- Joined
- May 1, 2008
- Messages
- 21,686
- Reaction score
- 13,824
I understand your rationale, but we have limited $$ to spend. I'd rather prioritize and allocate accordingly. We've gone into a draft before relatively barren at a position (TE in 2010, in a deep TE draft, as this one is) and we've also found that having a "complete team" may be an illusion (e.g., Donald Jones and Michael Jenkins at WR last year). I'd rather spend my money on quality additions and address some holes in a very deep and strong draft than try and address all needs in FA and come out with a diluted talent pool.
Who exactly would you target in FA to address these needs, so that we go into the draft as a "complete team", how much do you estimate the cost of those targets to be, and how do you plan to cover that cost given all the other needs?
Who exactly would you target in FA to address these needs, so that we go into the draft as a "complete team", how much do you estimate the cost of those targets to be, and how do you plan to cover that cost given all the other needs?
I agree with your analysis.
My only nitpick is my personal bias against going into the draft hoping that your will be able to get draftees to meet a particular need and have them contribute as rookies. You have a fine plan to allocate two picks to DE and to fill that need.
My idea is that we go into the draft with a complete team, perhaps with one major need (likely to be TE this year). This gives the flexibility to pick the best valued player at a position of need whenever we pick.












