EXCELLENT Article on Free Agency

I could see DeAngelo Williams fitting that description, and certainly Ronnie Brown/Ricky Williams, but honestly I don't see Ahmad Bradshaw fitting it. It's just hard for me to see it being a good argument when all the guys he names I can sit back and honestly say that I didn't think those people deserved money when they got it.

 

Curtis Martin.

 

Please name a free agency that involved 450 free agents because of CBA issues.

 

Michael Turner, Derrick Ward ( who was clearly miscast in Tampa, he found a nice fit in Texas) LT.

Real issue here is FA Rb's are rarely signed in the first place, they are traded or retire or what have you, looking solely at FA is a bit of a shuck.

 

Michael Turner

 

LT
Ricky Williams did he is still active. Was a trade though never mind.
Woodhead ? He was a freebee though.

 

The Jets signed LaDainian Tomlinson as a free agent this year. I'm quite sure they don't regret that. He accounted for 1442 rushing and receiving yards to go along with 9 TDs en route to yet another AFC Championship Game appearance.

Barnwell talked about Thomas Jones' free agent addition to the Bears and how that was worth every penny and then some.

But what about how the Bears traded Jones to the Jets for a little bit better draft position in the 2nd round, with the Jets giving Jones an immediate 4 year, $25 million extension? The Bears traded Jones because they didn't want to give him that extension. Jones ran for like 1100 yards in 2007 for the Jets, 1300 yards with a Pro Bowl in 2008, and 1500 yards in 2009. I bet the Jets are glad they didn't read Barnwell's article before giving Jones all that money.

And then Barnwell admitted another exception to his rule with Michael Turner. There sure do seem to be a lot of exceptions to his rule.

There's a LOT of holes in the way Barnwell took a look at this issue. He counts Mike Bell because he signed a $1.7 million contract? That's nothing. He counts Brandon Jacobs' re-signing with his own team? If that's the case he just opened the door to a WHOLE LOT of exceptions to his own "rule"...every time a team has given a contract extension to a successful back. I don't see the Rams complaining about extending their own Steven Jackson, for instance.

He's just manipulating and having his way with his examples, making them sound good (as long as you don't think about it too hard) without really disclosing that his subjective rhetoric (e.g. LaDainian Tomlinson only played "passably well") and the whole hokey pokey dance that is his methodology would melt under the heat of even slight scrutiny.

 

Counted 9, T jones was named twice, Jacobs resigning with the Giants was not counted by me as it makes little sense./

Yep, that is his role, like Don Smith/Ken Davis used to do for the Bills.

His big yr, 08, 180 carries 1,000 yds at 5.0 a carry, in 09 in Tampa he had 114 carries for 3.6 yds, in Houston 50 carries for 6.3 yds per.

Tampa signed him to be a Feature back and he just isn't, limit his carries and he does fine.

 

I agree about Derrick Ward. He never should have gotten money. He was always the most uninteresting of the three runners in New York.

I think in addition to there being some examples of veteran runners allowed to switch teams, get paid and still thrive, like I said you also have to consider the whole lockout-enhanced free agency thing. Last year was an uncapped year and suddenly guys with 4 and 5 years accrued were not free agents anymore, they couldn't switch teams. Also, teams refused to give extensions to players because they wanted to know how the CBA was going to look before they did that. With the lockout lasting as long as it did, legitimately teams will only have 72 hours to try and remedy all that, re-signing their own. There will be free agents switching teams this year that you don't typically see. I see Ahmad Bradshaw as a prime example of exactly that kind of player. I see Sidney Rice as another, at the receiver position.

 

michael turner

edit: sorry i didnt see he was already mentioned, didnt read everything

what about cedric benson, sure better than in chicago

 

Yeah I wonder what Benson signed for in Cincinnati. Or maybe he was claimed off waivers and Barnwell would arbitrarily deem that not to count, even though I'm sure Benson is making more than a million a year.

I would be a little worried about DeAngelo Williams but still willing to do it. He's a veteran, I get the feeling he would have been a free agent regardless of any CBA issues, he's been in the league a little while, if he started dropping off the face of the earth at his next destination you just have to chalk it up and say yeah, you engaged in a risky practice and it came up bad.

Bradshaw though I think is a little different. The Giants have known they got something in him since they got him into camp in 2007. But they also had Brandon Jacobs and Derrick Ward. They brought him along slowly because of that, and now he's just reaching premium levels. Catching onto Bradshaw feels to me like catching onto a rising star rather than a falling one.

 

Marcus Allen

 

For two years, Jamaal Lewis. Michael Turner. Do you not see what he just did? Michael Turner was great, so to take away from the fact that he was the third leading rusher last year, he brought up some sabermetrics in DVOA. I doubt any GM looks at Turner's numbers vs. his DVOA and would say he isn't worth it.

No one but the Bucs thought Derrick Ward was worth that money. He got in on spot duty after Jacobs and was underwhelming then. You see how he brings up Jacobs to prove his point even though Jacobs went back to the same team and doesn't really apply here? He also misses the fact that Jacobs regained his job before Bradshaw was injured and rushed for 5.6 YPC.

Bringing up Leonard Weaver is stupid. He's a FB but he calls him a "hybrid back" to make his point as if a FB doesn't have the same responsibilities as a RB but seeking different results. Weaver was injured in a freak accident where his leg got messed up and had nothing to do with durability.

One thing to note, the guys who usually become free agents as RB's usually aren't that good or are old. Mike Bell was a number two behind Pierre Thomas. Chester Taylor was a number two back but he went to a system with an already good receiving and running back in Matt Forte. A lot of these signings were stupid by the teams rather than indictments on the players. Thomas Jones did not play as poorly as he makes it seems and when you're in the same backfield as Jamaal Charles, you don't need to get that much carries anyway. He also brings up Knowshon Moreno which doesn't have anything to do with the issue of free agency in order to give himself more negative things to say.

If he wants to talk about guys who re-signed with the same team (Brandon Jacobs), then he should bring up Marion Barber who went back to the Cowboys in 2007 and still played at a high level.

If you look at the caliber player they were before they got signed, you can clearly see they didn't deserve the money in the first place. In 2007, Ahman Green had just finished his 10th year in the league, barely ran for 1,000 yards and only managed 4.0 YPC. He's correlating Free Agency with running backs signed being bad. You'd have a stronger correlation with running backs being bad on one team, and continuing to be bad on another.

 

Corey Dillon

Code:

2003  29  CIN  ATT: 138 YDS: 541   TD: 2
2004  30  NE   ATT: 345 YDS: 1635  TD: 13
2005  31  NE   ATT: 209 YDS: 733   TD: 13
2006  32  NE   ATT: 199 YDS: 812   TD: 13

Oh, avg'd like 450 yds/yr receiving too in NE

 

I understand both sides of the argument and agree with it to an extent. Free agent running backs are definitely a crapshoot. You have to be wary of how much mileage each back has on them and with backs sometimes unproven and underused is better then a player at his peak or coming off a great year. Bradshaw was used very mildly the first two years with the Giants. It wasnt until the last two or three years that hes received any significant number of carries on a per game basis. Most of his time handling the rock those first two years was on special teams and much of the time he saw in the backfield was actually for blitz pick up. And you will see when/if we sign him, he is easily one of the top 2-3 backs in the league in blitz pickup.

Some of those backs he named were products of their system, one year wonders or at the tail ends of their careers. If you look at the names he mentions at the end of the running back segment its Ronnie Brown, Ricky Williams, and DeAngelo Williams. Ronnie and Ricky we know are plodders at this point. DeAngelo should have at least 2-3 good years left but at 28 who knows. Id still sign Williams because hes still an explosive back but I wouldn't want it to be longer then 4 years or so with a big cap hit.

Bradshaw fits exactly what we are missing: young, explosive, can make defenders miss. Thats why I listed him and Sidney Rice as my 1st and 2nd targets. Man, Id be doing backflips.

 

The issue with running backs is they have a very short shelf life. Finding a back that is good for more than 3 or 4 years is the exception rather than the rule. Everybody can name backs who were good for that long or longer, but compared to the number of backs who are good for one or two years and disappear, it's obvious that the odds are stacked against finding one of the few that are good for a long time. Subsequently, most FA backs who played well at their first stop are generally disappointments for their second teams. Like every thing else, it comes down to picking the "right" guy, but you're playing against long odds when you're paying big money to FA RBs.

 

Michael Vick