Enjoy an Ads-Free ASFN - lighter and faster too! Become an ASFN-Contributor and help support the site.
Go Back   Arizona Sports Fans Network > Arizona Teams > Arizona Cardinals

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old March 5th, 2007, 02:38 PM   #1
SuperSpck
Fewer ghosts in Realityland
 
SuperSpck's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Minnesota. Crap.
Posts: 7,971

Worried about the lack of signings? Don't worry...


... it may just be a case of square pegs and round holes.

Cardinals fans probably won't miss Davis and signing Gandy would be the same as getting someone else's Davis.

In this case I hold out hope that in a mid-teir free agent class those avalable simply don't mesh with what the coaching staff envisions.

With that in mind, here's an ESPN article:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...len&id=2788383

Updated: March 5, 2007, 1:14 PM ET
Free agency littered with disappointments



By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com
Archive




Two years ago, in an effort to bolster their defense and add some much-needed muscle versus the run, the Atlanta Falcons signed unrestricted free agent middle linebacker Ed Hartwell to a six-year, $26.25 million contract that included an initial signing bonus of $8 million.

And last week, after watching Hartwell limp through two injury-plagued seasons in which he did little to distinguish himself, the Falcons unceremoniously released him. The anemic dividend on an investment that totaled $10 million in compensation for two years: 13 starts, 63 tackles, a sack and a forced fumble.

Those are hardly the kinds of numbers Atlanta officials anticipated when they signed Hartwell, who had played the early portion of his career in the shadow of Baltimore Ravens star Ray Lewis and seemed poised to emerge from his former teammate's shadow.

That said, they aren't altogether unusual, either.
The opening forays of the free-agent signing period this weekend produced some mind-boggling dollar figures, again demonstrating the lack of fiscal responsibility which traditionally exists at this time of year. Some number crunching of the leaguewide ledger book reinforced the caveat emptor inherent to the free agency exercise.

Consider this: In the week preceding the start of the free-agency period, NFL teams released 16 players they had signed as free agents only a year earlier. Ten more veterans added as free agents only two years ago were lopped from rosters.

Guys such as Hartwell, quarterback Aaron Brooks, linebacker LaVar Arrington and cornerback Fred Smoot, to cite only a few, went from veterans considered quick fixes by the franchises that signed them to players earning speedy pink slips.

"It just didn't work," acknowledged Smoot, who rebounded from his release by the Minnesota Vikings late last week by quickly re-signing with the Washington Redskins, his original franchise. "I guess it happens."

Indeed, it does, and with more regularity than it should.

In fact, that some teams and players fail so miserably in free agency is one of the most perplexing components of a system that should not be so flawed. Unlike the draft, free agency affords teams the opportunity to assess players based on their NFL track records. Because players cannot become unrestricted free agents until they have accrued four seasons of service in the league, there is a body of work to be studied.

Teams can kick the tires before making the buy.

Yet as recent history has indicated, there are still a lot of lemons. Even with four years of videotape with which to analyze the free agents, with a ton of empirical evidence on which to base decisions, too many errors are made.

And there is no reason to believe more weren't made over the weekend.

The spending spree began with a frenzy despite assessments that this year's pool of unrestricted veterans was the most diluted ever. Teams especially were enamored of offensive linemen, none of whom have ever been to a Pro Bowl game but many of whom still garnered contracts that will average $6 million to $7 million annually.

Said the president of one AFC franchise that still prefers to build through the draft, while surveying the cash carnage Sunday evening: "For a lot of these teams, money just burns a hole in their pockets. If they've got it, they're going to spend it, even on middle-level players. They've taken the middle class and raised it up, believe me. And a year from now, they'll be releasing half the guys they signed because they found out they were poor fits."

If there is one unlearned lesson, it seems, from nearly a decade and a half under the current free-agent system, it's that "fit" must be the key to any addition. Instead, free agency for the most part has been about squeezing square pieces into round holes.

Arguably the most notable acquisition of the weekend, it seemed, was the New England addition of Adalius Thomas. A prototype hybrid edge linebacker from a 3-4 defense joining a coach who essentially created the position. What a novel approach, spending on a player who already fits an existing job description.

Teams ought to do more of it, but they don't, which is why so many clubs end up discarding free agents so quickly.

And why, in just a year or two, we'll see many of the same players who signed big-money deals this weekend back on the street again.
Len Pasquarelli is a senior writer for ESPN.com.
Enjoy an Ads-Free ASFN - lighter and faster too! Become an ASFN-Contributor and help support the site.
SuperSpck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 5th, 2007, 06:35 PM   #2
Duckjake
Registered
 
Duckjake's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 29,655
Quote:
Cardinals fans probably won't miss Davis and signing Gandy would be the same as getting someone else's Davis.
The only thing Cardinal fans miss are wins.

As for free agents where would the Cardinals have been last year without Warner,EJames,MBrown,Okeafor,Clancy,Berry,Huff,Mac klin and Griffith. 5-11 probably.
__________________
Forget the pay. Can the guy play.
Duckjake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 5th, 2007, 06:43 PM   #3
TheCardFan
Things have changed.
 
TheCardFan's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duckjake View Post
As for free agents where would the Cardinals have been last year without Warner,EJames,MBrown,Okeafor,Clancy,Berry,Huff,Mac klin and Griffith. 5-11 probably.
So true!
TheCardFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 5th, 2007, 06:47 PM   #4
jefftheshark
Now 20% Fat Free!
 
jefftheshark's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Viva Las Vegas!
Posts: 4,763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duckjake View Post
The only thing Cardinal fans miss are wins.

As for free agents where would the Cardinals have been last year without Warner,EJames,MBrown,Okeafor,Clancy,Berry,Huff,Mac klin and Griffith. 5-11 probably.
Think of where we would have been, if we had only had a coach who knew how to use them effectively.

The Shark
jefftheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 5th, 2007, 08:57 PM   #5
WildBB
BillyBoy
 
WildBB's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: The Sonoran Jungle - West
Posts: 9,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSpck View Post
... it may just be a case of square pegs and round holes.

Cardinals fans probably won't miss Davis and signing Gandy would be the same as getting someone else's Davis.

In this case I hold out hope that in a mid-teir free agent class those avalable simply don't mesh with what the coaching staff envisions.

Your right there's not alot of good fits out there and too many who just want the payday and could care less about the team. If they cared they'd take pretty good $$$$ to stay where they are. These guys aren't hurting for dough. It's out there and they're swarming to it. It's ruined pro sports to a large extent and we're seeing it played out on a grand scale this off season.
__________________
PT - 42 - 40 NFC CHAMPS 2008
JS - CoL - RIP - #1
WildBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 6th, 2007, 07:27 AM   #6
john h
Registered User
 
john h's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Little Rock
Posts: 10,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperSpck View Post
... it may just be a case of square pegs and round holes.

Cardinals fans probably won't miss Davis and signing Gandy would be the same as getting someone else's Davis.

In this case I hold out hope that in a mid-teir free agent class those avalable simply don't mesh with what the coaching staff envisions.

With that in mind, here's an ESPN article:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...len&id=2788383

Updated: March 5, 2007, 1:14 PM ET
Free agency littered with disappointments



By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com
Archive




Two years ago, in an effort to bolster their defense and add some much-needed muscle versus the run, the Atlanta Falcons signed unrestricted free agent middle linebacker Ed Hartwell to a six-year, $26.25 million contract that included an initial signing bonus of $8 million.

And last week, after watching Hartwell limp through two injury-plagued seasons in which he did little to distinguish himself, the Falcons unceremoniously released him. The anemic dividend on an investment that totaled $10 million in compensation for two years: 13 starts, 63 tackles, a sack and a forced fumble.

Those are hardly the kinds of numbers Atlanta officials anticipated when they signed Hartwell, who had played the early portion of his career in the shadow of Baltimore Ravens star Ray Lewis and seemed poised to emerge from his former teammate's shadow.

That said, they aren't altogether unusual, either.
The opening forays of the free-agent signing period this weekend produced some mind-boggling dollar figures, again demonstrating the lack of fiscal responsibility which traditionally exists at this time of year. Some number crunching of the leaguewide ledger book reinforced the caveat emptor inherent to the free agency exercise.

Consider this: In the week preceding the start of the free-agency period, NFL teams released 16 players they had signed as free agents only a year earlier. Ten more veterans added as free agents only two years ago were lopped from rosters.

Guys such as Hartwell, quarterback Aaron Brooks, linebacker LaVar Arrington and cornerback Fred Smoot, to cite only a few, went from veterans considered quick fixes by the franchises that signed them to players earning speedy pink slips.

"It just didn't work," acknowledged Smoot, who rebounded from his release by the Minnesota Vikings late last week by quickly re-signing with the Washington Redskins, his original franchise. "I guess it happens."

Indeed, it does, and with more regularity than it should.

In fact, that some teams and players fail so miserably in free agency is one of the most perplexing components of a system that should not be so flawed. Unlike the draft, free agency affords teams the opportunity to assess players based on their NFL track records. Because players cannot become unrestricted free agents until they have accrued four seasons of service in the league, there is a body of work to be studied.

Teams can kick the tires before making the buy.

Yet as recent history has indicated, there are still a lot of lemons. Even with four years of videotape with which to analyze the free agents, with a ton of empirical evidence on which to base decisions, too many errors are made.

And there is no reason to believe more weren't made over the weekend.

The spending spree began with a frenzy despite assessments that this year's pool of unrestricted veterans was the most diluted ever. Teams especially were enamored of offensive linemen, none of whom have ever been to a Pro Bowl game but many of whom still garnered contracts that will average $6 million to $7 million annually.

Said the president of one AFC franchise that still prefers to build through the draft, while surveying the cash carnage Sunday evening: "For a lot of these teams, money just burns a hole in their pockets. If they've got it, they're going to spend it, even on middle-level players. They've taken the middle class and raised it up, believe me. And a year from now, they'll be releasing half the guys they signed because they found out they were poor fits."

If there is one unlearned lesson, it seems, from nearly a decade and a half under the current free-agent system, it's that "fit" must be the key to any addition. Instead, free agency for the most part has been about squeezing square pieces into round holes.

Arguably the most notable acquisition of the weekend, it seemed, was the New England addition of Adalius Thomas. A prototype hybrid edge linebacker from a 3-4 defense joining a coach who essentially created the position. What a novel approach, spending on a player who already fits an existing job description.

Teams ought to do more of it, but they don't, which is why so many clubs end up discarding free agents so quickly.

And why, in just a year or two, we'll see many of the same players who signed big-money deals this weekend back on the street again.
Len Pasquarelli is a senior writer for ESPN.com.
Most of us remember our discards of Hearst, Rice, and Thomas Jones and the guys we did not sign. You have to take chances and get in the arena. You cannot improve by sitting on the sidelines as a spectator. Sometimes you bite the bear and sometimes the bear bites you.
john h is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Tags
aaron brooks, adalius thomas, baltimore ravens, coaching staff, fred smoot, lavar arrington, len pasquarelli, minnesota vikings, nfl team, nfl teams, ray lewis, signing bonus, thomas jones, washington redskins



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Sitemap:1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:29 AM.



Subscribe in a reader
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007 - 2008, PixelFX Studios
Inactive Reminders By Icora Web Design