1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Is big spending in FA the best policy?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by kmac, Mar 17, 2007.

  1. kmac

    kmac Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Messages:
    849
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think we can have a discussion on this and how it pertains to the Packers' organization without another TT flame war. The following is from PFT.



    Since free agency opened two weeks ago, 26 teams have signed players who spent the 2006 season with other teams.

    Six teams, to date, have not signed a single free agent who played elsewhere last year.

    The Bengals, Ravens, Chargers, Giants, Bears, and Panthers are the franchises who have opted thus far to stand pat. Of that group, both the Giants and the Ravens have traded for new running backs. But none of this six-pack of teams has inked a new veteran player.

    Four other teams have signed only one new player. The Colts recently inked quarterback John Navarre, a third-year player who received no free-agent tender from the Cardinals. The Packers signed cornerback Frank Walker earlier this week. The Steelers signed offensive lineman Sean Mahan over the weekend. And the Titans recently snagged cornerback Nick Harper.



    Thoughts? It's interesting to see the company we're in here. All of the best franchises other than the Patriots seem to be taking this road this season, and the Patriots have played Free Agency this way most years until this one. Do you think the best way to go from mediocrity to contender is by following the lead of these franchises, or dropping it like it's hot like the Bucs and 49ers have done this offseason?
     
  2. millertime

    millertime Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    841
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think that it is best to build from the draft. I do think that if there are some quality, young FAs at a reasonable price, they should be brought in. Some of the guys I thought GB should have signed are Eric Johnson, Justin Griffith, and Rod Hood. All of these players received reasonable contracts and could start for GB. (Hood as nickel corner).

    I think the Randy Moss trade (or no trade) has really delayed TT from signing any FAs. The longer we take to get Moss the lower his price goes. This is good. what is bad is that while waiting for Moss, we are missing out on some good, young FAs.

    Of all the FAs left, I hope that TT at least looks into Ken Hamlin, Ian Scott, Kawika Mitchell, Matt Lehr, and Cooper Carlisle.
     
  3. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Just one thing I'd like to say.

    The 49ers started the free agency period with something like 38 million dollars in cap space.

    They signed 5 players: CB Nate Clements; S Michael Lewis; DT Aubrayo Franklin; WR Ashley Lelie; LB Tully Banta-Cain.

    None of the above players, besides Clements, has pro-bowl skills.

    The 49ers signed these 5 players for 26 million in cap space. As of right now, they have 12 million left. A chunk of that will go to their draft picks. They still need to bring in people to compete for spots. They still gotta leave money for signing players to replace anyone who gets injured.

    RB Frank Gore recently said he wants an extension. There is no way in hell that the 49ers are gonna be able to talk extension with Gore this offseason (he makes less than 1 million this season). You can bet Gore isn't gonna be too thrilled with his salary based on what he produces.

    49ers aren't in such a good position after all.
     
  4. kmac

    kmac Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Messages:
    849
    Ratings:
    +0
    I can see the flipside as well though. The 49ers are a good comparison to us. They had a mediocre season and were perceived to be a couple pieces away from contending for their division title and/or a wildcard spot, just like us. We're looking to build for a Super Bowl run over the long term, where as the 49ers are obviously in "win now" mode. It'll be interesting to see which theory wins out in the next couple of seasons.
     
  5. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,834
    Ratings:
    +3,480
    there is something similar here

    packer forum thread

    web page source


    A look at last year's free-agent "phenoms" reveals more smoke than fire. Here is a scorecard on the top 20 free agents who changed teams in 2006, as ranked by Pro Football Weekly last June:


    1.Edgerrin James.

    2. Steve Hutchinson.

    3. Julian Peterson.

    4. LeCharles Bentley.

    5. Ty Law.

    6. John Abraham.

    7. Drew Brees.

    8. Terrell Owens. .

    9. Will Witherspoon.

    10. LaVar Arrington.

    11. Chris Hope.

    12. Darren Howard.

    13. Charles Woodson.

    14. Adam Archuleta.

    15. David Thornton.

    16. Adam Vinatieri.

    17. Josh McCown.

    18. Kevin Shaffer.

    19. Trevor Pryce.

    20. Jon Kitna.

    ~~~`

    How many really and truly made their team better for the salary they made?
     
  6. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    Honestly over half at least. FA's are just piece. You are not going to get over the hump just because you sign some big name guy but it will certainly help. Edgerrin James is a definite upgrade at RB for the Cards. However, their O-Line stinks. You can't blame the FA's for the 10 other guys on the field.

    Look at the Saints. They signed Brees and he was throwing to guys like Colston. So with a good mix a FA's and solid drafting, coaching, etc you can build a winning franchise
     
  7. OregonPackFan

    OregonPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    356
    Ratings:
    +0
    I heard the Packers were looking to wait out the Raiders untill they released Moss, and that a trade would not take place before after the draft if they didn't release him.
     
  8. Pack93z

    Pack93z You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,855
    Ratings:
    +22
    Miller... I would like to hear your opinion on the need for a couple of these.. more of a debate and learning type of thing.. your thoughts:)

    Hamlin... Yes Safety needs I see the need to add.. not sure he is what we need but understand.

    DT .. Scott... IMO we need rotational players at this point, Starters are in place.. does he fit a "role" player.

    MLB - Mitchell... wants to be a starter, read someplace that is the reason for shopping himself, does he accept a Backup/special teams role?

    G - Lehr and Carlisle - Last year I would be jumping up and down for especially Carlisle, but we let the young guys grow into their role. I don't know much about the personality of Carlisle, would he come in an be a mentor to the young guys and be a spot player?
     
  9. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,834
    Ratings:
    +3,480
    yup, there lies the issues...Should have the cards spent on an o-l last year and then this year focus on a rb?? That signing really didnt fit their need so to speak.

    For me Brees was a huge risk..But then again I didnt sit there and see the results of his work out or the testing of his shoulder. They really hit it big there..
     
  10. millertime

    millertime Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Messages:
    841
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think Hamlin is the best Safety available. Seattle just sign Grant and Russell so he should not go back there. I think we might have to overpay for Hamlin, but I don't think thats too bad. Marquand Manuel costs us thre playoffs last year. Carroll and Manual cost us one game (I don't remeber which one). That one game would have got us into the playoffs.

    Scott is young. He is a rotational player for the Bears but can start in a pinch. Picking him up would help the Pack and hurt the Bears, with Tank gone for a copuple games.

    I'm a bit of a homer for Mitchell. I went to USF where Kawika played. He plays with a ton of heart and I don't think he's gotten too many offers. IMO he would be an upgrade over Poppinga. I like Brady but Mitchell is better. I know Kawika played Weakside and middle but i think hes capable of playing strongside.

    Lehr and Carlisle are depth guys. ZBS experience. I don't want either of these guys to start over Colledge, Spitz, or Moll.
     
  11. PackOne

    PackOne Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,013
    Ratings:
    +4

    Do we really need another thread on how people would build a great team from their lazy-boy ?
     
  12. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    It depends on how good the player is. Some overpay drastically like the 49ers did for Nate Clements. He's not worth that kind of money and one can argue both Al Harris and Charles Woodson are better players. However a good value signing like Adalius Thomas can be very helpful. Thomas is a Pro Bowl player. He's in his prime. He signed for a pretty reasonable deal.

    So it depends on the position and the players a lot of the time. This year I was not overly excited about the players in free agency. Last years was a better crop in my opinion.
     
  13. packedhouse01

    packedhouse01 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    1,560
    Ratings:
    +1
    Actually I like this thread. Free Agency has become an important part of the game. Look at what Drew Breese did for the Saints. My humble opinion is that if your team is in position to make a run for a championship and you have good depth, but you're missing that one piece of the puzzle, you try and buy that piece. If you're doing what the 49ers did and you're buying five pieces to the puzzle, the chances are fairly good that some of that isn't going to work out for you because you've limited what you can spend on keeping people on your team that got you this far. There are many philosophies on what to do in free agency.

    Right now I'm thinking Ted's approach is a good one for where we are now. I think next year will be a much more telling year as to where this franchise is in the rebuilding process. I wish we could have picked up another receiver, a tight end that can catch the ball and another safety, but we didn't so we're going to have to hope that the young guys drafted last year step up and hopefully we can have another good draft and fill those spots. I'm not too excited about what is left in free agency.
     
  14. kmac

    kmac Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2006
    Messages:
    849
    Ratings:
    +0
    I don't know if you've noticed, but that's kind of what every sports message board EVER is about.
     
  15. Cdnfavrefan

    Cdnfavrefan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,624
    Ratings:
    +0
    LOL my thought exactly K. I wonder if he thinks the other threads are impacting the Packers progress.
    I believe FA can be a great tool if it's done with the proper research and analysis. Picking up a guy or 2 who fill a need can be a great way to move up a level.
    Problem comes when teams like the Redskins just buy together great players no matter what the cost or how they'll fit in. They've proven JUST buying guys cause they're good won't help. The teams though that sign FA's who are worth the money and fit in the system and the coaches have definately benefitted, but FA should be viewed as a tool to help build a team not the main building block
     
  16. celticraider

    celticraider Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    85
    Ratings:
    +0
    Explain to me why you think the Raiders would even consider releasing Randy Moss. There is no way on God's green earth that will ever happen. I seriously doubt he is even getting traded, let alone released.

    As far as on topic, yes you can build a solid team through second tier free agent signings to shore up holes ala the Pats in 2001. You cannot build a team through upper tier FA because their just isn't enough room under the cap to do so. You fill holes with above average bargains later on in FA. I love what the Pack have done so far.
     
  17. OregonPackFan

    OregonPackFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    356
    Ratings:
    +0
    because the raiders don't want to pay his 11 million dollar contract while he's not playing

    he's certainly not happy down there, why the hell would he suddenly start playing with fire for what could be a rookie QB and a team in shambles?
     
  18. celticraider

    celticraider Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    85
    Ratings:
    +0
    Sounds good if it was all true. Here's some problems with what you think with sources to back me up.

    1 ) Raiders are under the cap, no cap issues.

    http://www.ibabuzz.com/raidersblog/?s=Griffith

    2) Randy was very positive with phone calls to Kiffin, as per the coach. They have had great phone conversations.

    http://www.sacbee.com/359/story/127993.html

    3) Every player on the team that has spoken about Randy this offseason has endorsed him as a great player and positive influence in the locker room. Including Jerry Porter, Nnamdi Asomugah, and Ronald Curry.

    Jerry Porter interview, Nnamdi Asomugah interview can be heard here

    http://www.putfile.com/celticraider24/media

    Link to Curry's interview and comments here ...

    http://www.realfootball365.com/nfl/articles/2007/03/raiders-curry-mossbrady160307.html

    Now take all these factors into consideration, and realize we are most likely drafting the only person in the NFL who may be able to overthrow the guy. Best arm in football teamed up with the games best deep threat ... I doubt Randy is going anywhere.


    Mind you I am a Raider fan on record as wanting him off my team. I want him gone, but I doubt he is going. What I believe is happening is people inquired about his availability, and we are listening. You would be a fool to not listen for offers for any player, no matter how good he is. Look at this excerpt from Adam Schefter of the NFL Network ...

    http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/10043397

    Now mind you, the Packers are my favorite team in the NFC. I root for you guys every time you play anyone but the Raiders. My favorite player is on your team, I am a bonifide fan of the Pack and I'm pissed at Randy Moss. I'm not just trying to burst your bubble here, I want the Pack to do well, I'm here cause I root for this team.

    That being said, look at the evidence. Would we move him, sure. Would you pay us what we would want to move him? Not a chance imo. I also think it would be foolish to pay the price Al is most likely asking. Talks have taken place, but Al is going to be asking for the sun, the moon, and the stars because we don't have to move him.
     
  19. retiredgrampa

    retiredgrampa Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2005
    Messages:
    804
    Ratings:
    +0
    CelticRaider; If you're right, and you're more in the "know" about Davis than I am, I must say that an awful amount of broadband space has been wasted in the past few months. That said, I don't regret it because this off-season we needed some hot topic to opine about and Moss was "it". Luckily, most every year we can kick in about something. However, IF Moss is indeed just a figment of our imaginations, I wonder where TT plans on spending all that money. He has definitely shown that he won't spend a dime more than he must, even losing out on Griffith who was ideal for us. Had TT tossed in an extra million, Griffith would have signed with GB notwithstanding his preference for other coaches, IMO. Of course if money ISN't used on Moss, Barnett will get his big deal +maybe another re-sign or two. TT must be holding back for something.
     
  20. celticraider

    celticraider Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    85
    Ratings:
    +0
    Every offseason the Raiders are involved in numerous rumors. It never stops, when you are a Raider fan you learn how the team operates by actually observing Al and the Raiders braintrust. I am saying yes, Al would trade Randy Moss. Al would trade his left arm to win. He is going to do what he thinks benefits the team most. Trading the most talented WR in the game for a 2nd round pick or a backup QB that hasn't looked very impressive in limited duty isn't what's best for the Raiders.


    Consider how that trade looked, Randy Moss and a tight end for a backup QB that hasn't looked good and a 7th rounder. In case the backup performs well Al Davis throws in a 2nd round pick. :rotflmao:

    There is no way Al takes a crappy offer like that for the most talented receiver, hell maybe the most talented player in the game. If you look at the reasons I laid out in the previous post you would understand why.
     
  21. chibiabos

    chibiabos Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    398
    Ratings:
    +0
    :twocents: I would think the only effective way to look at FA, is what percentage of FA signings actually improved the team they went to. Based on my limited view the odds are against a FA doing much more then filling a hole and that temporarily. Most of the money spent on them doesn't seem to pay off very often. My guess is that perhaps 10% of FA signings are worth it. Have to factor in the injury probability as well; especially with the older FA.
     
  22. retiredgrampa

    retiredgrampa Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2005
    Messages:
    804
    Ratings:
    +0
    RE: re-signing your own players. I would hope that when TT extends Barnett, it's with the proviso that he be agreeable to moving to OLB. He's not aggressive enough for MLB but his speed would be of more benefit on the outside. Hawk would be ideal at MLB with his hitting ability. Barnett didn't want the move before because it would affect his paycheck, but once he's got his money, why would he care? Moves like this are necessary because just depending on the same guys to become better because they're a year older won't cut it. It happens to EVERY team. Due to our inactivity in FA, it appears to me that the draft has taken on even more significance. No mistakes this year. 8-8 will be tough to better this year given our schedule.
     
  23. chibiabos

    chibiabos Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2005
    Messages:
    398
    Ratings:
    +0
    :twocents: I don't know? Perhaps Barnett will be OK in the middle now that he has additional help on both the outside backers. Do still think he's bit liight for the position and who knows what will transpire this coming training camp? As you say moving to the outside shouldn't matter as long as the pay and recognition is there. Perhaps he has a comfort zone in the middle. We also don't know what the defense will be able to do against really good offenses yet. Then there's always the possibility of some player popping up that could outperform Barnett. In the NFL no position is someone's forever.
     

Share This Page