Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Value of Position versus Value of Player

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Gee718 View Post
    RB makes the most immediate impact if the OL is worth a darn.
    I agree
    "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by TEM View Post

      This year I do also previous years not so much.
      Good chatting with you TEM. May not have agreed a lot but I appreciated your opinions.

      maybe Iíll see you on another forum one of the days

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by CGYgiant View Post

        Good chatting with you TEM. May not have agreed a lot but I appreciated your opinions.

        maybe Iíll see you on another forum one of the days
        Join Rosie's site You are a good poster . It seems the whole crew has joined. It would be a shame not have your insight .
        "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by WayBackFan View Post
          Best player available should be taken regardless of position.

          Always.

          Keeps the decision process simple.
          Yeah I disagree, this is a capped league. In order to maximize return on available assets you take the higher paid positions at the top of the draft. You don't take positions where you can sign proven commodities at the same or even lower dollar values. The best play would of been to move down and acquire multiple picks. For example the 34th pick Will Hernandez will cost the Giants 7.5 million over 4 years. The picks at the top of the 2nd round are the best value in the entire draft. If you can pay 4 or 5 of those guys instead of 1 guy at 2 you take the 5 guys every time.

          Would you rather have Barkely or

          Will Hernadez OG
          Nick Chubb RB
          Harold Landry Edge
          James Daniels C
          Darius Guice RB
          Last edited by Redeyejedi; 05-16-2018, 07:34 AM.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by TEM View Post

            This is what I do not get with some of your posts. You add parameters to the topic . This was purely based on drafting. You can say all you want on how it is based upon cap ramifications. A lot Teams go into the draft with copious amounts of cap space and still follow the model.



            I don't know what is difficult to "get" about reality, but whatever. Looking at it from a cap management standpoint, taking a RB that high is very stupid. What that does not take into account is other factors. Such as current team needs and make-up, talent of the players available, system or game impact. It is simple budgeting, when you have a limited amount of money to spend in a cap situation you have to be smart about how much you use at any one position. The draft picks are so valuable because you can get a player at a controlled cost discount to the production he provides on the field. A RB drafted this high offers the team no cap savings from a vet and is actually more expensive than the average vet. It is poor cap management.

            This does not mean you can't take a RB, but you need to have a plan of how to offset the extra expense and from which positions you will take the extra money. So unless a team makes a regular habit of drafting RBs in the top 10 picks every year, it really isn't an issue. People question why it is always QB, LT, DE and CB in the top of the draft every year and I provided an answer. This should not be turned around to say drafting Barkley at 2 was the wrong move unless you think the Giants FO are completely incapable of handling cap dollars. While I would not have had an issue if the Giants had chosen Darnold or Chubb with the #2 pick instead, I think Barkley was the best choice for them there and I don't think it likely they would have landed him if they traded down.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by jmike View Post

              I don't know what is difficult to "get" about reality, but whatever. Looking at it from a cap management standpoint, taking a RB that high is very stupid. What that does not take into account is other factors. Such as current team needs and make-up, talent of the players available, system or game impact. It is simple budgeting, when you have a limited amount of money to spend in a cap situation you have to be smart about how much you use at any one position. The draft picks are so valuable because you can get a player at a controlled cost discount to the production he provides on the field. A RB drafted this high offers the team no cap savings from a vet and is actually more expensive than the average vet. It is poor cap management.

              This does not mean you can't take a RB, but you need to have a plan of how to offset the extra expense and from which positions you will take the extra money. So unless a team makes a regular habit of drafting RBs in the top 10 picks every year, it really isn't an issue. People question why it is always QB, LT, DE and CB in the top of the draft every year and I provided an answer. This should not be turned around to say drafting Barkley at 2 was the wrong move unless you think the Giants FO are completely incapable of handling cap dollars. While I would not have had an issue if the Giants had chosen Darnold or Chubb with the #2 pick instead, I think Barkley was the best choice for them there and I don't think it likely they would have landed him if they traded down.
              I can agree with everything except drafting the RB @2 notion is stupid. . It seems the previous "cap management " drafting value of position over value of player placed us into a 5 year rut. What is the definition of stupidity; Doing the same thing over and over without reward.

              Jen it is good to see you went to Rosie's site. I hope the members that have not joined as of yet . Will at some point
              "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by TEM View Post

                I can agree with everything except drafting the RB @2 notion is stupid. .
                IDK, if somebody spent $12 on a half gallon of milk, I would call that stupid. Doesn't mean it wasn't their best option at the time though.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by jmike View Post

                  IDK, if somebody spent $12 on a half gallon of milk, I would call that stupid. Doesn't mean it wasn't their best option at the time though.
                  There is a difference between a static system ( milk) and a dynamic system ( A football player) A static system the parameter is defined unless economic abnormalities or regional costs redefine the parameter. Static systems are more stable as far as cost. . Not the same in dynamic system. The price may fluctuate as a based uneven parameters one may have more talent , ability... then another. Ö it is not defined in a neat little box.
                  Last edited by TEM; 05-16-2018, 10:43 AM.
                  "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by TEM View Post

                    There is a difference between a static system ( milk) and a dynamic system ( A football player) A static system the parameter is defined unless economic abnormalities or regional costs redefine the parameter. Static systems are more stable as far as cost. . Not the same in dynamic system. The price may fluctuate as a based uneven parameters one may have more talent , ability... then another. Ö it is not defined in a neat little box.
                    I understand the difference, I was just simplifying the point. At the end of the day, the Giants are going to spend more of the cap on RB than nearly any other team in the league due to a player who has never played a down. Financially speaking it is a poor decision any way you want to twist it, it doesn't mean it was the wrong decision.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by jmike View Post

                      I understand the difference, I was just simplifying the point. At the end of the day, the Giants are going to spend more of the cap on RB than nearly any other team in the league due to a player who has never played a down. Financially speaking it is a poor decision any way you want to twist it, it doesn't mean it was the wrong decision.
                      Why is it? If you are going by what the status quo has dictated. I am in the camp that perhaps they are wrong. That has been my entire point. Just maybe a different kind of thought process is needed.
                      "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Redeyejedi View Post

                        Yeah I disagree, this is a capped league. In order to maximize return on available assets you take the higher paid positions at the top of the draft. You don't take positions where you can sign proven commodities at the same or even lower dollar values. The best play would of been to move down and acquire multiple picks. For example the 34th pick Will Hernandez will cost the Giants 7.5 million over 4 years. The picks at the top of the 2nd round are the best value in the entire draft. If you can pay 4 or 5 of those guys instead of 1 guy at 2 you take the 5 guys every time.

                        Would you rather have Barkely or

                        Will Hernadez OG
                        Nick Chubb RB
                        Harold Landry Edge
                        James Daniels C
                        Darius Guice RB
                        I can agree with your logic. There is value at the top of the second round. In some cased much better then in the top of the 1st.
                        "Three things can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad." Darrell Royal

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X