Poker
On the Game Day Roster
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2007
- Messages
- 299
- Reaction score
- 113
Great, insightful post as usual, Mo. Keep bringing it...
One interesting thing to think about is: Colts have had a tilted, offense-heavy spending strategy. Defense has been light, with fillins/rookies as you say. Pats have been more balanced across the board. This year, 2007, they have taken advantage, like in Moneyball or the stock market, of "special circumstances", with Moss/Stallworth contracts, to build a Colts-like offense without sacrificing the other pieces, and now, for oen year anyway, we may have built a football engine unlike anything seen in the hard-cap era. But unless the Patriots "winning mystique" is a sustainable advantage, meaning they can attract talent at below market cap prices, it may regress to a smaller advantage like in other years.
QUOTE=MoLewisrocks;574515]We run a much more complex defense, which is why BB prefers veteran presence however much less "cost effective", and have had a lot more success running it than Indy has had running theirs - which at the end of the day is what counts. They don't award Lombardis for developing your own talent. Besides which, Indy lets much of it go once the I'm developed bill comes due. The team Bill Polian constructed needed more than HFA, as the Steelers proved in 2005, they needed some matchup breaks to get their lone ring in 9 years with Peyton and Polian and 5 years with St. Dungy.
Right now they have 14 players on their roster who never took an NFL snap prior to this season including all 9 players they drafted in 2007. It's not something they were thrilled to do, it's what they had to do in part because of the way their roster is compensated/constructed and in part because Polian hasn't had much success with veteran acquisitions. Simon cost him $13M for 13 games and is still on the cap. They traded a 2007 2nd rounder for Booger McFarland in 2006 and he landed on IR this August at a cap cost of $5.5M.
We have 6 players on our roster with cap hits in excess of $4M. The Colts have 11. We have 21 players with cap hits in excess of $2M (our upper middle class so to speak). The Colts have 9. We have a handful of players on our roster making league minimum salaries. They have a bundle. If they again get matched up in the playoffs against teams that can't mount any kind of sustained offense or whose defense is below average or severaly impacted by illness or injury when they meet, then the model will likely work just fine once again. If on the other hand they face a matchup with an offense that can put up some points combined with a defense that can sustain physically disrupting their offense, they are back to bridesmaids. There is probably not an NFC team they couldn't handle. There are a couple in the AFC they would likely find themselves in a dog fight to get past. Pittsburgh, who beat them at home in the 2005 AFCC, NE who had them on the ropes through the first half in the 2006 AFCC before fatigue and the flu and a second tier receiving corps took it's toll, and SD if they do really get their heads on straight and play up to their paper talent.
They don't have a lot of battle tested depth. Their prior depth stepped up this season to assume starter roles when their home grown predecessors were allowed to walk. Addai is backed up by a kid from the CFL (another non draftee I guess), but I'm not sure they have a 3rd or 4th let alone 5th RB option on the roster if the injury bug bites hard. Same with their depth all across the defense, which they have already had to dip into when their starting MLB went on IR. If one of the WR or Clark goes down, not sure what how much damage that offense can inflict. They have been relatively lucky, comparatively speaking, on the injury front for the last couple of seasons. They were able to cover for Stokley because Harrison, Wayne and Clark are durable and Gonzalez is now in place. They were able to manage Sanders to get the most from his limited availability by using him against us and shelving him facing a weak schedule until the playoffs. Quite a few of their key pieces including Sanders got dinged up in week 5 but the game was well in hand and they've had a bye to get better. Now they face three extremely physical defenses in a row, two on the road, so we'll see if their luck holds out. Only one of those teams legitimately has the offense to hang with them though.
BTW there isn't much room left to restructure the Manning and Harrison deals because of all their previous restructures (which along with backloading Freeney's extension almost entirely account for the excess they will roll over this year). Deals for others will be creaping into backloadedness too and have to begin to be pushed out as a result unless a cash costly extension is forthcoming for Manning. His cap numbers for the last 3 years of his deal are $18-21M, with a little something already sitting in the to be voided years of that original 9 year but really a 7 year deal. And Sanders is up in 2008 (I believe if he voids 2009) and Clark is up shortly thereafter.
And lets not forget, Polian's system failed to meet the ultimate test until 5 years into an experiment to see if Tony Dungy could do more with less if they could just get favorable playoff and SB matchups. In the regular season in a weak division, he's da balls.
No system is perfect. I still prefer ours to theirs over the long haul.[/QUOTE]
One interesting thing to think about is: Colts have had a tilted, offense-heavy spending strategy. Defense has been light, with fillins/rookies as you say. Pats have been more balanced across the board. This year, 2007, they have taken advantage, like in Moneyball or the stock market, of "special circumstances", with Moss/Stallworth contracts, to build a Colts-like offense without sacrificing the other pieces, and now, for oen year anyway, we may have built a football engine unlike anything seen in the hard-cap era. But unless the Patriots "winning mystique" is a sustainable advantage, meaning they can attract talent at below market cap prices, it may regress to a smaller advantage like in other years.
QUOTE=MoLewisrocks;574515]We run a much more complex defense, which is why BB prefers veteran presence however much less "cost effective", and have had a lot more success running it than Indy has had running theirs - which at the end of the day is what counts. They don't award Lombardis for developing your own talent. Besides which, Indy lets much of it go once the I'm developed bill comes due. The team Bill Polian constructed needed more than HFA, as the Steelers proved in 2005, they needed some matchup breaks to get their lone ring in 9 years with Peyton and Polian and 5 years with St. Dungy.
Right now they have 14 players on their roster who never took an NFL snap prior to this season including all 9 players they drafted in 2007. It's not something they were thrilled to do, it's what they had to do in part because of the way their roster is compensated/constructed and in part because Polian hasn't had much success with veteran acquisitions. Simon cost him $13M for 13 games and is still on the cap. They traded a 2007 2nd rounder for Booger McFarland in 2006 and he landed on IR this August at a cap cost of $5.5M.
We have 6 players on our roster with cap hits in excess of $4M. The Colts have 11. We have 21 players with cap hits in excess of $2M (our upper middle class so to speak). The Colts have 9. We have a handful of players on our roster making league minimum salaries. They have a bundle. If they again get matched up in the playoffs against teams that can't mount any kind of sustained offense or whose defense is below average or severaly impacted by illness or injury when they meet, then the model will likely work just fine once again. If on the other hand they face a matchup with an offense that can put up some points combined with a defense that can sustain physically disrupting their offense, they are back to bridesmaids. There is probably not an NFC team they couldn't handle. There are a couple in the AFC they would likely find themselves in a dog fight to get past. Pittsburgh, who beat them at home in the 2005 AFCC, NE who had them on the ropes through the first half in the 2006 AFCC before fatigue and the flu and a second tier receiving corps took it's toll, and SD if they do really get their heads on straight and play up to their paper talent.
They don't have a lot of battle tested depth. Their prior depth stepped up this season to assume starter roles when their home grown predecessors were allowed to walk. Addai is backed up by a kid from the CFL (another non draftee I guess), but I'm not sure they have a 3rd or 4th let alone 5th RB option on the roster if the injury bug bites hard. Same with their depth all across the defense, which they have already had to dip into when their starting MLB went on IR. If one of the WR or Clark goes down, not sure what how much damage that offense can inflict. They have been relatively lucky, comparatively speaking, on the injury front for the last couple of seasons. They were able to cover for Stokley because Harrison, Wayne and Clark are durable and Gonzalez is now in place. They were able to manage Sanders to get the most from his limited availability by using him against us and shelving him facing a weak schedule until the playoffs. Quite a few of their key pieces including Sanders got dinged up in week 5 but the game was well in hand and they've had a bye to get better. Now they face three extremely physical defenses in a row, two on the road, so we'll see if their luck holds out. Only one of those teams legitimately has the offense to hang with them though.
BTW there isn't much room left to restructure the Manning and Harrison deals because of all their previous restructures (which along with backloading Freeney's extension almost entirely account for the excess they will roll over this year). Deals for others will be creaping into backloadedness too and have to begin to be pushed out as a result unless a cash costly extension is forthcoming for Manning. His cap numbers for the last 3 years of his deal are $18-21M, with a little something already sitting in the to be voided years of that original 9 year but really a 7 year deal. And Sanders is up in 2008 (I believe if he voids 2009) and Clark is up shortly thereafter.
And lets not forget, Polian's system failed to meet the ultimate test until 5 years into an experiment to see if Tony Dungy could do more with less if they could just get favorable playoff and SB matchups. In the regular season in a weak division, he's da balls.
No system is perfect. I still prefer ours to theirs over the long haul.[/QUOTE]
