Quote
Ramsdude
Quote
zn
Quote
Ramsdude
Quote
zn
Bad approach.
You sign him now or pay A LOT more when he is a free agent with risk of losing him.
Bad approach? Is there a right approach? lol IMO, damned if you do, damned if you don't. What would people be saying if they gave him $16 mil or more now and he didn't perform well? I can imagine all the posts saying how we over paid a guy without knowing if he was right for the system.
I can also imagine all the posts if we sign him after the season if he does well saying we should of signed him earlier and we had to pay too much. It's a no win set up for the Rams. Damned if they do...damned if they don't.
Didn't Fisher get blasted for paying Foles too soon?!!
Also, maybe Cooks doesn't want to be signed now knowing he will have more leverage later if he performs well.
Yes. There is a right approach, or rather a better one. IMO.
I could give a darn about this presumed "leverage" thing btw, I think that's mostly just made up.
But it goes like this.
Contracts go up. They just do. They always do.
So whatever is the range to sign a WR up for a second contract is now...it will simply be more in 2019.
You sign him now or pay more in 2019.
This whole "what is a player worth" thing is abstract. It doesn't really mean anything. The major consideration is the market. As in, if I don't pay this, someone else will.
So if you wait until 2019, someone else could throw money at him, and make him more expensive. And if that happens, you could lose him and then have to find a receiver, PLUS you lost a 1st round pick on a one year rental.
So you look at the market and say this is what WRs up for a 2nd contract are getting, and pay it now, to avoid those 2 bad outcomes.
....
So do you think paying Foles as early as they did was the right approach?
Yes and I said so at the time.
When it comes to Cooks, it's either
1. You pay him now
Or
2. risk having to pay him a lot more, if not risk losing him, and that means they wasted a 1st round pick.
Yes IMO paying now is always the better policy.
You don't put a well-performing 4 year players in a prove it year. You do that with older players who were injured or have to demonstrate they can still play.
Will a player now and then get injured, or fall off in performance? Sure. But that's the better risk than having to pay everyone more because you can't tell when a player offers what you need and so you lock him up.
Why would you spend a 1st round pick on a player you were not sure about? Makes no sense.
.....
