Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Meck
OR, maybe you don't understand what you're talking about. MAYBE, if we look at the Watkins deal, for example, the year per money looks like it's a big overpay, but because of how it's structured you can get out of it earlier so it's not quite what it looks like. MAYBE you had to go higher on the total deal money BECAUSE it's not all guaranteed money, and the deal is pretty shrewd if you look at it in terms of long term cap health. Could that be? Or is it more likely that YOU are smarter than the guy they hired to be GM?
And MAYBE you're focused on OMG FIRST ROUND PICK! when it's really a #29 which is essentially a high second in terms of available talent and historically speaking you have like a 35% chance of that pick being a "successful" NFL player, so taking a very good PROVEN NFL player isn't such a bad idea when you have a 2/3 year window on Mahomes' rookie contract and we were six inches from a Super Bowl?
If you don't see that these deals are structured much, MUCH better than, say, Eric Berry's deal was, or Justin Houston's deal, then you are not educated enough to have this discussion.
|
I didn't say these deals were worse than Berrys or Houstons. I just said on the negotiating end we haven't gotten great deals. Right moves, but gave up too much to do many of them or gotten way too little in return. It's possible to like the strategy but see flaws in some of the execution. Cp is revising history if all of a sudden we think we've been doing a great job the past two years getting market value out of deals. I'm not the only one, except that in our excitement we're misremembering.
That's fine. I'd rather be worse at negotiating if the strategy is right and we still get the player. But let's not fart roses about it.