I guess the Patriots don't value Wes Welker and the Eagles don't value Desean Jackson. I mean, both guys were given the franchise tag.
What evidence is there of that? The only evidence there is...is that KC sucks and have no need for a high priced WR.
How so? Its an exchange of money for services. The only way I can see that as possible is if the player turns down an equivalent offer from the team.
Guys get big contracts and walk all the time. It happens in ALL sports. Sometimes players want to explore the free agent market. The Chiefs are about to be in re-building mode, and because Bowe has made it clear he'd rather be elsewhere, they're willing to part ways. Value (#Value) really has nothing to do with it.
Walk after their contract, or walk when they are offered a contract? That is illogical. Why not rebuild with someone if the value adds up?
Not sure what you're getting at. You don't see the inherent value (#Value) in paying a draft pick as opposed to a big-money guy when you're re-building? Either way, Bowe wants out of KC. So it doesn't really matter.
This seems like a contradiction (to me) to the your guys' previous stance about letting Marshall go. You both thought the team was rebuilding and would not be very good, so why were you upset about getting rid of Marshall when that seems to be what you do as a bad team rebuilding?
The two aren't mutually exclusive. Any team's goal should be to get players who play above their compensation. He wants out because they won't pay him.
I was upset because they didn't attempt to replace Marshall's production. As I've said before, it was never about Marshall specifically. He can go fly a kite.
Ok but why replace his production right away when we already were gonna suck and need to rebuild? That seems to be your stance as to why KC is getting rid of Bowe.
Again, you don't know that. You're guessing. There were rumors down here that Bowe wanted to force a trade to Miami last offseason, so I don't think money is the primary factor. He knows he can get money anywhere, and he knows he doesn't want KC's money.
No, that's not what I'm saying. Bowe wants out of of KC. That we know for a fact. Stringer was saying that KC doesn't value Bowe, and I'm saying that there's no evidence to support that. It's a mix of things though. You have a WR who is due to make big money AND you know he doesn't wanna be there? Yeah, the choice is pretty easy. You get your comp pick and draft his replacement. I should point out that the Chiefs have Jonathan Baldwin, and the rumors there are that they think this means they're OK without Bowe. Then again, this is Pioli and the Chiefs we're talking about so...
Money is almost always a factor. Would he have taken less money to be traded to Miami? He realized KC wouldn't give him the money he wanted, so he tried to get out. Look, this is just a philosophical difference. I don't believe free agency or trade markets provide value-added. Some believe they do. To each their own.
If this thing has any legs, it could be an indication that they believe the team might be in a position to make some noise this year.
The point is, we're just guessing on why he wants out. Obviously money is gonna factor in, but the guy has had three different head coaches and (by my count) 5 different QB's throwing to him in 5 years. Is he worth a high draft pick AND a huge salary? I honestly don't know. Personally, I prefer the Dolphins draft a WR in Round 1 next year if possible, but I wouldn't hate a trade/FA signing of Bowe either.
I'm not against adding Bowe at the right price in free agency but I am against adding him in a trade mid-season when it's pretty clear new-add wide receivers are having a tough time absorbing this offense and so realistically we'd be getting Bowe for maybe 7 or 8 games, where chemistry problems between he and Tannehill could persist for the entire year. I don't see the point in paying for that. Some folks would say that you're paying for the right to be the only team at the table in negotiations but that makes no sense to me. By coming to the table at all and showing that you're willing to pay a high pick just to get him half a season early, you're signaling that you have significant interest which belies a high evaluation. He'd have the pleasure of coming to the negotiations table with a team that he already knows is desperate for him, so much so that they already had to jump through hoops just to get to the negotiations table. And now that the team's dick is hanging out of their pants already, there's going to be pressure on them to do something with it instead of walking away from the negotiations table. For all the wisdom of the commons that says you get a better deal with a player when you're the only team negotiating with him, I've never seen any evidence of it. I think teams that re-sign their own players get better deals, but I've never seen any evidence that teams executing a trade that is contingent on a new contract get better deals than they would have gotten if they'd successfully lured the guy in as a free agent. When you're relying on the market to set your value, it goes both ways. You could find a bunch of interest and get bid up into an insane deal, or you could find that your own thoughts on your worth are drastically different from those of the broader market. Teams are generally very disciplined in their free agent activities, too. That means that while they'll certainly pay attention to market offers for a player they're interested in on the down side (so that they can get the best deal possible), they're extremely reluctant to up their offers because of other offers on the up side. A team that's offering $6 million a year is rarely going to up that to $8.5 million a year just because they see that another team is offering $8 million a year. But they will be eager to have their offer match downward to what the rest of the market is thinking. When it's a mano y mano trade, then the interest of the one team is all that matters and is what guides whether the contract is high or not. When you're in a multi party negotiation then the interest of others does matter, especially on the down side which as I said is what we've been seeing in the NFL lately. In short, think there's a strong possibility that if you try and trade for Dwayne Bowe right now, you'll end up paying even more than you'd have to pay in free agency.
Then again, how often does a mid-season trade for a WR actually happen? Off the top of my head, I can only come up with Braylon Edwards and Chris Chambers. Edwards actually was pretty instrumental in helping Sanchez (like Tannehill a rookie at the time) and the Jets reach the AFC Championship game, although his issues limited his stay in NY. Chambers did help SD in 2007, but not to any great extent.
Right, and I'm saying that the front office is just guessing as well, on both why he wants out and also what type of character he has. The team that has the most accurate information on both accounts is Kansas City.
Yeah, I was just going off the top of my head. Forgot about that one. Either way, mid-season WR trades are something that I don't believe occurs enough to make a concrete determination about whether it's more likely to work or not.
He was built up by the Hard Knock crew into a storyline, did nothing against any defense that wasn't full of scrubs, then was cut from the practice squad. He was a good storyline, nothing else, bit like Les Brown.
BenVolinPBP Just to be clear: #Dolphins aren't in trade talks for Dwayne Bowe bit.ly/PcLp27 about 1 hour ago · reply · retweet · favorite
I wish threads like this would just go away until some new news comes out, but I know if any new good news comes out, someone will just start a new thread anyway. lol
Out of the top 100 WR's active it's hard to find ones that are ever traded midseason. So as far as producing it's next to none because it just don't happen often. When it does that WR has a big chance of having a mental issue to start with. I don't think Wallace or Bowe have mentel issues. #1 Calvin Johnson # 2 Julio Jones # 3 Jordy Nelson # 4 Larry Fitzgerald # 5 Victor Cruz # 6 Hakeem Nicks # 7 A.J. Green # 8 Jeremy Maclin # 9 Mike Wallace # 10 Greg Jennings # 11 Andre Johnson # 12 Roddy White # 13 Brandon Marshall # 14 Percy Harvin # 15 Marques Colston # 16 Miles Austin # 17 Steve Smith # 18 Steve Johnson # 19 Wes Welker # 20 Dwayne Bowe # 21 Dez Bryant # 22 Eric Decker # 23 Torrey Smith # 24 DeSean Jackson # 25 Vincent Jackson # 26 Antonio Brown # 27 Demaryius Thomas # 28 Kenny Britt # 29 Pierre Garcon # 30 Greg Little # 31 Kendall Wright # 32 Justin Blackmon # 33 Brandon Lloyd # 34 Randall Cobb # 35 Santonio Holmes # 36 Titus Young # 37 Danny Amendola # 38 Robert Meachem # 39 Lance Moore # 40 Jonathan Baldwin # 41 Sidney Rice # 42 Michael Williams # 43 Brandon LaFell # 44 Michael Crabtree # 45 Steve Smith # 46 Reggie Wayne # 47 Santana Moss # 48 Mario Manningham # 49 Anquan Boldin # 50 Denarius Moore # 51 Darrius Heyward-Bey # 52 Jerome Simpson # 53 Nate Washington # 54 Doug Baldwin # 55 James Jones # 56 Alshon Jeffery # 57 Lestar Jean # 58 Nate Burleson # 59 Austin Collie # 60 Stephen Hill # 61 Andre Roberts # 62 Emmanuel Sanders # 63 Malcom Floyd # 64 Brian Quick # 65 Golden Tate # 66 Louis Murphy # 67 David Nelson # 68 Mohamed Sanu # 69 Michael Floyd # 70 Deion Branch # 71 Brian Hartline # 72 Rueben Randle # 73 Davone Bess # 74 Vincent Brown # 75 Eddie Royal # 76 Laurent Robinson # 77 Travis Benjamin # 78 Steve Breaston # 79 Greg Childs # 80 AJ Jenkins # 81 Devery Henderson # 82 Jason Avant # 83 Early Doucet # 84 Jeremy Kerley # 85 Harry Douglas # 86 Joe Adams # 87 Kevin Walter # 88 Damian Williams # 89 Earl Bennett # 90 Mike Thomas # 91 Leonard Hankerson # 92 Andre Caldwell # 93 Jacoby Ford # 94 Dezmon Briscoe # 95 Arrelious Benn # 96 Chris Givens # 97 Michael Jenkins # 98 Domenik Hixon # 99 Preston Parker #100 Jacoby Jones
I thought the goal was to win a SB? If a $400,000 receiver plays above his compensation at a 500k level, does that define his worth on the field or make him better than the guy trying to cover him?
If any trade does end up happening, especially for a wide receiver, I reckon the media will be a little out of the loop. IE the Brandon Marshall trade that brought him here.
When you are playing a game with a hard salary cap, the winner is the one who maximizes those resources. No, it does not make him better than anyone. Yes, it does define his worth to the team. You have $125M to build a team. Inherently you want to underpay as many people as possible, i.e. build a team worth $150M for $125M. This is why you almost never see the consistently good teams in the NFL spending much in free agency.
Sure, and $9.5M for one year isn't much of a commitment. You run into problems when you are guaranteeing them future money.
IIRC there were rumors about that trade leading up to it. Marshall was on the block and the Dolphins and Seahawks were the two teams mentioned. Then you had the Vontae trade, which someone from Indy NAILED. The only trade that NO ONE scooped was the trade that sent Marshall to the Bears.
I don't think anyone is arguing that it's a concrete rule that needs to be followed in every example, but it's pretty fundamental and good roster construction. It's not good to have someone playing like a 500k WR typically plays in a starter role, but there are soft caps to how much you can pay positions and players in certain spots.
the winner is the one who wins. Maximizing resources is great, but trying to be cheap about it can cost you production. So you'd rather have us sit on the money that could go toward Bowe or Wallace so that it makes our team's dollar to value ratio appear higher? Considering the reduced rookie wage scale, doesn't drafting well takes care of the "underpaying/maximizing resources" part?... and don't we have a slew of picks this year to make it feasible to sign Wallace, Bowe, or Jennings (IE: pay for missing production)? IIRC, we have the most underpaid QB/WR corps in the league. Surely we can afford to pay for some much needed production and provide our young, talented, inexpensive QB an upgraded, playmaking receiving target w/o looking like a spendthrift in the process. BTW, the addition of Wallace or Bowe would still keep our combined QB/WR/TE salary under much of the league's.
You are misrepresenting my position. I'm not suggesting spending less money. I'm suggesting spending your money on players that will perform above their salary. I'm not suggesting anything about feasibility. I'm strictly speaking about value-added benefit. If you are "paying for missing production" you're inherently at a disadvantage to the teams that aren't doing that (i.e. getting that production elsewhere). There is no separate part of getting value added. Its the name of the game when there is a hard-cap.
I agree with that, but it almost seems like Stringer is speaking in generalizations rather than what's specific to Miami. What's specific to us is: A. Our current WR corps is below satisfactory. B. We have a significant amount of cap space. C. We have a young franchise QB who needs an upgrade at WR to better help him develop AND maximize his potential. D. We can't wish our offense into not having difficulty scoring, nor defenses making us 1 dimensional. E. We have an abundance of inexpensive draft picks that will serve to help maximize value (like Stringer was speaking of). F. There really are no holes on this team moving forward outside of a significant upgrade at WR and the re-signing of our current players that the draft can't take care of. Side note: Will the Super Bowl winning Giants pay Victor Cruz the bucks to keep his production in NY.... or will they let him walk in FA b/c his future salary will no longer equate to "maximizing value" considering he'll be getting paid what he's worth? A team cant rely solely on rookie contracts and constantly trying to find diamonds in the rough; sometimes they have to pay a guy what he's worth if they want his level of production.
