VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 20:41:01 06/04/04 Fri
Author: John (Fargo Freeze)
Author Host/IP: 216.40.220.132
Subject: Re: Free Agent Pool drying up?
In reply to: FIFL Commish 's message, "Re: Free Agent Pool drying up?" on 23:52:23 06/02/04 Wed

Well, I am with you on the 500 FAs, quantity isn't really the issue I was concerned with, but more to the quality. It seems somewhat reasonable for there to be more FAs on the extremes ( < 1yr or > 7yr ), I just wanted to see if anyone else thought that the rooks out there were pretty weak. I was thinking back to my first season as GM and how I got some pretty quality project players off the FA pool. Maybe its just that the players my predecessor had
on the roster were that bad. :)



>The 8's, 9's and 10's are players that for the most
>part were around when the league started. If they
>don't play this year, they will for sure retire. I
>basically follow 1 simple rule. If a player see's any
>action, he will return as a FA the following year. If
>a player is not drafted, and is not signed after 2
>years, he is gone.
>
>I don't like having 500 FA's available, so after this
>season, the talent pool will be the same in quantity,
>but more younger players.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>Thanks for taking the time to go thru the FAs and
>>compiling that list. Now the big question; How many
>>of those players would you sign today? How many would
>>actually start? How many would actually be higher up
>>on the depth chart than the last slot? Obviously,
>>these questions are facetious, if they were good
>>enough to start, they probably wouldn't be Free
>>Agents. Most of the players on your list are also
>>year 8+ players, and while I don't have anything
>>against older vets in general, the fact is that their
>>skills are diminishing, sometimes rapidly, and signing
>>a yr8 is for emergency backup for a season (two if you
>>have *no* depth), with no real stability for the team.
>>
>>
>>>POST DRAFT 2005, things will change in the FA pool…
>>HAVE
>>>to. Too many young teams with myriad picks.
>>
>>Not sure I understand how you came to this, but I
>>think its the older teams that will have more post
>>draft turnover, thereby more vets will come from older
>>teams. The last two drafts have been shallow. So
>>shallow in fact that my 5 thru 8 picks have been
>>practically ignored as they had no chance of making my
>>extremely youthful roster. The same will hold for
>>2006 and 2007 as the only pick I haven't traded away
>>is the 1st rounds and very late rounds (not much trade
>>value in those).
>>
>>Cheers,
>>John
>>Fargo Freeze

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.