Quote:
Originally Posted by Skinzman
Because the draft can get you very underpaid players. Free agency usually goes to the top bidder. The teams that are good for a long period of time usually draft well, they are constantly having youth that is underpaid on their team keeping their cap manageable.
While that may not be the situation every time, it does seem to bear out over the long run. Just compare the Redskins of the past 20 years compared to the last couple. The Eagles for the longest time were a good team. Now that being the dream team is more important, how has their record been?
IMO, free agency should be used to supplement what you have built during the draft. Not saying to ignore FA, but the main building of the team cant be FA or you will always have what we had for the longest time. Some top talent, but no where near enough overall talent and zero depth. Cant afford that when you are paying FA prices for everyone.
|
I understand personnel strategy and differences in philosophy, but I don't understand the argument with a Redskins player vs another Redskins player like Garçon vs Morris. I want both players even at Garçon's cap number. You have to utilize both methods to obtain players and every team's situation is different at any given point of the development of the team. The philosophy should be changing from year to year and not just free agency = bad and draft = good or vice versa. That's what these arguments were all heading towards. I don't think it's that black and white.
03-13-2013, 01:40 PM
Threaded Mode