The more I think about BB and his options with Hightower, Ryan, Butler... the more confused I get. I can see a scenario where he brings them all back, brings 1 or 2 back, or lets all 3 walk (after Butler plays out his deal + tag). The reason is because of the surplus value you get with contracts for upper tier guys coming off their rookie deals.
Baseball can measure surplus value of a contract by using WAR (Wins Above Replacement). But football doesn't have such a metric due to the inherent differences in the games... those inherent differences also make me take every PFF ranking/stat with a gigantic chunk of salt. Baseball is a succession of individual 1-on-1's in similar circumstances. Many constants and few variables. Large samples of data because starters have 600 outcomes/year on offense. That is easy to study scientifically. Football is all situational... down and distance, scheme, exploiting matchups, effectiveness of pass rush on CB play, quality of in-game adjustments by coaching staff... you can go on and on and all impacts production/performance of a player. Data samples are small.
So I don't think there is a metric that can compare the value of a contract with a player's impact on a team. Too many variables to model and be accurate. But we know from our eye test that Edelman has outplayed his contract. Gronk too. Branch. We can go on and on. But those 1st 2 guys were extended early which cost them a shot at true market value later (the team took on some risk), and Branch was a vet cut seemingly on the downside of his career. Those are obvious surplus values, and there are many more I didn't mention.
But what about our only current market value guys on his 2nd contract... Solder & McCourty? DMc is the better argument given his consistent, durable Pro Bowl quality play thru his 2nd contract so far. About all we could ask for when he signed on the dotted line. But the question is... has this near perfect outcome produced any surplus value? If you pay a guy to be a top Safety in the game, he has to be a top Safety in the game to make it worthwhile. Unless he is head and shoulders above the next guy, there may not actually be any surplus value with McCourty. Not a knock on him at all, just trying to make the point that you need a near perfect outcome to make a top of the market contract worth it. And even then you likely only get even value... little/no opportunity for upside. If there was an accurate metric for surplus value, I think the Pats would lead the league by a good margin, and much of that comes from players other than those we fans salivate after like Hightower, Ryan, Butler.
BB paid McCourty because he was stuck... there was nothing in the cupboard that had a prayer of doing the job. You can abandon the quest for value here and there when need trumps value by a healthy margin. It worked, and it might work again with 1/2/3 of the key 2nd contract guys. But I question whether the cupboard is bare at those positions like it was with McCourty. None of us fans can evaluate if there is another Malcolm Butler ready to emerge at CB or LB, but the Pats probably know. They may see something different in the under-contract group of KVN, McLellin, Roberts, Freeny than we do. We all thought they were nuts going with what they had at OL going into the 2014 SB year.
Lots more to expand on, but this has already gotten long... main point is, the more I think about it, the more I wonder if the possibility is turning into likelihood of letting Hightower and Ryan walk, and taking their 3rd round comp picks (Ryan may be 4th, should be close) rather than hoping for health and even value on those deals in the best case scenario. They still have plenty of time to decide on anything with Butler unless he agrees to an early extension that makes both sides happy. Thoughts?
Baseball can measure surplus value of a contract by using WAR (Wins Above Replacement). But football doesn't have such a metric due to the inherent differences in the games... those inherent differences also make me take every PFF ranking/stat with a gigantic chunk of salt. Baseball is a succession of individual 1-on-1's in similar circumstances. Many constants and few variables. Large samples of data because starters have 600 outcomes/year on offense. That is easy to study scientifically. Football is all situational... down and distance, scheme, exploiting matchups, effectiveness of pass rush on CB play, quality of in-game adjustments by coaching staff... you can go on and on and all impacts production/performance of a player. Data samples are small.
So I don't think there is a metric that can compare the value of a contract with a player's impact on a team. Too many variables to model and be accurate. But we know from our eye test that Edelman has outplayed his contract. Gronk too. Branch. We can go on and on. But those 1st 2 guys were extended early which cost them a shot at true market value later (the team took on some risk), and Branch was a vet cut seemingly on the downside of his career. Those are obvious surplus values, and there are many more I didn't mention.
But what about our only current market value guys on his 2nd contract... Solder & McCourty? DMc is the better argument given his consistent, durable Pro Bowl quality play thru his 2nd contract so far. About all we could ask for when he signed on the dotted line. But the question is... has this near perfect outcome produced any surplus value? If you pay a guy to be a top Safety in the game, he has to be a top Safety in the game to make it worthwhile. Unless he is head and shoulders above the next guy, there may not actually be any surplus value with McCourty. Not a knock on him at all, just trying to make the point that you need a near perfect outcome to make a top of the market contract worth it. And even then you likely only get even value... little/no opportunity for upside. If there was an accurate metric for surplus value, I think the Pats would lead the league by a good margin, and much of that comes from players other than those we fans salivate after like Hightower, Ryan, Butler.
BB paid McCourty because he was stuck... there was nothing in the cupboard that had a prayer of doing the job. You can abandon the quest for value here and there when need trumps value by a healthy margin. It worked, and it might work again with 1/2/3 of the key 2nd contract guys. But I question whether the cupboard is bare at those positions like it was with McCourty. None of us fans can evaluate if there is another Malcolm Butler ready to emerge at CB or LB, but the Pats probably know. They may see something different in the under-contract group of KVN, McLellin, Roberts, Freeny than we do. We all thought they were nuts going with what they had at OL going into the 2014 SB year.
Lots more to expand on, but this has already gotten long... main point is, the more I think about it, the more I wonder if the possibility is turning into likelihood of letting Hightower and Ryan walk, and taking their 3rd round comp picks (Ryan may be 4th, should be close) rather than hoping for health and even value on those deals in the best case scenario. They still have plenty of time to decide on anything with Butler unless he agrees to an early extension that makes both sides happy. Thoughts?