Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers Trade Candidates
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Voyageur" data-source="post: 1066204" data-attributes="member: 17953"><p>I think the belief in most front offices is that an experienced free agent who is game ready is worth more than a rookie draft pick who needs to spend time learning the game and is therefore fairly useless in most cases for at least part of a year and often longer. </p><p></p><p>If you look at a 4-year rookie contract that pays someone $2 mill a year and won't be of value until often year 3, you only get two years where the real return is felt, so it's essentially costing $4 mill a year for his productive years on the contract. Then there's the obvious situation where the guy is given a contract and never makes it to the field as a regular. You take those two concerns, for a new player, and compare it to the value of a game ready player in free agency and you see that giving that FA $4 mill a year in a contract is a fair trade off, in fact a better deal in a way, because he fills both roles in one. He becomes the starter, and he reduces the need for a backup on the bench who is instantly game ready all in respect to protecting that rookie who just isn't ready to offer the team what they need.</p><p></p><p>We say they are overpaying, they feel they are protecting the future by giving others a chance to grow into the part and keep the cost of replacements on the bench down. It's a gamble of course because the experienced free agent can be a flop too, but most teams don't put too much out there in advance for their services if they aren't positive, they will need them.</p><p></p><p>A prime example of the latter is Hardman. If he doesn't make the team this year, the Packers are only out about $130K. He was brought in to insure they had enough bodies to move forward and protect the fact they have two rookies taking the field or at least gracing the sidelines most of the time as they go through their learning curve.</p><p></p><p>When you think about it, Banks might be an excellent decision on the part of the brain trust. He's game ready, and from what I'm gathering, still getting better at the position. Those are positives in my book.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Voyageur, post: 1066204, member: 17953"] I think the belief in most front offices is that an experienced free agent who is game ready is worth more than a rookie draft pick who needs to spend time learning the game and is therefore fairly useless in most cases for at least part of a year and often longer. If you look at a 4-year rookie contract that pays someone $2 mill a year and won't be of value until often year 3, you only get two years where the real return is felt, so it's essentially costing $4 mill a year for his productive years on the contract. Then there's the obvious situation where the guy is given a contract and never makes it to the field as a regular. You take those two concerns, for a new player, and compare it to the value of a game ready player in free agency and you see that giving that FA $4 mill a year in a contract is a fair trade off, in fact a better deal in a way, because he fills both roles in one. He becomes the starter, and he reduces the need for a backup on the bench who is instantly game ready all in respect to protecting that rookie who just isn't ready to offer the team what they need. We say they are overpaying, they feel they are protecting the future by giving others a chance to grow into the part and keep the cost of replacements on the bench down. It's a gamble of course because the experienced free agent can be a flop too, but most teams don't put too much out there in advance for their services if they aren't positive, they will need them. A prime example of the latter is Hardman. If he doesn't make the team this year, the Packers are only out about $130K. He was brought in to insure they had enough bodies to move forward and protect the fact they have two rookies taking the field or at least gracing the sidelines most of the time as they go through their learning curve. When you think about it, Banks might be an excellent decision on the part of the brain trust. He's game ready, and from what I'm gathering, still getting better at the position. Those are positives in my book. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
CarryTheG14
tynimiller
milani
Latest posts
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: CarryTheG14
2 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: tynimiller
9 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: Curly Calhoun
Today at 8:28 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The Crew - 2026
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
Today at 7:58 AM
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
Cam Achord new ST coach - Fire him
Latest: OldSchool101
Yesterday at 11:14 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers Trade Candidates
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
