03-09-2016, 09:35 PM
(03-09-2016, 09:22 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Never said that, but congrats on taking it to the far extreme opposite.
What I would rather have is worrying about winning in 2016 more than worrying about potential picks that you may or may not get in 2017 that may or may not produce an NFL caliber player. If you so happen to get one or two while making the best possible roster you can that year, great, it's a small bonus. But refraining from making the best possible roster you can for the sole reason of trying to horde them for two seasons from now, not great.
Sustainability is great and all, unless you're trading actually trying to win for it.
If you hit on a draft pick and have the guy under control for 4+ years under rookie wage and then a tag. That beats the hell out of overpaying with one of these monster contracts.
According to Hobson we were right there with the money for Jones. They had something we couldn't offer. A giant hole at their #1 WR spot. Everybody knew it was a weak class. Hence why Marvin got 40million and Sanu is supposedly getting 7mil a year.
I don't think overpaying for leftovers is "trading actually trying to win."
We need a #2 WR and we have a whole draft ahead of us plus more than the first 3.5 hours of free agency.
Sanu and MJ were 3rd and 5th round picks. They are replaceable.
