Quote:
Originally Posted by takethecake
THIS. This is what it all boils down to. You'll never hit on 100% of your draft picks OR your FA signings, so you have to minimize your losses when you inevitably get an underperforming player. You drafted a bust? Oh well, he's signed to a rookie deal, so you don't really lose much. You signed an Albert Haynesworth and he sucks (or Mike Wallace this year)? Too bad, you've already guaranteed him so much money that he cripples your ability to replace him.
You can argue that FAs are generally more proven than rookies, but that neglects to take into account FAs that have to learn a new system, FAs that appear better than they are because of their supporting cast (Matt Cassel), etc. Without having any real numbers, I can still guarantee you that the "Hit Percentage" on FAs is not significantly higher than it is for high draft picks. Draft vs. Free Agency? It's all about the Benjamins... :cool-smil
|
So does it boil down to free agency is bad and the draft is good - to you? And if so (or if not)- then what is your philosophy about free agency? Keep in mind that there's a good number of redskins players that were obtained through free agency and through low risk trades. What would have done with these players and what do you do with them going forward?