Quote:
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.