ganesh Posted September 9, 2006 Posted September 9, 2006 It took LJ longer than McGahee to establish himself. Go back to the middle of 2004, when LJ was backing up Priest Holmes. Around the trading deadline, KC thought he was a bust & rumors were rampant that they'd take a mid-2nd day pick (5-6th round) to get Johnson out of there. He was buried on the bench and disgruntled. How soon everyone forgets. 766005[/snapback] How soon people forget the "getting the diapers out" comment Vermeil had abou LJ.
Kelly the Dog Posted September 9, 2006 Posted September 9, 2006 Getting good players in the later rounds gives you advantages high round draft picks and free agents do not. You sign them at a very low price and if they turn out to be good players you can negotiate long term contracts with them below market rates. That actually frees up money for acquiring veteran free agents. 765989[/snapback] Not really. You're not going to have 53 stars on your team. There are only 24 starters counting kickers. That is less than half of your roster. Less than half of them on any team make serious money. There are plenty on young guys that make no money, lower round picks and veteran minimum players and streets free agents on all teams that fill that gap. McGee got at least the going rate for a decent but not great CB who happens to be a great KR. Peters TOOK less than the going rate he MIGHT have acheived had he waited because this was a sure thing. He didn't have to, and would likely have made the going rate on the open market in a year or two. He made a conservative choice for the money now.
Scraps Posted September 9, 2006 Posted September 9, 2006 Not really. You're not going to have 53 stars on your team. There are only 24 starters counting kickers. That is less than half of your roster. Less than half of them on any team make serious money. There are plenty on young guys that make no money, lower round picks and veteran minimum players and streets free agents on all teams that fill that gap. McGee got at least the going rate for a decent but not great CB who happens to be a great KR. Peters TOOK less than the going rate he MIGHT have acheived had he waited because this was a sure thing. He didn't have to, and would likely have made the going rate on the open market in a year or two. He made a conservative choice for the money now. 766053[/snapback] Proving my point.
Kelly the Dog Posted September 9, 2006 Posted September 9, 2006 Proving my point. 766120[/snapback] Not proving the point at all. If a first or second or third round draft choice had the same career as Peters did he would not have been offered a big time contract either after only starting half of one year. Peters decided to take the nice money now instead of risking injury or that he wouldn't progress as the Bills expect him to for the great money down the line. He didn't have to take it and a lot of guys don't. If he progresses as we think he will and approaches star status, he could have made a killing in free agency in a year or two (whenever his contract was up).
Dibs Posted September 10, 2006 Author Posted September 10, 2006 I said nothing. It was Dawgg that posed the question. 765987[/snapback] Ooops, sorry scraps. Your stance smacks of homerism. 765987[/snapback] All my stance is is that picking WM over LJ at the time was a reasonable gamble. If that is homerism....you should hear some of my other thoughts.
Dawgg Posted September 10, 2006 Posted September 10, 2006 I don't buy any of that. The real problem was that LJ was trapped behind the undisputed top running back in the league in Priest Holmes, who for two years in a row was virtually unstoppable. Was he in Vermeil's doghouse? Yes. But Vermeil has never been one to share carries amongst his backs, especially when he has a workhorse on hand. We saw that in St. Louis and we saw it in KC... if LJ were actually given a chance to play, he probably would have developed into a solid running back much earlier. It took LJ longer than McGahee to establish himself. Go back to the middle of 2004, when LJ was backing up Priest Holmes. Around the trading deadline, KC thought he was a bust & rumors were rampant that they'd take a mid-2nd day pick (5-6th round) to get Johnson out of there. He was buried on the bench and disgruntled. How soon everyone forgets. 766005[/snapback]
Dawgg Posted September 10, 2006 Posted September 10, 2006 Not necessarily true. A guy chosen in the mid to late rounds has A LOT more to lose than a guy chosen in the top 3 rounds. With that being said, he is more likely to sign a long term deal earlier because he is making very little to begin with. Peters was probably making around the minimum... he can play it out and risk a severe injury or take the money now and know he is taken care of for a while. Clements on the other hand had a first round contract -- so he doesn't have the urgency that a guy like Peters or Terrance McGee had to get a pay raise. Not proving the point at all. If a first or second or third round draft choice had the same career as Peters did he would not have been offered a big time contract either after only starting half of one year. Peters decided to take the nice money now instead of risking injury or that he wouldn't progress as the Bills expect him to for the great money down the line. He didn't have to take it and a lot of guys don't. If he progresses as we think he will and approaches star status, he could have made a killing in free agency in a year or two (whenever his contract was up). 766127[/snapback]
Kelly the Dog Posted September 10, 2006 Posted September 10, 2006 Not necessarily true. A guy chosen in the mid to late rounds has A LOT more to lose than a guy chosen in the top 3 rounds. With that being said, he is more likely to sign a long term deal earlier because he is making very little to begin with. Peters was probably making around the minimum... he can play it out and risk a severe injury or take the money now and know he is taken care of for a while. Clements on the other hand had a first round contract -- so he doesn't have the urgency that a guy like Peters or Terrance McGee had to get a pay raise. 766306[/snapback] That's true. And a good point. Still, I contend that it matters not where your players come from, and every team has guys that make too much money and guys that make peanuts who are great. And every team has some high picks and some low picks and some high priced free agents and some bargain basement and street free agents. And it matters not that in a couple years you may not have lucked out on some low round picks. TD's fault was he didnt get enough players that produced, that were winners, and that had good chemistry. It didnt matter where they came from.
Dawgg Posted September 10, 2006 Posted September 10, 2006 Yeah, there's always some overpaid and underpaid players on every team. But it is important to note that the teams that have success year after year are the ones that find solid contributors in rounds 2-5 of the draft. I'll give you an example That's true. And a good point. Still, I contend that it matters not where your players come from, and every team has guys that make too much money and guys that make peanuts who are great. And every team has some high picks and some low picks and some high priced free agents and some bargain basement and street free agents. And it matters not that in a couple years you may not have lucked out on some low round picks. TD's fault was he didnt get enough players that produced, that were winners, and that had good chemistry. It didnt matter where they came from. 766313[/snapback]
Kelly the Dog Posted September 10, 2006 Posted September 10, 2006 Yeah, there's always some overpaid and underpaid players on every team. But it is important to note that the teams that have success year after year are the ones that find solid contributors in rounds 2-5 of the draft. I'll give you an example 766331[/snapback] The original post was about low round picks, not first day picks.
Scraps Posted September 10, 2006 Posted September 10, 2006 The original post was about low round picks, not first day picks. 766338[/snapback] Actually I said mid-late rounds.
Albany,n.y. Posted September 10, 2006 Posted September 10, 2006 I don't buy any of that. The real problem was that LJ was trapped behind the undisputed top running back in the league in Priest Holmes, who for two years in a row was virtually unstoppable. Was he in Vermeil's doghouse? Yes. But Vermeil has never been one to share carries amongst his backs, especially when he has a workhorse on hand. We saw that in St. Louis and we saw it in KC... if LJ were actually given a chance to play, he probably would have developed into a solid running back much earlier. 766302[/snapback] Then why was KC about to dump him off on another team (the rumors were a mid pick or a trade involving McCardell) and be willing to take a > $3 mil cap hit? They thought he was a bust & got lucky that nobody traded for him. It happens all the time. When Frank Reich was put on Plan B, nobody signed him away from Buffalo. The Bills had no idea he was the perfect #2 QB for that team...and if he had signed elsewhere, there would be no Houston comeback in our history. Kurt Warner was exposed to the expansion draft & Cleveland passed on him. He won the Super Bowl that season.
Recommended Posts