Folks fixate too much on losing FAs w/ no comp

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Its interesting watch TSW posters seemingly fixate on the importance of getting some type of compensation for the loss of an FA by trading him.

 

Folks seem to me to have been fooled into an expectation by the great job TD did of tagging Peerless and getting a 1st rounder who became WM.

 

Such compensation for losing an FA has been a rare thing in this league (sometimes a team will move a player in antiticpation of him leaving if they already have a replacement in place, but it is even rarer to pull off the coup TD pulled off by tagging and then trading PP).

 

Getting some compensation for losing a valued player is nice, but this is the exception rather than the rule with most players. Yet given the rediculous moves folks were proposing because Clements was an FA and the virtual demand that we get something for Henry right now simply does not comport with the reality of the league.

 

Consider this and think about it. Who have been our major FA acquisitions over the past few years?

 

What compensation did we have to give up or even worry about giving up to get|

 

Takeo Spikes?

Jeff Posey?

London Fletcher?

Bennie Anderson?

even Sam Adams?

 

Nada. nothing, zippo.

 

Get a clue. The way the system is designed is to create a partially free market. There is some restraint of trade due to the tags, but in general when a player qualifies he becomes a free agent and is free to negotiate.

 

Teams deal with the potential loss, but do so by getting replacements so they can comfortably lose players or by making a deal with them to keep them in place. it is simply the rare case where a player is traded for compensation.

 

We have Arthur Blank, owner of the Falcs primarily to thank for the Peerless deal. He publicly promised his customers (and more important Michael Vick) that he was going to spend whatever was necessary that he was allowed to spend to get the best WR in FA for Vick.

 

As it happened with the other top flight WRs getting locked up PP was clearly the best performer on the market and the only WR available with anywhere near 100 catches. More ironically he was from AT and on record wanting to go home.

 

TD merely had to take the unusual step of transition tagging PP and then reel in the deal.

 

The general rule is that if Winfield or Jennings wants to test the free market, they have a right to do so and the system is set up for them to do so unless the Bills choose to pay through the nose.

 

The notion of trading Clements now (and thus losing out on a year of performance from him which we would still have to pay for in part with the cap allocation of his last year of bonus) was not only unlikely but actually pretty silly from a football point of view.

 

It makes far more sense to let him play out his contract (unless he foolishly will take some lowball offer) and then to potentially resign him under the greatly expanded cap of the next TV contract or to get him for a song if he has the bad luck with the timing of injury that Andre Reed had.

[Mort Hendrickson]

I am not entirely positive, but pretty sure, just don't know the specifics. My understanding is that if you draft a player and lose him in free agency, and then do not sign a player of equal or greater value, you are awarded a compensatory draft pick based upon the value of the player you lost in free agency. Correct me if I am wrong, but thats compensation for losing a fee agent, and can be as high as a late 3rd round pick.

[The Jokeman]

I am not entirely positive, but pretty sure, just don't know the specifics. My understanding is that if you draft a player and lose him in free agency, and then do not sign a player of equal or greater value, you are awarded a compensatory draft pick based upon the value of the player you lost in free agency. Correct me if I am wrong, but thats compensation for losing a fee agent, and can be as high as a late 3rd round pick.

320369[/snapback]

You only receive compensation for the loss of UFAs. The definition of an UFA is a player that finishes out his contract with his current team and generally been in the league for at least 4 seasons. The problem is the actual details of how compensation is determined has no set formula. It's generally thought about compensation is based on how many UFAs you signed/lost and the production of those players lost. Ie if you lose a Pro Bowl type player you earn more then if lose a back up player. You were correct about the highest a team can get is a late 3rd Round pick.

[MrLocke]

The trouble with compensatory picks is that the highest you get them is in the third round and you get them at the end of that round. I know we landed Jonas with one of these picks. The point is that compensatory picks atleast in my opinion do not match what you lose in free agency. Even if you are alotted the full four picks because of where they come in the draft.

[Bill from NYC]

>>>>Yet given the rediculous moves folks were proposing because Clements was an FA and the virtual demand that we get something for Henry right now simply does not comport with the reality of the league.<<<<<

 

FFS, Clements and TH are 2 entirely different situations, and btw neither is a UFA.

 

I think most posters wanted something for Travis is because:

1) HE asked to be traded.

2) He was thought to have some value.

3) He is certainly not the future of the Bills at the RB position.

 

As for Clements:

1) A lesser player at his position just signed a 50 million dollar deal.

2) He is NOT a UFA, thus a trade would have been possible (not necessarily the best move mind you).

3) NC is most certainly a valueable commodity.

4) Some (myself included) think that there is a very small chance that the Bills will re-sign him, due to cash restraints, and or the wisdom of giving 50-60 million cap dollars to a corner.

 

Your point about compensation for the FAs that the Bills signed is well taken, but imo it does not apply here.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

The trouble with compensatory picks is that the highest you get them is in the third round and you get them at the end of that round. I know we landed Jonas with one of these picks. The point is that compensatory picks atleast in my opinion do not match what you lose in free agency. Even if you are alotted the full four picks because of where they come in the draft.

320487[/snapback]

 

A lot of this from a philosophical standpoint is a question ofhow much do you believe in a free market or not as producing a good result.

 

The NFL actually has adopted a system which has substantially abandoned the free market because it would be pretty much impossible to produce a good football product if things operated based on free market tenets.

 

There was a market battle between the players and the owners in the mid-80s where the NFLPA demanded 52% of the gross revenues go to the workers and the NFL beat the players silly by hiring replacement players and producing an acceptable (to the customers) product for a long enough period of time that the NFLPA caved under the push from its members who were not getting paychecks during the replacement player interlude.

 

The NFLPA armed with the best lawyers and labor experts money can buy (the players being rich and all) and under the leadership of players like Gene Upshaw dealt with this setback by moving to decertify the NFLPA as a bargaining agent and this force the NFL owners into operating in a free market.

 

Amusingly to me, the NFL owners actually caved rather quickly rather than operating in a free market where captial holders of the type of Jerry Jones would as quickly as they could buy up talent and run the Rooneys (and likely the Ralph Wilsons) out of the league.

 

Instead, the NFL and NFLPA agreed to a partnership which is reflected in the CBA which takes the more non-free market approach of restraining trade (there is a draft so talented players cannot market their services to the highest bidder, rules are set so players like Clarrett and Williams cannot enter the market until they reach an arbitrarily set age, the NFL/NFLPA agree to ban the use of legal substances like steroids even under a doctor's guidance).

 

Fans are actually demanding that the NFL/NFLPA go even further from a free markety approach and compensate teams when they lose free agents. Such compensation can happen in unique cases if you do a good job and manage risks (TD and the Peerless situation) but is not the norm and in many ways is against a free market approach.

 

The rules are that many players will walk without compensation when they reach FA status under the rules. Sometimes its hurts you (if Clements walks without compensation to the Bills) but sometimes it helps you big time (we got Spikes, Fletcher, and Posey giving up no players).

 

I tend to be a free market kind of guy, but I certainly that the more communistic restraints of trade inherent in the current NFL/NFLPA partnership produces a better football product than if we simply adopted a free market.