One-year prove-it deals

[gimmesix]

I believe one of the easiest ways we will be able to tell if the team's free agent philosophy is different this year is by if it signs any outside free agents to three- or four-year contracts.

Dallas' front-office typically signs outside FAs to one-year deals (or acquires players in trades with one year left on their contracts). There are some exceptions to that, like Solomon Thomas signing for two years last year, but one-year deals have been the standard. The reason for that is the players they are signing have some kind of flaw that allows the team to get them for cheaper, and the players want that opportunity to prove themselves and then cash in.

Javonte Williams is a good example of this. He was coming off two down seasons after tearing up his knee, so the team was able to get him for one year at $3.5 million. Williams proved himself and got his three-year deal this year.

We also traded for Pickens in the last year of his contract, Elam and Murray, too. All three had questions that allowed us to get them as bargains. Pickens was behavior-oriented while Elam and Murray had shown their teams that they couldn't live up to their first-round draft status.

There are plenty of others we could use as examples here as well that show Dallas clearly has a philosophy that leads to it signing players who have something to prove on one-year deals. Proven players want to cash in on their accomplishments with multiyear deals rewarding them for their current level of play.

There's no doubt that Dallas will sign some one-year deals to fill out the roster, but if that's all it does, then nothing has changed.

 

[ShiningStar]

without knowing the plan, i cant agree either way. if Dallas thinks they have a shot at the playoffs, they might take that chance and sign some 1 year deals for that goal, than see where the chips fall. Other than that, no, i dont like 1 year deals with our best shot at a championship game at least 3 years away

 

[gimmesix]

without knowing the plan, i cant agree either way. if Dallas thinks they have a shot at the playoffs, they might take that chance and sign some 1 year deals for that goal, than see where the chips fall. Other than that, no, i dont like 1 year deals with our best shot at a championship game at least 3 years away

I don't see one-year prove-it deals equaling a team thinking it has a shot at anything. By nature, those deals mean you are taking a chance on a player and hoping for the best. If you are a team that believes you have a playoff roster other than needing a few pieces, then you should go out and get proven pieces.

 

[john van brocklin]

I believe one of the easiest ways we will be able to tell if the team's free agent philosophy is different this year is by if it signs any outside free agents to three- or four-year contracts.

Dallas' front-office typically signs outside FAs to one-year deals (or acquires players in trades with one year left on their contracts). There are some exceptions to that, like Solomon Thomas signing for two years last year, but one-year deals have been the standard. The reason for that is the players they are signing have some kind of flaw that allows the team to get them for cheaper, and the players want that opportunity to prove themselves and then cash in.

Javonte Williams is a good example of this. He was coming off two down seasons after tearing up his knee, so the team was able to get him for one year at $3.5 million. Williams proved himself and got his three-year deal this year.

We also traded for Pickens in the last year of his contract, Elam and Murray, too. All three had questions that allowed us to get them as bargains. Pickens was behavior-oriented while Elam and Murray had shown their teams that they couldn't live up to their first-round draft status.

There are plenty of others we could use as examples here as well that show Dallas clearly has a philosophy that leads to it signing players who have something to prove on one-year deals. Proven players want to cash in on their accomplishments with multiyear deals rewarding them for their current level of play.

There's no doubt that Dallas will sign some one-year deals to fill out the roster, but if that's all it does, then nothing has changed.

Good observation !

 

[Reality]

I don't see one-year prove-it deals equaling a team thinking it has a shot at anything. By nature, those deals mean you are taking a chance on a player and hoping for the best. If you are a team that believes you have a playoff roster other than needing a few pieces, then you should go out and get proven pieces.

It's not that one-year-prove-it deals are bad, but rather the Cowboys using them to try to solve problems that is the real problem.

The Cowboys should use one-year-prove-it players to supplement their roster with the hope they elevate the team, not use them to fix problem areas while hoping they live up to past performance levels or unrealized potential.

For example, they signed Will Grier to a one-year deal. They did not do that expecting him to solve any problems beyond being a backup placeholder.

If Dak was lost for an extended time, the Cowboys would be looking for a starter, not a backup to Grier.

Because they gave him a one-year deal, they can also easily cut him before the season starts if they draft or sign another quarterback they believe can play better than him.

 

[Ironicalicon]

I believe one of the easiest ways we will be able to tell if the team's free agent philosophy is different this year is by if it signs any outside free agents to three- or four-year contracts.

Dallas' front-office typically signs outside FAs to one-year deals (or acquires players in trades with one year left on their contracts). There are some exceptions to that, like Solomon Thomas signing for two years last year, but one-year deals have been the standard. The reason for that is the players they are signing have some kind of flaw that allows the team to get them for cheaper, and the players want that opportunity to prove themselves and then cash in.

Javonte Williams is a good example of this. He was coming off two down seasons after tearing up his knee, so the team was able to get him for one year at $3.5 million. Williams proved himself and got his three-year deal this year.

We also traded for Pickens in the last year of his contract, Elam and Murray, too. All three had questions that allowed us to get them as bargains. Pickens was behavior-oriented while Elam and Murray had shown their teams that they couldn't live up to their first-round draft status.

There are plenty of others we could use as examples here as well that show Dallas clearly has a philosophy that leads to it signing players who have something to prove on one-year deals. Proven players want to cash in on their accomplishments with multiyear deals rewarding them for their current level of play.

There's no doubt that Dallas will sign some one-year deals to fill out the roster, but if that's all it does, then nothing has changed.

I believe this a philosophy that will remain steadfast. It makes sense, and you can be fairly certain they will make some of those deals. However, if they go after a top or even mid-tier FA they will have to make it 2-3 or more years because that's what the market dictates.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I believe one of the easiest ways we will be able to tell if the team's free agent philosophy is different this year is by if it signs any outside free agents to three- or four-year contracts.

Dallas' front-office typically signs outside FAs to one-year deals (or acquires players in trades with one year left on their contracts). There are some exceptions to that, like Solomon Thomas signing for two years last year, but one-year deals have been the standard. The reason for that is the players they are signing have some kind of flaw that allows the team to get them for cheaper, and the players want that opportunity to prove themselves and then cash in.

Javonte Williams is a good example of this. He was coming off two down seasons after tearing up his knee, so the team was able to get him for one year at $3.5 million. Williams proved himself and got his three-year deal this year.

We also traded for Pickens in the last year of his contract, Elam and Murray, too. All three had questions that allowed us to get them as bargains. Pickens was behavior-oriented while Elam and Murray had shown their teams that they couldn't live up to their first-round draft status.

There are plenty of others we could use as examples here as well that show Dallas clearly has a philosophy that leads to it signing players who have something to prove on one-year deals. Proven players want to cash in on their accomplishments with multiyear deals rewarding them for their current level of play.

There's no doubt that Dallas will sign some one-year deals to fill out the roster, but if that's all it does, then nothing has changed.

Im
Not so sure it’s wrong approach though. You want guys hungry and playing for contracts.

This is just a odd free agency class. I don’t know how much I’d like to sign guys like Hendrickson, Dean, Phillips, etc. they all are injury risks.

Devin Loyd is probably the one guy I wouldn’t mind signing long term.

One year prove it deals on good players isn’t the problem. One year prove it deals on Elam and Murray type guys is.

 

[Q_the_man]

I believe one of the easiest ways we will be able to tell if the team's free agent philosophy is different this year is by if it signs any outside free agents to three- or four-year contracts.

Dallas' front-office typically signs outside FAs to one-year deals (or acquires players in trades with one year left on their contracts). There are some exceptions to that, like Solomon Thomas signing for two years last year, but one-year deals have been the standard. The reason for that is the players they are signing have some kind of flaw that allows the team to get them for cheaper, and the players want that opportunity to prove themselves and then cash in.

Javonte Williams is a good example of this. He was coming off two down seasons after tearing up his knee, so the team was able to get him for one year at $3.5 million. Williams proved himself and got his three-year deal this year.

We also traded for Pickens in the last year of his contract, Elam and Murray, too. All three had questions that allowed us to get them as bargains. Pickens was behavior-oriented while Elam and Murray had shown their teams that they couldn't live up to their first-round draft status.

There are plenty of others we could use as examples here as well that show Dallas clearly has a philosophy that leads to it signing players who have something to prove on one-year deals. Proven players want to cash in on their accomplishments with multiyear deals rewarding them for their current level of play.

There's no doubt that Dallas will sign some one-year deals to fill out the roster, but if that's all it does, then nothing has changed.

We have 24 hours from the start of tampering to know if we are serious.

 

[Coogiguy03]

I think this year we get a few players to longer deals, there will be some depth guys maybe that we see sign these deals. We need some guys to stay here with Parker to help his defense especially

 

[DuncanIso]

I believe one of the easiest ways we will be able to tell if the team's free agent philosophy is different this year is by if it signs any outside free agents to three- or four-year contracts.

Dallas' front-office typically signs outside FAs to one-year deals (or acquires players in trades with one year left on their contracts). There are some exceptions to that, like Solomon Thomas signing for two years last year, but one-year deals have been the standard. The reason for that is the players they are signing have some kind of flaw that allows the team to get them for cheaper, and the players want that opportunity to prove themselves and then cash in.

Javonte Williams is a good example of this. He was coming off two down seasons after tearing up his knee, so the team was able to get him for one year at $3.5 million. Williams proved himself and got his three-year deal this year.

We also traded for Pickens in the last year of his contract, Elam and Murray, too. All three had questions that allowed us to get them as bargains. Pickens was behavior-oriented while Elam and Murray had shown their teams that they couldn't live up to their first-round draft status.

There are plenty of others we could use as examples here as well that show Dallas clearly has a philosophy that leads to it signing players who have something to prove on one-year deals. Proven players want to cash in on their accomplishments with multiyear deals rewarding them for their current level of play.

There's no doubt that Dallas will sign some one-year deals to fill out the roster, but if that's all it does, then nothing has changed.

The Elam deal was odd.

A man cover corner…signed to play in Ebers jacked up zone scheme.

 

[DuncanIso]

I think this year we get a few players to longer deals, there will be some depth guys maybe that we see sign these deals. We need some guys to stay here with Parker to help his defense especially

I dont know.

Team will only have about 10-15M to play cards with.

Those are gonna be league min contracts.

 

[DuncanIso]

without knowing the plan, i cant agree either way. if Dallas thinks they have a shot at the playoffs, they might take that chance and sign some 1 year deals for that goal, than see where the chips fall. Other than that, no, i dont like 1 year deals with our best shot at a championship game at least 3 years away

Jerry likes to back fill the roster with league min contracts.

 

[Coogiguy03]

I dont know.

Team will only have about 10-15M to play cards with.

Those are gonna be league min contracts.

If we extend players etc that helps give us more

 

[ShiningStar]

I don't see one-year prove-it deals equaling a team thinking it has a shot at anything. By nature, those deals mean you are taking a chance on a player and hoping for the best. If you are a team that believes you have a playoff roster other than needing a few pieces, then you should go out and get proven pieces.

you forget teh days of the mercenaries. its ok. but you are wrong in that regard

 

[ShiningStar]

Jerry likes to back fill the roster with league min contracts.

ty, that was what i was missing.

 

[gimmesix]

you forget teh days of the mercenaries. its ok. but you are wrong in that regard

The days of the mercenaries are long gone. Jerry and Stephen stopped that kind of FA shopping after 2012. Brandon Carr was the last free agent we spent mercenary money on.

 

[gimmesix]

It's not that one-year-prove-it deals are bad, but rather the Cowboys using them to try to solve problems that is the real problem.

The Cowboys should use one-year-prove-it players to supplement their roster with the hope they elevate the team, not use them to fix problem areas while hoping they live up to past performance levels or unrealized potential.

For example, they signed Will Grier to a one-year deal. They did not do that expecting him to solve any problems beyond being a backup placeholder.

If Dak was lost for an extended time, the Cowboys would be looking for a starter, not a backup to Grier.

Because they gave him a one-year deal, they can also easily cut him before the season starts if they draft or sign another quarterback they believe can play better than him.

I don't disagree with that. You have to supplement your roster. Our problem is that all we do is one-year deals, even for players we are counting on to start.

 

[gimmesix]

The Elam deal was odd.

A man cover corner…signed to play in Ebers jacked up zone scheme.

I believed Eberflus thought he would be playing a lot of Cover 3 (which is his preferred scheme), where the outside corners use a lot of press and bail technique, which has some man tendencies. I think he believed that Cover 2 was Elam's primary learning difficulty.

 

[TequilaCowboy]

One year deals say more about the FO ability than it does about the player. A FO who questions their own decisions and abilities in obtaining talent is afraid to make any two or more year decisions. Yeah, sometimes you have no other option on a certain player, but you can’t have your team littered with one and done players. Starting a season with one foot out the door is not good bidness sense.

 

[shabazz]

It's not that one-year-prove-it deals are bad, but rather the Cowboys using them to try to solve problems that is the real problem.

^this

Signing Elam, Murray, Sanborn and Wilson are fine for depth and STs....but not as your starters.