Should have never let Eric Walden walk

[perrykemp]

Originally Posted by jterrell

He also got far less pressure on a per snap basis than Butler.

Green Bay fans hate this guy and think he is a bum.
That's why GB drafted an OLB in the first round last year in Nick Perry.

Agreed the Packer are attempting to replace Walden.

I guess when I am going with this is almost a Sabermetrics view of a position. Packers got 22 sacks from the 4 OLBs in Matthews, Walden, Perry, and Moses at it cost them roughly $4.4m:

Packers:

Matthews: $1,930,000
Nick Perry: 1,363,500
Walden: $725,000
Moses: $391,000
---------------------
Packers OLB sacks: 22
Packers Total $4.4m for OLB position
Packers cost per sack: $200,000

Cowboys:

Ware: $7,546,000
Spencer: $8,856,000
Butler: $739,000
Albright: $465,000
--------------------
Cowboys OLB sacks: 25.5
Cowboys Total $17.6m for OLB positon
Cowboys cost per sack: $1,270,000

So the Cowboys are spending (in salary) 6x as much as the Packers per sack by their OLBs. The question is why?

If the Cowboys resign Spencer for $10m/year a year the cost goes up even more.

Nothing wrong with spending a lot of on position, however, I wonder sometimes about the relational value of how some of these big contracts play out and suspect that a good measure of teams like the Packer's success is predicated on putting together a reasonable blend of salaries and looking for "value" players.

Again -- the application of Sabermetrics thinking in football fascinates me -- not sure if it can really work since baseball (as opposed to football) is such an individual game -- especially hitting, however, it can't hurt to try to apply some of those theories and see what happens.

[Yuma Cactus]

So Sabermetrics would have you believe that when Clay Mathews wants $15 mil a yr they should let him walk.
The problem with the baseball math theories in football is great players require other teams to commit more resources to deal with their greatness (which don't show in the stats) and allow other players to get the #'s.

[Picksix]

Originally Posted by DallasDW00ds0n

You caught me ! Busted!! my agenda as a fan for the Dallas Cowboys is to just bash and dont actually LIKE this team, AMIRITE??

Well, the first step to solving a problem is admitting you have one. Seriously, the guy has had two good games his entire career. One just happened to come in a playoff game, and now, we should have never gotten rid of him. PFF has him rated at something like -35, meaning he's way below average. Can't overreact to one game.

[perrykemp]

Originally Posted by Picksix

Well, the first step to solving a problem is admitting you have one. Seriously, the guy has had two good games his entire career. One just happened to come in a playoff game, and now, we should have never gotten rid of him. PFF has him rated at something like -35, meaning he's way below average. Can't overreact to one game.

I hope nobody is arguing that Walden is at best, mediocre.

My question is this -- is Walden's production at $725,000/year worthwhile compared to Spencer's at $8,800,000 (likely ~$10,000,000/y if the resign him)?

It helps frame the conversation of deciding whether or not the Cowboys should break the bank on Spencer.

[Picksix]

Originally Posted by perrykemp

I hope nobody is arguing that Walden is at best, mediocre.

My question is this -- is Walden's production at $725,000/year worthwhile compared to Spencer's at $8,800,000 (likely ~$10,000,000/y if the resign him)?

It helps frame the conversation of deciding whether or not the Cowboys should break the bank on Spencer.

Sure. You're always trying to get value throughout the team. It's a tough balance. If Spencer walks, and they go cheap at SOLB, can they use that money to improve other areas, thus hopefully making the team better as a whole? That's what they have to decide.

[Risen Star]

Originally Posted by perrykemp

Walden an OK 3-4 OLB. Not terrible. Not special.

Spencer is obviously a superior player.

However, if you look at it from a value perspective, Walden is paid $725/year -- vs $8.86m for Spencer. So Spencer got paid 10x more this year and assuming he gets $10m/year from someone next season he'll be getting roughly 13x more.

Between Walden and the Packers undrafted free agent OLB Desmond Moses, they got 7.5 sacks at a cost of $1m or so. I suspect the Packers are perfectly fine with that kind of performance at that price when they already have Raji and Matthews also pressuring on the front seven.

This kind of "value-based" strategy is something the Cowboys will have to consider when they contemplate resigning Spencer or not.

You can only have so many $10m/year guys on the team -- is Spencer one of those guys?

Great post and no he's not.

This is where having a legit GM comes into play.

[FiveRings]

I still think someday we'll rue losing Hamilton.

[cowboyschmps3]

Same thing I say every time I see him make a play

[newlander]

Originally Posted by Vanilla2

http://www.packers.com/team/roster/e...b-d8bb4464d696

Bunch of over reactionary know nothins

Or even worse you all know he's a starter and not a very good one and are just using his nationally televised performance last night to further your Cowboy bashing agenda.

Eric Walden is VERY average.....at best. Anyone that knows football knows this guy is average: yeah, he had a good game last night against a crippled opponent that was missing it's starting QB: I don't have the annointing oil out over that.

[newlander]

Originally Posted by Risen Star

Great post and no he's not.

This is where having a legit GM comes into play.

.....we could justify Spencer IF we didn't have so many bad deals in other critical positions: Free, JRat, Austin, Sensi, etc.....

[M'Kevon]

Originally Posted by perrykemp

I hope nobody is arguing that Walden is at best, mediocre.

My question is this -- is Walden's production at $725,000/year worthwhile compared to Spencer's at $8,800,000 (likely ~$10,000,000/y if the resign him)?

It helps frame the conversation of deciding whether or not the Cowboys should break the bank on Spencer.

How is mediocre - and I'd argue that he's not up to that level - acceptable as a starter? Walden's production for a year doesn't equal Spencer's for three games.

The only way to make Walden production mediocre is to add his stats to the other LBs on Green Bay and average it out. As you did.

[tayloner182]

I know most people don't give credence to PFF ratings/rankings, but it has to at least mean something that they had Anthony Spencer as the single best 3-4 OLB in all of football this year while Erik Walden was the single worst. Even if the metric is flawed, at least they're being judged by the same metric. Of course, this doesnt take into account contract/value. Here's the list:

3-4 OLB

Best
1. Anthony Spencer
2. Clay Matthews
3. Aldon Smith
4. Justin Houston
5. Ahmad Brooks

Worst
1. Erik Walden
2. Shaun Phillips
3. Connor Barwin
4. Calvin Pace
5. Sam Acho

[yimyammer]

Originally Posted by perrykemp

Agreed the Packer are attempting to replace Walden.

I guess when I am going with this is almost a Sabermetrics view of a position. Packers got 22 sacks from the 4 OLBs in Matthews, Walden, Perry, and Moses at it cost them roughly $4.4m:

Packers:

Matthews: $1,930,000
Nick Perry: 1,363,500
Walden: $725,000
Moses: $391,000
---------------------
Packers OLB sacks: 22
Packers Total $4.4m for OLB position
Packers cost per sack: $200,000

Cowboys:

Ware: $7,546,000
Spencer: $8,856,000
Butler: $739,000
Albright: $465,000
--------------------
Cowboys OLB sacks: 25.5
Cowboys Total $17.6m for OLB positon
Cowboys cost per sack: $1,270,000

So the Cowboys are spending (in salary) 6x as much as the Packers per sack by their OLBs. The question is why?

[View Full Quote]If the Cowboys resign Spencer for $10m/year a year the cost goes up even more.

Nothing wrong with spending a lot of on position, however, I wonder sometimes about the relational value of how some of these big contracts play out and suspect that a good measure of teams like the Packer's success is predicated on putting together a reasonable blend of salaries and looking for "value" players.

Again -- the application of Sabermetrics thinking in football fascinates me -- not sure if it can really work since baseball (as opposed to football) is such an individual game -- especially hitting, however, it can't hurt to try to apply some of those theories and see what happens.

great post, I like this type of analysis. I hope the Cowboys are doing this but it sure doesn't seem like they are given how far above the cap they are and how they seem to cling to players and/or find themselves backed into a corner in signing guys like Free because they don't have other options. They appear to have an opposite approach where they hope their star players can carry them across the goal line, but I don't think thats possible given the amount of injuries every team incurs.

I hope franchising Spencer is evidence of them possibly starting to be hesitant in giving huge long term contracts and they seriously evaluate whether they could sign 2-4 players for what Spencer will command that will collectively produce as good or better results and give them a higher probability of withstanding injuries and fatigue since that risk will be spread among several players vs just one.

I'm not saying they shouldn't sign Spencer, I merely hope they take a good, hard look at the cost/benefit and relative risks of either scenario.

[M'Kevon]

Originally Posted by yimyammer

great post, I like this type of analysis. I hope the Cowboys are doing this but it sure doesn't seem like they are given how far above the cap they are and how they seem to cling to players and/or find themselves backed into a corner in signing guys like Free because they don't have other options. They appear to have an opposite approach where they hope their star players can carry them across the goal line, but I don't think thats possible given the amount of injuries every team incurs.

I hope franchising Spencer is evidence of them possibly starting to be hesitant in giving huge long term contracts and they seriously evaluate whether they could sign 2-4 players for what Spencer will command that will collectively produce as good or better results and give them a higher probability of withstanding injuries and fatigue since that risk will be spread among several players vs just one.

[View Full Quote]I'm not saying they shouldn't sign Spencer, I merely hope they take a good, hard look at the cost/benefit and relative risks of either scenario.

Far from great, this is a horrible analysis if you are attempting to justify replacing Spencer with Walden. You are giving Walden credit for the stats of the other LBs on the team. Compare both LB groups without Spencer/Walden:

Packers:

Matthews: $1,930,000
Nick Perry: 1,363,500
Moses: $391,000
---------------------
Packers OLB sacks: 19
Packers Total $3.6 for OLB position
Packers cost per sack: $190,131
Cowboys:

Ware: $7,546,000
Butler: $739,000
Albright: $465,000
--------------------
Cowboys OLB sacks: 14.5
Cowboys Total $8.74m for OLB positon
Cowboys cost per sack: $603,034

While there is a monetary value to replacing Spencer, it also makes for a decidedly worst defense, as measured by sacks. Removing Walden does not hurt GB. It damn near cripples Dallas.

And this doesn't take into consideration of Spencer's value against the run, where Walden is one of the worst in the NFL.

Based on this "value-based logic", it would be equally valuable to replace Ware with Moses. Moneyball works to an extent in baseball, because you can cover deficiencies with overall strong play. Football targets weakness, targets deficiencies.

If you wish to argue that Walden can replace Spencer on the field, be my guest - it would be a short argument. But to argue in terms of the cap hit without any consideration of the vast talent discrepancy between the two, is utterly ridiculous.

[yimyammer]

Originally Posted by M'Kevon

Far from great, this is a horrible analysis if you are attempting to justify replacing Spencer with Walden. You are giving Walden credit for the stats of the other LBs on the team. Compare both LB groups without Spencer/Walden:

Packers:

Matthews: $1,930,000
Nick Perry: 1,363,500
Moses: $391,000
---------------------
Packers OLB sacks: 19
Packers Total $3.6 for OLB position
Packers cost per sack: $190,131
Cowboys:

Ware: $7,546,000
Butler: $739,000
Albright: $465,000
--------------------
Cowboys OLB sacks: 14.5
Cowboys Total $8.74m for OLB positon
Cowboys cost per sack: $603,034

While there is a monetary value to replacing Spencer, it also makes for a decidedly worst defense, as measured by sacks. Removing Walden does not hurt GB. It damn near cripples Dallas.

[View Full Quote]And this doesn't take into consideration of Spencer's value against the run, where Walden is one of the worst in the NFL.

Based on this "value-based logic", it would be equally valuable to replace Ware with Moses. Moneyball works to an extent in baseball, because you can cover deficiencies with overall strong play. Football targets weakness, targets deficiencies.

If you wish to argue that Walden can replace Spencer on the field, be my guest - it would be a short argument. But to argue in terms of the cap hit without any consideration of the vast talent discrepancy between the two, is utterly ridiculous.

I like the creative thinking involved and I don't consider it a great justification for Walden nor am I trying to argue they should replace Spencer with Walden, I just like the idea of looking at the value of a group of players vs the value of a single player because I think its essential a team not be too top heavy with high contracts to a few players and instead build a team that is collectively better than a few individuals. This enables a team to withstand the long run and deal with the inevitable injuries that happen to all teams.

I believe a team has to be real careful about giving cap crippling contracts to players (especially 30+ old) that if injured or their performance drops off will leave the team with no other options.

A high quality QB is the only contract that comes to mind that I think a team should always put a ton of $$ toward because without a high quality QB, you're pretty much screwed anyway