Mo spoke of this on his show yesterday, but it makes much more sense when you are able to see the chart.

I am not saying that I never want the Bengals to spend on a FA, but this shows that the way they have been doing things is paying off.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2016/winning-nfl-free-agency-a-mythical-trojan-horse

(02-24-2017, 10:14 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Mo spoke of this on his show yesterday, but it makes much more sense when you are able to see the chart.

I am not saying that I never want the Bengals to spend on a FA, but this shows that the way they have been doing things is paying off.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2016/winning-nfl-free-agency-a-mythical-trojan-horse

I'm definitely ok with not over spending like some teams do year in/year out, but it would be nice to try and find 1 or 2 good free agents from time to time.

what we consistently do is retain below average players who eat up cap space preventing us from keeping some of our better players and signing a truly high quality free agent or two each season.

why are Bodine, Ray M, Michael Johnson and Jones still on this team?

Once a player signs a contract with the Benagals , do any of them ever fear they might be cut if they under perform? No- because it never happens.

Broncos just cut their under performing tackle to have the money to sign Whit.

We woould never consider this.

(02-24-2017, 12:11 PM)bengals67 Wrote: what we consistently do is retain below average players who eat up cap space preventing us from keeping some of our better players and signing a truly high quality free agent or two each season.

why are Bodine, Ray M, Michael Johnson and Jones still on this team?

Once a player signs a contract with the Benagals , do any of them ever fear they might be cut if they under perform? No- because it never happens.

Broncos just cut their under performing tackle to have the money to sign Whit.

We woould never consider this.

Question - If the Bengals lose Whitworth and Zeitler, would players like Okung and Warmack be satisfactory consolation prizes? Sure, they aren't as good as Whitworth and Zeitler, but probably better than Ogbuehi at LT and a draft pick at RG. Plus both would likely be more in the price range that the Bengals FO think is reasonable.

I'm not saying the Bengals should spend crazy in free agency but adding a quality/ impact player such as Alex Mack every once and awhile could put you over the hump. The problem with free agency is that average players get paid top dollar just because their the best at their position in their free agency class and not a top 3-5 player at their position in the league. It's the team's the job to determine weather the player is worth the money vs being desperate and reaching because of need. For example if you evaluated Mack as a free agent, you can see from his play that he was dominate and one of the best players at his position in the league not just the best of his free agency class. If you evaluated Byron Maxwell coming out as a free agent you could see that he benefited from playing with Sherman, Thomas, Chancellor and a great pass rush. The Eagles paid Maxwell like he was one of the best CB's in the league when he wan't because they were desperate. Then people point to these bust signings as an example of why free agency is bad. If you draft well and sign a free agent who is worth the money every now and then it wont kill you. The problem is some them's rely to much on free agency and sign 2nd and 3rd tier guys to top dollar contracts.

(02-24-2017, 12:11 PM)bengals67 Wrote: what we consistently do is retain below average players who eat up cap space preventing us from keeping some of our better players and signing a truly high quality free agent or two each season.

why are Bodine, Ray M, Michael Johnson and Jones still on this team?

Once a player signs a contract with the Benagals , do any of them ever fear they might be cut if they under perform? No- because it never happens.

Broncos just cut their under performing tackle to have the money to sign Whit.

We woould never consider this.

These were not below average players when we signed them .... also Bodine if im not mistaken is on a rookie contract .. you are over generalizing.. as for cutting players..  I believe Hawk signed for two years and was cut after one year.. I believe Dansby is on a 2 year contract and could be cut this year.. so yes it does happen but it is rare.. but as a whole it has worked pretty good for the organization overall in the last 6 years in winning and being competitive in the NFL.. maybe they might have to shift their thinking as they are getting players more and more over 30 but they have signed some key players in their 20s to contracts.. so i would not say we are losing all our key pieces.

(02-24-2017, 01:29 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: These were not below average players when we signed them .... also Bodine if im not mistaken is on a rookie contract .. you are over generalizing.. as for cutting players..  I believe Hawk signed for two years and was cut after one year.. I believe Dansby is on a 2 year contract and could be cut this year.. so yes it does happen but it is rare.. but as a whole it has worked pretty good for the organization overall in the last 6 years in winning and being competitive in the NFL.. maybe they might have to shift their thinking as they are getting players more and more over 30 but they have signed some key players in their 20s to contracts.. so i would not say we are losing all our key pieces.

Dansby was on a 1-year deal. He'll be a FA in March.

(02-24-2017, 12:11 PM)bengals67 Wrote: what we consistently do is retain below average players who eat up cap space preventing us from keeping some of our better players and signing a truly high quality free agent or two each season.

why are Bodine, Ray M, Michael Johnson and Jones still on this team?

Once a player signs a contract with the Benagals , do any of them ever fear they might be cut if they under perform? No- because it never happens.

Broncos just cut their under performing tackle to have the money to sign Whit.

We woould never consider this.

Agree   would be nice to hang on to our more talented players that WE drafted like Zeitler and Whit so we can use draft picks elsewhere while Fisher, Westerman and OG develop. I dont get it with Zeitler, If Brown dosent value the G position then why the hell did he draft one in the first? Zeitler has proved his worth. The thing I hate about this team is the loyalty Brown has with below average players. We wait way too long to not just replace but just to attempt to replace someone. You can throw Peko in that list also.

(02-24-2017, 12:11 PM)bengals67 Wrote: what we consistently do is retain below average players who eat up cap space preventing us from keeping some of our better players and signing a truly high quality free agent or two each season.

why are Bodine, Ray M, Michael Johnson and Jones still on this team?

Once a player signs a contract with the Benagals , do any of them ever fear they might be cut if they under perform? No- because it never happens.

Broncos just cut their under performing tackle to have the money to sign Whit.

We woould never consider this.

Nice post, this is the problem with the way this team does things.

They hold onto mediocrity, even though MJ and Adam were not mediocre before last year.

Then they hold no one accountable for their poor coaching or poor play.

(02-24-2017, 12:46 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Question - If the Bengals lose Whitworth and Zeitler, would players like Okung and Warmack be satisfactory consolation prizes? Sure, they aren't as good as Whitworth and Zeitler, but probably better than Ogbuehi at LT and a draft pick at RG. Plus both would likely be more in the price range that the Bengals FO think is reasonable.

All for it Ocho, even though i doubt PA could coach these guys up at all and both would probably regress in run blocking.

Still better than rookies for PA to not coach up.

Correlation vs causation. It's not that free agency causes teams to lose. Teams that typically lose, typically have fewer players worthy of retaining - and hence more money to splurge in free agency. Using FA to fix a bad team overnight rarely - if ever - works, so it's likely that these types of teams continue to lose. This does not mean that FA should be avoided like the plague, or that a few calculated and intelligent FA moves can't help a good team get over the top.

This article is about teams that "win free agency". I've yet to see anyone asking the Bengals to do that. Pretty much every championship team over the last 25 years has benefitted greatly from a FA acquisition or a trade. This is undeniable really. It's not about "winning free agency", it's about dumping dead weight and making a smart move to get a solid player or two that greatly benefit the team. Think of the Patriots renting Revis for a championship run. Or renting a Martellus Bennett as a great insurance policy for their oft-injured star TE. These are just a couple of the hundreds of examples of successful pickups through the years.

(02-24-2017, 03:02 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Correlation vs causation. It's not that free agency causes teams to lose. Teams that typically lose, typically have fewer players worthy of retaining - and hence more money to splurge in free agency. Using FA to fix a bad team overnight rarely - if ever - works, so it's likely that these types of teams continue to lose. This does not mean that FA should be avoided like the plague, or that a few calculated and intelligent FA moves can't help a good team get over the top.

This article is about teams that "win free agency". I've yet to see anyone asking the Bengals to do that. Pretty much every championship team over the last 25 years has benefitted greatly from a FA acquisition or a trade. This is undeniable really. It's not about "winning free agency", it's about dumping dead weight and making a smart move to get a solid player or two that greatly benefit the team. Think of the Patriots renting Revis for a championship run. Or renting a Martellus Bennett as a great insurance policy for their oft-injured star TE. These are just a couple of the hundreds of examples of successful pickups through the years.

Nice post Shake. This is just the thing, we don't have a bad team. We still have a good team that could get over the top
with a few good FA moves from what i see. All we have to do is keep our foundation strong. Keeping Whitworth and Dre
would do this. Then you could add a cheap Center like Wisnewski to compete with Bodine and add a guy like Warmack
for competition at RG since Zeit is as good as gone.

Get Fairley at DT and let the dead weight of Peko go. Add Sean Spence and let the dead weight of Maualuga go...

The Draft is freed up and we are looking damn good barring injuries.

(02-24-2017, 03:02 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Correlation vs causation. It's not that free agency causes teams to lose. Teams that typically lose, typically have fewer players worthy of retaining - and hence more money to splurge in free agency. Using FA to fix a bad team overnight rarely - if ever - works, so it's likely that these types of teams continue to lose. This does not mean that FA should be avoided like the plague, or that a few calculated and intelligent FA moves can't help a good team get over the top.

This article is about teams that "win free agency". I've yet to see anyone asking the Bengals to do that. Pretty much every championship team over the last 25 years has benefitted greatly from a FA acquisition or a trade. This is undeniable really. It's not about "winning free agency", it's about dumping dead weight and making a smart move to get a solid player or two that greatly benefit the team. Think of the Patriots renting Revis for a championship run. Or renting a Martellus Bennett as a great insurance policy for their oft-injured star TE. These are just a couple of the hundreds of examples of successful pickups through the years.

I want to make this my new sig. Great stuff as usual Shake.

(02-24-2017, 12:46 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Question - If the Bengals lose Whitworth and Zeitler, would players like Okung and Warmack be satisfactory consolation prizes? Sure, they aren't as good as Whitworth and Zeitler, but probably better than Ogbuehi at LT and a draft pick at RG. Plus both would likely be more in the price range that the Bengals FO think is reasonable.

Satisfactory? I wouldn't go that far. Let's be honest. If Whit and Z leave to sign big deals elsewhere, the Bengals will not want to mess with any chance at getting 2 (potential) 3rd round compensatory picks in 2018. That's how our FO rolls. Okung and Warmack would have to come here on 1-year prove it deals to even be considered by the Bengals.

(02-24-2017, 10:34 AM)Crowe Wrote: I'm definitely ok with not over spending like some teams do year in/year out, but it would be nice to try and find 1 or 2 good free agents from time to time.

Completely agree...I would love to see the savings from Zeitler not being signed and Adam Jones being released on Prince Amukamura and Terrelle Pryor...our team would be dramatically improved (IMHO) for roughly the same money.  

(02-24-2017, 12:11 PM)bengals67 Wrote: what we consistently do is retain below average players who eat up cap space preventing us from keeping some of our better players and signing a truly high quality free agent or two each season.

why are Bodine, Ray M, Michael Johnson and Jones still on this team?

Once a player signs a contract with the Benagals , do any of them ever fear they might be cut if they under perform? No- because it never happens.

Broncos just cut their under performing tackle to have the money to sign Whit.

We woould never consider this.

Exactly !

(02-24-2017, 03:02 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Correlation vs causation. It's not that free agency causes teams to lose. Teams that typically lose, typically have fewer players worthy of retaining - and hence more money to splurge in free agency. Using FA to fix a bad team overnight rarely - if ever - works, so it's likely that these types of teams continue to lose. This does not mean that FA should be avoided like the plague, or that a few calculated and intelligent FA moves can't help a good team get over the top.

This article is about teams that "win free agency". I've yet to see anyone asking the Bengals to do that. Pretty much every championship team over the last 25 years has benefitted greatly from a FA acquisition or a trade. This is undeniable really. It's not about "winning free agency", it's about dumping dead weight and making a smart move to get a solid player or two that greatly benefit the team. Think of the Patriots renting Revis for a championship run. Or renting a Martellus Bennett as a great insurance policy for their oft-injured star TE. These are just a couple of the hundreds of examples of successful pickups through the years.

And exactly again !

No one wants the Bengals to pull a Redskins and go out and buy a team. It's been proven time and again that doesn't work. On the other hand picking up a piece or two when you're close to fill a hole has very much worked.

No team has ever been perfect in the draft, there's plenty of misses there as well, cough (Ogbuehi) cough. Now is the time if there's ever been one for this team to roll the dice on a couple upper level FA's and cut the dead weight.

I have very little faith they actually will.

(02-24-2017, 12:46 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Question - If the Bengals lose Whitworth and Zeitler, would players like Okung and Warmack be satisfactory consolation prizes? Sure, they aren't as good as Whitworth and Zeitler, but probably better than Ogbuehi at LT and a draft pick at RG. Plus both would likely be more in the price range that the Bengals FO think is reasonable.

And then we go backwards from 6-9-1.  And the team's core gets maybe too far away to ever get to a SB, or even win a playoff game.

(02-24-2017, 10:14 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Mo spoke of this on his show yesterday, but it makes much more sense when you are able to see the chart.

I am not saying that I never want the Bengals to spend on a FA, but this shows that the way they have been doing things is paying off.

http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.com/blog/2016/winning-nfl-free-agency-a-mythical-trojan-horse

That chart Cherry picks 3 of the years the Bengals were good.

The fact is that they haven't won a playoff game in 26+ years. The strategy is broke.

Just imagine if they upgraded the Center position with a guy like Alex Mack. Maybe 1 or 2 free agents would have put them over the top?

(02-24-2017, 03:02 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Correlation vs causation. It's not that free agency causes teams to lose. Teams that typically lose, typically have fewer players worthy of retaining - and hence more money to splurge in free agency. Using FA to fix a bad team overnight rarely - if ever - works, so it's likely that these types of teams continue to lose. This does not mean that FA should be avoided like the plague, or that a few calculated and intelligent FA moves can't help a good team get over the top.

This article is about teams that "win free agency". I've yet to see anyone asking the Bengals to do that. Pretty much every championship team over the last 25 years has benefitted greatly from a FA acquisition or a trade. This is undeniable really. It's not about "winning free agency", it's about dumping dead weight and making a smart move to get a solid player or two that greatly benefit the team. Think of the Patriots renting Revis for a championship run. Or renting a Martellus Bennett as a great insurance policy for their oft-injured star TE. These are just a couple of the hundreds of examples of successful pickups through the years.

Exactly. It's not like I want the Bengals to go sign a $12 million a year free agent. I'm talking about upgrading a position of need like Center with a guy like Stefan Wisienewski that made $1.5 million last year!

Or a guy like Ronald Leary from Dallas if Zeitler leaves. Just whatever they do...don't roll with Westerman at Guard next to Bodine and Ced.

(02-24-2017, 03:02 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Correlation vs causation. It's not that free agency causes teams to lose. Teams that typically lose, typically have fewer players worthy of retaining - and hence more money to splurge in free agency. Using FA to fix a bad team overnight rarely - if ever - works, so it's likely that these types of teams continue to lose. This does not mean that FA should be avoided like the plague, or that a few calculated and intelligent FA moves can't help a good team get over the top.

This article is about teams that "win free agency". I've yet to see anyone asking the Bengals to do that. Pretty much every championship team over the last 25 years has benefitted greatly from a FA acquisition or a trade. This is undeniable really. It's not about "winning free agency", it's about dumping dead weight and making a smart move to get a solid player or two that greatly benefit the team. Think of the Patriots renting Revis for a championship run. Or renting a Martellus Bennett as a great insurance policy for their oft-injured star TE. These are just a couple of the hundreds of examples of successful pickups through the years.

Basically what I came in here to say. I know we're both solidly on the same page on this topic.

Bad team + Big FA = Still a bad team.
Good team + 1 great FA/a few good FA = Great team.

Adding to your examples of the Patriots, the Seahawks when they won theirs had signed both of their DEs in FA. The Broncos signed quite a few people in FA for their two recent SB appearances and one win (Manning/Welker/Sanders/Talib/etc).

The whole key to that article is it was about teams coming off back-to-back losing seasons. Of course they are going to lose, they suck. FA just pushes you from good to great, not from gutter to great.... but I am sure that won't keep a couple people from telling others "derp da derp Haynesworth" or something like that when people express a desire for the Bengals to actually improve for once in FA rather than get worse, or at best maintain their level.

(02-24-2017, 12:11 PM)bengals67 Wrote: what we consistently do is retain below average players who eat up cap space preventing us from keeping some of our better players and signing a truly high quality free agent or two each season.

why are Bodine, Ray M, Michael Johnson and Jones still on this team?

Bodine was given three years to develop.  That is not unreasonable at all.  If you looked at what other teams do instead of just criticizing everything the Bengals do you would realize that it is very rare for a team to cut a draft pick after just 2 seasons.

Rey was never as bad as some fans claimed, but he could have been replaced by now.

Michael Johnson is one of the top 30-35 DEs in the league and is paid accordingly.  We could not replace his production for the same price on the free agent market.

Jones is one of our best CBs.  He was actually one of the top 5 CBs in the league when he signed his current contract after the 15 season.

(02-24-2017, 12:11 PM)bengals67 Wrote: Once a player signs a contract with the Benagals , do any of them ever fear they might be cut if they under perform? No- because it never happens.

You must be a very new Bengal fan.  Or else you need to have a talk with Kyle Cook, Deltha Oneal, Rudi Johnson, and Willie Anderson.