the manner in which you stated it that led to the "and what team are you GM of again?" comment.  Look, do what you want, say what you want..I was just responding to your "lazy logic" argument and giving my thought as to what led to the original comment.  There are several people who come on this site trying to act like some sort of almighty guru with inside knowledge and secret sources that give them information that they can come here to share even though 99% of what they say is just a summary of things hundreds of other people on this forum and/or media outlets have been saying so they're really providing nothing new to the conversation.   That's how you sound when you make a statement as definitive as "because they're certainly not highly rated through the rest of the league, so how much leverage could they possibly have?!".  

[BrentMc11]

How a player is rated by the general public and media mean less than nothing.  The media makes things up as they go along and the general public is even less informed.  I'm not arguing that, on the surface, it looks like Walden might have been overpaid, but at the same time we don't know the specifics of the structure of the contract.  It could well have been setup so that the Colts can release him after one year if he doesn't pan out with minimal cap hit, and rumors so far are indicating that to be the case.  So people are getting all worked up over Walden getting paid "$4 mil per year" when he may never see anything close to that.  

 

Also, it's not you expressing the opinion or even taking some assumption in regards to a player's perceived value, it is, I believe, the manner in which you stated it that led to the "and what team are you GM of again?" comment.  Look, do what you want, say what you want..I was just responding to your "lazy logic" argument and giving my thought as to what led to the original comment.  There are several people who come on this site trying to act like some sort of almighty guru with inside knowledge and secret sources that give them information that they can come here to share even though 99% of what they say is just a summary of things hundreds of other people on this forum and/or media outlets have been saying so they're really providing nothing new to the conversation.   That's how you sound when you make a statement as definitive as "because they're certainly not highly rated through the rest of the league, so how much leverage could they possibly have?!".  

I saw somewhere only 4 million is guaranteed....as info...the other thing I noticed was other players with the same stats were way above him in scale for the year.  Bottom line is Pagano likes Walden...

[Jay Kirk]

How a player is rated by the general public and media mean less than nothing.  The media makes things up as they go along and the general public is even less informed.  I'm not arguing that, on the surface, it looks like Walden might have been overpaid, but at the same time we don't know the specifics of the structure of the contract.  It could well have been setup so that the Colts can release him after one year if he doesn't pan out with minimal cap hit, and rumors so far are indicating that to be the case.  So people are getting all worked up over Walden getting paid "$4 mil per year" when he may never see anything close to that.  

 

Also, it's not you expressing the opinion or even taking some assumption in regards to a player's perceived value, it is, I believe, the manner in which you stated it that led to the "and what team are you GM of again?" comment.  Look, do what you want, say what you want..I was just responding to your "lazy logic" argument and giving my thought as to what led to the original comment.  There are several people who come on this site trying to act like some sort of almighty guru with inside knowledge and secret sources that give them information that they can come here to share even though 99% of what they say is just a summary of things hundreds of other people on this forum and/or media outlets have been saying so they're really providing nothing new to the conversation.   That's how you sound when you make a statement as definitive as "because they're certainly not highly rated through the rest of the league, so how much leverage could they possibly have?!".  

I have confidence our leadership know exactly what they are doing

[Dan]

How a player is rated by the general public and media mean less than nothing.  The media makes things up as they go along and the general public is even less informed.  I'm not arguing that, on the surface, it looks like Walden might have been overpaid, but at the same time we don't know the specifics of the structure of the contract.  It could well have been setup so that the Colts can release him after one year if he doesn't pan out with minimal cap hit, and rumors so far are indicating that to be the case.  So people are getting all worked up over Walden getting paid "$4 mil per year" when he may never see anything close to that.  

 

Also, it's not you expressing the opinion or even taking some assumption in regards to a player's perceived value, it is, I believe, the manner in which you stated it that led to the "and what team are you GM of again?" comment.  Look, do what you want, say what you want..I was just responding to your "lazy logic" argument and giving my thought as to what led to the original comment.  There are several people who come on this site trying to act like some sort of almighty guru with inside knowledge and secret sources that give them information that they can come here to share even though 99% of what they say is just a summary of things hundreds of other people on this forum and/or media outlets have been saying so they're really providing nothing new to the conversation.   That's how you sound when you make a statement as definitive as "because they're certainly not highly rated through the rest of the league, so how much leverage could they possibly have?!".  

 

I don't have the time to reply properly but it remains to be seen whether it really is only $4m guaranteed, other places are saying it's around $8m so until we get a reliable source giving the information, I'll refrain.

 

And your second point means that the justification for making the tired "I'd like to see YOU do better" (an interesting discussion on its merits) was that my frustrated, overly-emotional wording portrayed that I was trying to claim some higher knowledge? Of course I don't, and I can also see no reason for thinking that $4m pa for Walden is acceptable other than trying to defend your own team. I'm certainly not the only person who thinks it's more than anyone else would have paid, heck, I was just reading this when I saw your reply. End of the day, it's very hard to argue that we were forced into a position to pay him $4m a year. Frankly, if we were, then I'd rather let other teams have him. 

[Jason_]

I don't have the time to reply properly but it remains to be seen whether it really is only $4m guaranteed, other places are saying it's around $8m so until we get a reliable source giving the information, I'll refrain.

 

And your second point means that the justification for making the tired "I'd like to see YOU do better" (an interesting discussion on its merits) was that my frustrated, overly-emotional wording portrayed that I was trying to claim some higher knowledge? Of course I don't, and I can also see no reason for thinking that $4m pa for Walden is acceptable other than trying to defend your own team. I'm certainly not the only person who thinks it's more than anyone else would have paid, heck, I was just reading this when I saw your reply. End of the day, it's very hard to argue that we were forced into a position to pay him $4m a year. Frankly, if we were, then I'd rather let other teams have him. 

 

Again though, you're assuming that he WILL be paid $4mil per year when there's no way to know if that will be the case.  So why get near the cliff preparing to jump when we have no idea yet how the contract was structured or anything like that?  The contract could very well have been written as an incentive for Walden to live up to while still being easy for the team to get out of if he doesn't live up to it.  If he becomes a $4 mil per year player then that's what he'll get.  If he doesn't become that type of player then he gets released and doesn't see anywhere near that much money.  I'm just speculating, but I find it very hard to believe that our GM would just pick some random backup and pay him a crap load of money for no reason at all.

[AntonMcG]

I don't have the time to reply properly but it remains to be seen whether it really is only $4m guaranteed, other places are saying it's around $8m so until we get a reliable source giving the information, I'll refrain.

 

And your second point means that the justification for making the tired "I'd like to see YOU do better" (an interesting discussion on its merits) was that my frustrated, overly-emotional wording portrayed that I was trying to claim some higher knowledge? Of course I don't, and I can also see no reason for thinking that $4m pa for Walden is acceptable other than trying to defend your own team. I'm certainly not the only person who thinks it's more than anyone else would have paid, heck, I was just reading this when I saw your reply. End of the day, it's very hard to argue that we were forced into a position to pay him $4m a year. Frankly, if we were, then I'd rather let other teams have him.

You're right, it probably is more than anyone else was willing to pay, perhaps that is why we got him.

[crazycolt1]

I am sure when Grigson looses his job Irsay will give you guys a call. Grigson did not win the GM of the year by not knowing what he is doing. It's way too early to whine and cry over any thing that has been done.