Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bay Area Bloodsucking Insects
We all know RFA doesn't fully compensate, so why stop teams from getting fully compensated? Please address that? Wouldn't you want that oppourtunity?
Now as for having getting comp picks and players..... that's how the system goes. Honestly, I've never liked the comp picks (i'm not sure if I mentioned that in the original thread) as they further devalue the 2nd round picks, picks that were earned by teams.
That's why last year I traded my entire 2005 rookie draft as I saw it merely trading my 2005 1st rounder and 2nd rounder (i thought at that time it would be in the 30+ range) for the 2004 1.5 pick.
Those picks are useless.
Why not tag Bulger higher? Is that his fault? Yes. However, is Bulger worth a 1st round salary? IN jim's opinion no. So he's stuck. What's the best thing for him to do... trade to make up some of that value.
2nd round picks are pretty much useless, back up players. Most 2nd round tenders are STARTERS in the league, so why not attempt to gain fair compensation.
I agree we didn't implement a system that fully compensates teams, but why prevent teams from doing so if the market price hasn't been tampered with?
|
Since you specifically requested a response, here it is. The initial system was no compensation for losing an RFA. If that were the system today, then I'd feel much better about wheeling and dealing for the matches. In that system, you'd have a mirror of what the NFL does, with the team stealing another teams player having to send compensation. However, what we saw was that not as many players were moving, so we tried to come up with an incentive to let players move. It wasn't about giving equal compensation, it was about getting player movement. Now that system is, in my mind, being exploited. Not only are tendering teams getting compensation from the league (a system who's Achilles heel is devaluing the rest of the draft) but they are muscling more compensation out of other teams. We agree to disagree whether or not that is acceptable. Bottom line, if we got rid of the comp, I'd feel great about wheeling and dealing. If we're going to give free picks, then I don't like the wheeling and dealing. It hurts the league.
2nd round and later picks are worthless? Lets set up two pools of players. Tell me which group you want:
Group 1
Chris Perry
REggie Williams
Justin Fargas
Taylor Jacobs
William Green
Joey Harrington
Group 2
Keary Colbert
JP Losman
Jason Witten
Nate Burleson
Brian Westbrook
Patrick Ramsey
The first group is of course the oh so valuable first rounders. The second group is of course the oh so worthless later rounders. Is there a higher percentage of success in the first round? Of course. Are there players to get in the later rounds? Definitely.
As far as Bulger, if Jim doesn't want to pay the market value for a player he tendered, why does he deserve anything at all? Isn't the main benefit of the RFA tool the ability to match the high bid? Isn't that the purpose of the whole thing? That to me is far more important and basic than the whole compensation issue.