[Scalper]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

First, while AP teams are selected by journalists, they are not like the pro bowl selections and are highly regarded as accurate reflections. But since you mention PFF, they have him as 4th, with 2 AFC and 1 NFC guards. Guess what. That is the same as the AP selections. He also was voted to the pro bowl (which i despise referring to) which is voted on by gms, players, and fans - i am also guessing WFT fans didn't flood the ballot box for Scherff. So the only group out there saying he is anything other than a top 5 G is internet mafia types.

PFF had him ranked 6th best overall G as of week 15 of NFL season. https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-top-25-...hrough-week-15
So you are plain wrong. Their season ending rankings had him lower. Internet mafia smear ignored. Broader point is, even if he is 5th best G, or 3rd, not worth the money he wants. Even his past production not worth what he wants, over whole tenure not just most recent year, and the classic mistake of past was overpaying for past production which declined in future. There are very few examples of injury prone players magically becoming healthier in their 30s, this alone is reason not to resign, instead of being duped by the glitter of All Pro selection.

Second, next man up isn't both 1M/year and 75% better. Erick Flowers and Justin Pugh are 10 and 8m respectively and maybe are hit that 3/4 mark. $1M for a guard this year (non draft) gets you a guard in the 50 to 60th best slot.

75% as good, not better. I would slide Charles, or Martin, or Larsen in at RG, accept a significant but not ruinous drop-off, and save a PILE. You don't have to spend $10M on a serviceable, above-average guard, just look at Schweitzer. Lots of teams draft solid but not elite starting Gs and have stud Ts and C.


Third, I love when rookie salaries are brought into discussion but that is only part of why your QNelson comment is a strawman fallacy. I don't pay for pff so i could only look at this year, but hear is a cbs note . The bold is mine. You are simply wrong about Scherff in pass blocking and value overall. As for QNelson, whenever he hits FA I guarantee 17m per year will be the starting point.


Salaries matter. All teams have finite number of players they can give $15M+ deals to. The decision to replace a high-priced veteran who is never consistently healthy with a much lower priced rookie player is not absurd. It is the reality of NFL economics. So rookie salaries compared to veteran salaries are not absurd, they are part of NFL dynamic. I want to look at this team in 2 years and see McL, entire DL, etc., locked up, not lose our best young players to make room for a 32-year old G on IR making $18M a year with $20M+ dead cap if we cut him. The question is not can we afford Scherff this year, but whether he is the optimal use of resources long term. The answer is no. RG is the lowest leverage position of the entire starting 22, you don't pay a RG who is never healthy $18M.

Nelson not a strawman fallacy. The crux is whether Scherff is worth what we are paying him and what he wants for a long-term deal. This is the crux of argument, not a refutation that distracts from argument as you mistakenly think. You ascertain value, in economics, via market pricing, and opportunity cost, cost of opportunities forsaken or parity products; we have no free market pricing as Scherff not URFA. Nelson, a G much more easy to argue worth $18M, is younger, consistently healthier than Scherff, and consistently better. Example of player perhaps worth what Scherff wants, with traits Scherff lacks.

Finally, yes you can get a mauler in the draft in the 3rd thru 5th round, and I expect the WFT will draft with that in mind but you don't let the strength of your OL walk first when you can afford not to.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

When the strength of OL is RG you have problems. Build it the right way, Ts and C, then Gs.

Scherff is okay in pass blocking when he gets his hands on people, but there are far too many plays where people blow by him untouched, pass rushers. He is naturally a slow-footed power blocker. This doesn't mean he sucks, but when you are talking about $18M for a G he should be total package. Scherff is not, especially not consistently year after year.

He has missed almost a third of games due to injury. In his prime. It is not absurd to think that climbs to 50% or higher in his 30s. Even if the pass blocking limitations don't concern you, he has strengths, the injury risk is too great to justify a fully guaranteed one-year deal (franchise) or a long term deal for tons of guaranteed money and injury guarantees. I don't hate Scherff, he is good, but not worth the price he is commanding. The smart choice is to be the Belicheat of old, let an aging injury risk walk, and let some other chump team overpay him to be on IR.