Heath Evans thinks EVERY one of our draft picks will fail! What!?!

Yes. Have you looked at Miami's Cap? We're not Pittsburgh.

If Tannehill works out like it's hoped, we have this golden period of time where the most important position is vastly underpaid. Now is the time to spend more on his tools.

 

Miami's salary cap is the exact same as Pittsburgh's.

Spend more on his tools? Miami can't spend more than the NFL rules allow.

 

It just prohibits Miami from spending money on other players.

 

So? That doesn't change the situation that the teams are in. The Dolphins aren't trying to win with the same personnel and schemes as the Steelers. That isn't permitted. Teams are by design different.

 

Miami previously did not spend as much as Pitt so YES they can spend more than Pitt this year within the allotted cap. lol ok so let's play that game

 

Okay, I feel like you’re being obtuse on purpose at this point. Did you really not understand my points?

 

Why are you against spending money on players?

 

so yea you are right, let's double down and get 2 more or even 3 more Bess/Hartline/Gibsons and keep doing the same thing hoping it turns out different...

 

But going even further - not only are these things influenced by choices and decisions by the teams, but also by the availability and volatility of the players available. And the cost to sign those players at the exact locations in which the Steelers acquired them.

So maybe instead of getting completely meta with this conversation we can just allow that teams are constructed differently with different needs because of different circumstances and identify if Wallace was a bad signing in those parameters.

 

This doesn't make sense. Miami doesn't have a higher salary cap this year or any year in the future than any other NFL team. The signing of Mike Wallace inherently prohibits signing other players.

What if Keller, Grimes, Clabo, and Starks all have Pro Bowl seasons? Where is the money coming from to re-sign them? Would you say Miami just couldn't re-sign those guys because of bad luck? No, you should say they couldn't re-sign them because they chose to spend money on guys like Wallace.

 

I'm only against overpaying for players.

 

Yes, I do. You're trying to say that Pittsburgh wants to keep Mike Wallace, but they simply cannot afford to match Miami.

My point is that they chose not to make enough cap room available. It was a conscious and calculated choice. Just like Miami's choice to sign Wallace could very well preclude them from re-signing players in the future.

 

So you're in favor of rape? Famine? Genocide?

 

I'm referring to the post I quoted. Where you said:

Miami is spending $6 million on the QB position in cap space this year. Pittsburgh, $16M. Next year with no contract changes Miami $9M, Pittsburgh $21M. Do you really not get how that allows more money to be spent on other positions?

As for my overall point, let me restate it. Wallace has a different value cap wise to Miami than Pittsburgh. It's poor anaylsis to judge Miami's money spent as high or low based on what Pittsburgh was willing to spend.

 

Lets stay on topic here.

 

That still leaves Pittsburgh with $100M in cap space not allocated to the QB.

By all means if you have any detailed analysis on Mike Wallace's character, work habits, leadership, etc. feel free to share. As it stands the closest we have to identifying those qualities is the opinion of the team that has had a first hand look at him for his entire career.

 

"Overpaid" is a highly subjective term. Most players don't have a universal value, each team has different resources and priorities so it's entirely possible that a guy like Wallace could be worth more to Miami than he is to Pittsburgh, just as Kendall Langford, Jake Long, Jeff Fisher and Jared Cook were worth more to the Rams than they were to the Dolphins. That doesn't mean they were bad pickups as Evans seems to be suggesting.

 

Now your getting it! How much does it leave Miami? The same or different?

 

And by Evans' logic who ever signed them would get a bad deal because Miami didn't spend the money on them and must of had inside knowledge.

 

You can determine their value by their performance. I mean if Mike Wallace becomes the best WR in the NFL, he won't be overpaid.

 

Both teams have more than enough space to sign Mike Wallace plenty of times over.

 

Yes, if they hit the open market, they would almost assuredly receive more than they are worth. This isn't "Evans' logic", its pretty fundamental economic theory.

 

That wasn't the question.

 

Right, but the question itself was inherently flawed. You're insinuating that the Steelers essentially have less cap room to work with. They don't. They have the exact same as Miami.

 

Exactly, we would be letting those players leave due to the economic situation not because they are bad players or not worth what another team is offering. Just like Pitt may have let Wallace go because of economic conditions not because they didn't believe he was worth the money we paid him.

 

Or if he increases jersey/ticket sales. Again, it's all subjective and it's all irrelevant to the big picture. But you're smart enough to know this so I'll leave it at that. If you want to extend the thread a few more pages you'll have to find another chain to pull .

 

The economic situation isn't something that happens to a team. Its created by the team. Signing Mike Wallace to the contract Miami signed him to is a declaration of Miami's future intentions to a certain degree. Just like Pittsburgh was cognizant of the impact of signing Ike Taylor or Willie Colon to the contracts the gave them.

 

Jersey and ticket sales are subject to revenue sharing, so the impact of signing him is marginal. I suppose one could argue that he increased chances of getting the stadium referendum passed, but I'm skeptical.

 

Agreed and my point is that there are consideration other than just a players ability as to whether a team will sign him at market value. Pitt may not have offered Wallace as much as Miami due solely on how he fit into their finances rather than any inside knowledge on his abilities (which is what Evans was suggesting).

 

Nope. Your understanding is flawed. I am stating that with contracts signed the Steelers have and had less cap room to work with. Thats why we started with the QB contracts. It's appareant that I'm going to have to go position by position to prove that the Dolphins have more room under the cap right now. It's basic economics, net vs gross.

If, for example the Steelers want to keep big Ben they have to pay him more than Tannehill. They have no choice, the contracts are signed. You want to take that out of consideration. You cannot do that though. It's reality. They have to pay Ben to keep him, which necessitates them having less money to spend elsewhere as compared to the Dolphins and their rookie QB contract. The decisions you keep talking about aren’t made independent of one another. Any contract changes the amount available for the rest of the contracts. That’s why whether we over paid Wallace matters. We don’t have the same contracts as the Steelers. Using them as the baseline for our contracts is like making a house hold budget decision based on someone else’s expenses and needs.

Is Wallace worth the money? That determination has to come from Dolphins situation, not the Steelers. It doesn’t matter that the Steelers paid less for Brown. That option was not available for the Dolphins. Would singing Wallace mean that Pallamalluautomanyvowels has to be cut? Doesn’t matter to the Dolphins, nobody has to be cut. Etc...

 

You're missing the fundamental point behind winners curse. The Dolphins have less information than the Steelers when assessing Wallace's value. They are inherently making a less-informed decision.

 

Another factor is that Pittsburgh had Antonio Brown, who was willing to play for much less while Miami had nothing close to Wallace's skill set and was in dire need of a player who could stretch the field. If we had Brown on the roster then Wallace would have less value to us as well and I dont think we'd have offered him what we did. The idea that a player has a specific value across the board to all teams is naive. IMO Wallace improves Miami's team moreso than Pitts and probably moreso than just about any team in the NFL, but it's all subjective and anyone who says they know one way or the other probably has an axe to grind.

 

yes it does. you are being too literal in your WORDING. Miami has more room under the cap for spending this year. Pittsburg has less room under the cap. so Miami can spend more this year UNDER the cap and therefore afford to offer more to a player like Wallace than Pitt can. I can't believe you are being that obtuse...

 

I had a BMW I couldn't afford unless I gave up food, utilities and rent. I had to get rid of it. I can afford a used Corolla.

Heath Evans doesn't think anyone should buy that BMW. He's insightful and does research.

 

but that is exactly how Evans is judging our decision to pay for Wallace not on how he fits in Miami

 

That's what I'm saying. He didn't make this up. It's a fundamental economic concept.

He's saying Miami had incomplete information, so the decision made was ill-informed.

How could anyone know how he fits, without spending the requisite time around him? Can you judge a potential wife based off a few meetings?

 

Only applies to auctions.

 

yes. Miami has the same all round amount of cap space as Pitt and based on spending can still have more money to spend under the cap. in other words by maneuvering and arranging and previous spending Miami has created more cap space to spend more money than say Pitt may be able due to their previous spending maneuvering and arranging. so I am not insinuating anything. NOT EVERY TEAM HAS THE SAME CAP ROOM. every team has the same basic limit but not the same room.

 

oh wow... no. he said Miami screwed up because they paid more than anyone else to obtain his services and made assumtions about his character and talent by saying he had inside info from Pitt. Miami may not have the same info that Pitt did but I'm pretty sure they did their homework in the scouting department. and everything that Evans says about Wallace from Pitt does not match what Tomlin and Big Ben have said about Wallace. the fact is only time will tell if this was a good move or not. not the means that Miami used to gain his services.

 

I'm not missing that, I'm giving it less relevance than you, and it's an entirely different argument than "everyone has the same salary cap".

I'm doing this for a couple of reasons. I believe the reports that they offered wallace more than brown last year. He was valued by the steelers, and was I believe, their first choice. Given the difference between the teams situations, I can see miami paying $millions more a year for the same player and it being worth it. Ryan is not Ben. He needs more help, and miami can afford it.

This doesn't mean I'm sold on wallace. Independent of the steelers, I wonder about the fit. The coaches preach wrs that can do anything well. Wallace seems more of a specialist, a specialty that we need, but not what the coaches seem to want. I think that if tannehill isn't on his rookie contract they don't pay him what they did.

Sent from my SGH-T959V using Tapatalk 2