Before you say we draft poorly

[xwalker]

And again I’ll repeat we would have had no reason to spend $50 mill on Carr if Jenkins had been a good pick.

Jenkins would have become a Free Agent. A quality Free Agent CB in that time frame was worth 50M. Jenkins was not going to sign a below market contract.

If Jenkins had been a good pick, he gets the contract that Carr received. Carr goes to another team.

 

[IrishAnto]

Jenkins would have become a Free Agent. A quality Free Agent CB in that time frame was worth 50M. Jenkins was not going to sign a below market contract.

If Jenkins had been a good pick, he gets the contract that Carr received. Carr goes to another team.

Is that not what I've just said?

 

[Nation]

There is always value in buying rookie contracts out for less money down the road. The original Jay Ratliff extension was a steal that way.

 

[xwalker]

Is that not what I've just said?

No. You said Carr's money could have gone to Nicks. It could not go to Nicks because it would have gone to Jenkins.

 

[xwalker]

There is always value in buying rookie contracts out for less money down the road. The original Jay Ratliff extension was a steal that way.

Yes, in the discussion I had with Idgit earlier in this thread, I said that the value to the 2013 team of making great picks in 2009 and earlier is not zero; however, it is very low as compared to the value of the picks still on their original rookie contracts.

There is some value in re-signing players before their original rookie contract expires; however, there is risk involved. It's rare to get a really significant discount when signing a player to a 2nd contract. Even if the team does get them signed for a discount, most teams don't like to drastically underpay star performers. It's the reason that Jerry gave Ratliff a 3rd contract.

Back to the risk issue, in order to get any discount the team needs to re-sign the player in his 3rd year or early in his 4th season. Thet re-signed Sean Lee to a contract that is a few million less over 7 years than the contract that Patrick Willis received in SF; however, Lee has never proven to be able to stay healthy. It's a significant risk for the team. Based on his injury history, it's doubtful that Lee would have received a bigger contract than Willis if both were Free Agents.

 

[IrishAnto]

No. You said Carr's money could have gone to Nicks. It could not go to Nicks because it would have gone to Jenkins.

Frankly that's you assumption.

You have no idea what Jenkins would have gotten and Nicks didn't get $50 mil.

It amazing how they could pay Carr $50 mil and Spencer $10 mil per year though isn’t it?

So as usual you treat your speculation as fact!

 

[Matts4313]

the whole premise is silly. People want to complain that we have been mediocre for 3 years... And then discount the fact that several of the drafts leading up to 2010 were atrocious. And that's why we are starting so many unda and rookies while having no depth in 2012, 2013.

 

[Common Sense]

the whole premise is silly. People want to complain that we have been mediocre for 3 years... And then discount the fact that several of the drafts leading up to 2010 were atrocious. And that's why we are starting so many unda and rookies while having no depth in 2012, 2013.

Also, changing schemes like underwear.

 

[xwalker]

Frankly that's you assumption.

You have no idea what Jenkins would have gotten and Nicks didn't get $50 mil.

It amazing how they could pay Carr $50 mil and Spencer $10 mil per year though isn’t it?

So as usual you treat your speculation as fact!

If Jenkins was good, then he is similar to Carr. Carr got 50M. Obviously the market price was 50M for a good CB.

This is very simple logic.

Facts:
The market price for a CB was 50M.
The Cowboys were willing to pay 50M for a good CB.

 

[IrishAnto]

If Jenkins was good, then he is similar to Carr. Carr got 50M. Obviously the market price was 50M for a good CB.

This is very simple logic.

Facts:
The market price for a CB was 50M.
The Cowboys were willing to pay 50M for a good CB.

Simple speculation more like.
Facts
Carr was a free agent, Jenkins was not.
Free agents normally get more money.
So you have no way of proving what contract Jenkins would have received, how it was structures, guaranteed money etc.
and how that would have affected any other potential signings.

 

[xwalker]

Simple speculation more like.
Facts
Carr was a free agent, Jenkins was not.
Free agents normally get more money.
So you have no way of proving what contract Jenkins would have received, how it was structures, guaranteed money etc.
and how that would have affected any other potential signings.

The contracts signed by other players in the same situation as Jenkins are facts.

Brandon Flowers was drafted by KC. He signed a 6 year, $49,350,000 contract before he became a Free Agent.

Brandon Carr signed a 50M contract as a Free Agent.

Draft pick or Free Agent, the market for a good CB was about 50M.

 

[ChooChoo73]

This thread is exactly the same mentality Jerry and Jason have and its what's wrong with this team. I hate to be a broken record but I couldn't care less how talented the draft picks are. They are useless if there is not a system to bring them into. It's why Dallas falls apart when they have injuries. You build a team based solely on talent and they will crumble when the talent lessens due to injury. Give me a system and then you can find the RKGs and experience less drop off when you get the injury bug. Everyone can draft talent but only a few teams draft according to their identity and those teams win. Norm H. said it perfectly. We are a Wildebeest who looks like a conglomeration of 12 different animals.

I'm tired of looking at 8-8. The very talent you cited in this thread is what keeps us winning enough to not go 0-16 but the foundation is crappy enough that we can't go 11-5 either. We are stuck and can only win if a few of our "stars" get hot at the same time which is always just a roll of the dice and a usual crap out.

 

[IrishAnto]

The contracts signed by other players in the same situation as Jenkins are facts.

Brandon Flowers was drafted by KC. He signed a 6 year, $49,350,000 contract before he became a Free Agent.

Brandon Carr signed a 50M contract as a Free Agent.

Draft pick or Free Agent, the market for a good CB was about 50M.

Still speculation and more importantly you still haven't proven that it would have prevented us signing the likes of Carl Nicks.
So either provide the proof or get back to the subject of the original thread.

 

[xwalker]

Still speculation and more importantly you still haven't proven that it would have prevented us signing the likes of Carl Nicks.
So either provide the proof or get back to the subject of the original thread.

It's called Deductive Reasoning or using logic.

You have not shown any reasonable counter-argument.

The point is that if Mike Jenkins had lived up to his draft status, that it would have required a contract similar to the ones signed by Brandon Carr and Brandon Flowers to retain him. I don't know how Carl Nicks is part of the discussion. If they signed a 50M CB, then it has the same effect on signing other players (like Nicks) regardless if the 50M was spent on Jenkins or Carr.

 

[IrishAnto]

It's called Deductive Reasoning or using logic.

You have not shown any reasonable counter-argument.

The point is that if Mike Jenkins had lived up to his draft status, that it would have required a contract similar to the ones signed by Brandon Carr and Brandon Flowers to retain him. I don't know how Carl Nicks is part of the discussion. If they signed a 50M CB, then it has the same effect on signing other players (like Nicks) regardless if the 50M was spent on Jenkins or Carr.

It’s called making assumptions with no factual data to back it up.
Just because another player on another team signed a contract for X amount doesn’t automatically mean that Jenkins would have signed the same.
We ended up with this argument due to your BS statement that the bad drafts of 2008-2009 and before have minimal impact on 2013 and beyond.

 

[xwalker]

It’s called making assumptions with no factual data to back it up.
Just because another player on another team signed a contract for X amount doesn’t automatically mean that Jenkins would have signed the same.
We ended up with this argument due to your BS statement that the bad drafts of 2008-2009 and before have minimal impact on 2013 and beyond.

1. The market value of good CBs in that time frame is not speculation, it is fact. I've shown 2 examples. One for a true free agent and one for a player that signed a new contract before he became a free agent.

2. In the context of the original argument, Mike Jenkins is as good as Carr or Flowers. It's not speculation, it's the context of the argument. That's how a "what if" scenario works.

 

[IrishAnto]

1. The market value of good CBs in that time frame is not speculation, it is fact. I've shown 2 examples. One for a true free agent and one for a player that signed a new contract before he became a free agent.

2. In the context of the original argument, Mike Jenkins is as good as Carr or Flowers. It's not speculation, it's the context of the argument. That's how a "what if" scenario works.

However the original argument wasn't about what Jenkins contract would be but whether if as a good draft pick the Cowboys wouldn't have had to sign Carr and pick Claiborne and as a counter to your argument that draft picks prior to 2010 had minimal impact on 2013 and the future.

 

[jnday]

Yes, in the discussion I had with Idgit earlier in this thread, I said that the value to the 2013 team of making great picks in 2009 and earlier is not zero; however, it is very low as compared to the value of the picks still on their original rookie contracts.

There is some value in re-signing players before their original rookie contract expires; however, there is risk involved. It's rare to get a really significant discount when signing a player to a 2nd contract. Even if the team does get them signed for a discount, most teams don't like to drastically underpay star performers. It's the reason that Jerry gave Ratliff a 3rd contract.

Back to the risk issue, in order to get any discount the team needs to re-sign the player in his 3rd year or early in his 4th season. Thet re-signed Sean Lee to a contract that is a few million less over 7 years than the contract that Patrick Willis received in SF; however, Lee has never proven to be able to stay healthy. It's a significant risk for the team. Based on his injury history, it's doubtful that Lee would have received a bigger contract than Willis if both were Free Agents.

You can't build and maintain a team off of first contract draftees and free agents. It leads to an unstable mess. A team has to have long term players to form the core and free agents are not long term players. A good portion if their career is over when they hit free agency. I understand where you are coming from, but you are taking it too far. True enough, a team can be fielded with your approach, but there would be no long term stability. You also undervalue the money saved by resigning drafted players. If they are extended before they hit free agency, often times it is cheaper. A good example of your position is the Dallas Cowboys. They are spinning their wheels and remain stuck at .500 and one contract draftees are part of the problem.

 

[IrishAnto]

You can't build and maintain a team off of first contract draftees and free agents. It leads to an unstable mess. A team has to have long term players to form the core and free agents are not long term players. A good portion if their career is over when they hit free agency. I understand where you are coming from, but you are taking it too far. True enough, a team can be fielded with your approach, but there would be no long term stability. You also undervalue the money saved by resigning drafted players. If they are extended before they hit free agency, often times it is cheaper. A good example of your position is the Dallas Cowboys. They are spinning their wheels and remain stuck at .500 and one contract draftees are part of the problem.

Well said.

 

[xwalker]

You can't build and maintain a team off of first contract draftees and free agents. It leads to an unstable mess. A team has to have long term players to form the core and free agents are not long term players. A good portion if their career is over when they hit free agency. I understand where you are coming from, but you are taking it too far. True enough, a team can be fielded with your approach, but there would be no long term stability. You also undervalue the money saved by resigning drafted players. If they are extended before they hit free agency, often times it is cheaper. A good example of your position is the Dallas Cowboys. They are spinning their wheels and remain stuck at .500 and one contract draftees are part of the problem.

Edit: I just wanted to add that this a good, well thought out response by jnday.

I gave examples of how re-signing your own players is not really less expensive than signing free agents. KC signed their own draft pick to the about the same 50M contract that the Cowboys gave to Carr. Sean Lee's contract was only slightly smaller than Patrick Willis' contract and Willis' does not have the significant injury that Lee does.

I did say the the value of those 2009 and earlier picks in not Zero relative to the 2013 team, just that they are very low in comparison to picks within the past 4 drafts. The Claiborne pick, due to both injuries and less than expected performance, is somewhere between 10 and 100 times more problematic for the 2013 team than the Mike Jenkins pick.

Think about the Jimmy Johnson Cowboys teams. You can't compare the contract and free agency issues, but just the fact that all of his draft picks were at most in their 4th year with the team when they won the 1st Super Bowl.