Derrick Dockery:

[djnemo65]

56, if you want to argue that we have historically overpaid for free agents then I don't think anyone would disagree with you. But that has nothing to do with Dockery, who garnered a market deal far in excess of what he was worth. Kudos to the Skins for having the fortitude and forsight to balk on that deal, even though they wanted to keep the player.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

56, if you want to argue that we have historically overpaid for free agents then I don't think anyone would disagree with you. But that has nothing to do with Dockery, who garnered a market deal far in excess of what he was worth. Kudos to the Skins for having the fortitude and forsight to balk on that deal, even though they wanted to keep the player.

i do agree, no way I would have paid him that amount of money. I just dont think I should have come down to him hitting the FA market.

[SouperMeister]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

i do agree, no way I would have paid him that amount of money. I just dont think I should have come down to him hitting the FA market.

I agree with 56fanatic - had we done the right thing and given Doc an extension when he had a year left on his contract, we would have saved a ton of money and kept a core guy just entering his prime. We just did exactly that with Cooley's extension, so I hope we continue the trend with Taylor and others that we hope to retain. The only time we should allow a solid core player get to free agency again is if we have no intention of keeping him.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

I agree with 56fanatic - had we done the right thing and given Doc an extension when he had a year left on his contract, we would have saved a ton of money and kept a core guy just entering his prime. We just did exactly that with Cooley's extension, so I hope we continue the trend with Taylor and others that we hope to retain. The only time we should allow a solid core player get to free agency again is if we have no intention of keeping him.

In hindsight, it might have been a good idea to lock him up a year before his contract was up. However, he was always the weak link on our line IMO and I wasn't sure in 2005 if he deserved an extension. It certainly would have been good to have locked up Pierce before his contract expired.