Last edited by Captain Lemming; 04-09-2013 at 02:21 AM.
In view of the fact that Mike Tomlin has matched Cowhers record I give him the designation:
TCFCLTC-
The Coach Formerly Considered Less Than Cowher
In view of the fact that Mike Tomlin has matched Cowhers record I give him the designation:
TCFCLTC-
The Coach Formerly Considered Less Than Cowher
Market forces do not decide how much something is "worth"...they decide how much money someone is required to pay for something...that is capitalism...
When shopping for a car, I may have to pay thousands more for a Lexus than I would for a Honda Accord...but, when comparing the two side-by-side, the Lexus may not be "worth" the thousands of extra dollars required...it may be in my best interest to buy the Honda and be able to use the money in my budget for other things down the road...
You're talking 'value for money' which is, essentially, a perspective.
Wallace's worth is several millions of dollars. The market set the number. If there had been no market for Wallace, he'd have signed for significantly less, his worth being whatever number he would have signed for.
Now, it could be argued he'd be better value for money on a significantly lower contract number..
Your Lexus/Honda example is a good one. The 'worth' of the Lexus, in real dollars, is more than the Honda. Why? It's more desirable, more popular, people are willing to pay it's worth. But the Honda might provide better bang for the buck. But it's worth will still be lower.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off, why should I?
Light up the darkness.
Ok, a couple of things.
Firstly, there was a few reports, or if you prefer- speculated reports- that the Steelers & Wallace were close to a deal, but the sticking point was the guarenteed money portion of the deal. If we are willing to assume the "Wallace wants top 10 money" speculated reports are potentially correct, then the reports saying Wallace was close to signing a deal must be equally as relevant.
Now, again, reports say that the money being talked about was similar to Brown's eventual contract. Most likely, it was more. But regardless- it's just a way of potentially putting a value from the Steelers on the position. Now, whatever the potential Wallace/Steelers deal was, financially, must have been somewhat acceptable if it is true Wallace was close to signing. this means- and this is the important part- that what Wallace wanted, and what the Steelers were willing to pay, were not THAT far apart. Particularly if, as Chadman said earlier, the sticking point wasn't the overall contract value, but the guarenteed money side of the deal.
So the first part of Chadman's belief/argument is this- if the two sides were close, then YES, Chadman would have been happy having Wallace sign 'for a little bit more' than what the Steelers had him valued at. Why? Because he made the team better (2012 season was marred by ill feeling & not a true indication of the impact he had the previous seasons with the Steelers, despite still having more yards than the new #1 WR).
The 2nd part of Chadman's belief/argument is this- if Brown is worth $48m to the Steelers, Wallace is worth more than that. Why? Because he has evidence on his side. Brown is, to this point, a one year wonder. Wallace has 3 solid to very good seasons, plus 2012, to his resume. So if Brown is a $48m type of guy, then Wallace is a $55m type of guy. (Just plucking numbers- don't use this as evidence against Chadman's argument).
If Wallace had simply been allowed to walk, and Brown had signed a contract in keeping with his production, or Heaven forbid- been allowed to play on his RFA tender in 2013- then Chadman wouldn't have an argument outside of "wish we could have kept Wallace". But the Steelers WERE willing to pay up big for a WR. And if the choice was Brown's $48m compared to either a 'similar' deal for Wallace, or something upwards of $55m- then Chadman would take Wallace over Brown. Better player, better resume, bigger impact.
Fact is- if they had paid Wallace instead of Brown, the WR's in 2013 would be.. wait for it... Wallace, Brown & Sanders. It would have given the Steelers an additional 2 years to evaluate Brown's level of play, and therefore his actual value as a WR. At this point- can anyone guarentee that Brown is a better WR than Sanders? Because guess what- next season, there's still not a lot of additional cap room, Sanders won't be a RFA, and Brown will be costing $9.5m or so. So the team is now tied to Brown, regardless of his level of play, and if 2013 is like 2012, Brown's value is more around a quarter of his cap hit.
The structure of the Miami deal for Wallace is all over the place, and not one that Chadman would support given the Steelers roster structure. But the overall cap value of Wallace at Miami is probably not that far over where Chadman would have gone to. Particularly as the Steelers have proven they were willing to go so high for Brown.
Now, some people seem to want to take the whole Wallace contract thing personally, and get quite upset talking about him. Not sure exactly where the level of hate is coming from, but so be it. All Chadman wants people to consider is that, if you are willing to claim Wallace's deal was unrealistic, that his demands were insane & the Dolphins screwed themselves- then consider what the Steelers have done with Brown & put it in perspective. At least Wallace is a proven deep threat that has a track record of making plays over his career. There is the very real chance that in 2014, the Steelers are left with an overpaid former 6th round possession WR, who's contract is going to be eternally restructured.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off, why should I?
Light up the darkness.
Better example- if the #1 Fullback in the Draft is the greatest run blocking FB of all time, an absolute can't miss prospect who will give years of solid production to his future employer, will he get drafted over the raw, fast, inexperienced, amazing athlete at WR that played for the biggest college, stands 6'4" 200lbs & runs a 4.20?
No?
That's because the game changing WR is 'worth' more than the reliable FB, even though the 6th round FB might give better value..
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off, why should I?
Light up the darkness.
Of course it's a perspective...it's difficult to establish true "worth" in a closed market with only 32 possible buyers...relative worth can only be established, and the Dolphins established that Mike Wallace was worth more to them than any other team...and, there are several factors that can drive this, including salary cap, stadium attendance, etc....
As for the Lexus, people are willing to pay the price, but that does not necessarily reflect "worth"...
Unfortunately, that's not a better example...
You are comparing apples (WR) to oranges (FB)...in this case, your premium draft pick is spent primarily on the position and not the player...
My comparison would have been better if I had used a Toyota Camry instead of a Honda Accord...
Bookmarks