Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason14h
So you are pro tear it down to the studs? Just slowly? Because these are the moves the "pro-tank" team is asking for and getting called pro-tank and tear to the studs.
This is where i get very confused. People say they aren't pro tank/tear it down but then are pro trade all the guys who make up our core. Just do it slowly/over multiple seasons.
This is where i can't see the why, except fear of the team culture. (which is fine if that's the reason, i think its just a reason more based in fear of "becoming Buffalo" "
These are old players we are discussing. They can drop off a cliff at any time. So keeping them (Even for last year) in a lose/lose to me
They perform well and hold their value - teams does better - team gets mid pick (or like last year loses a top 10 protected 1st for a 32 overall)
They perform poorly because age catches up to them, team does poorly and gets a better pick, but their value is lower?
I guess we could have a situation where they play great, Wolf stinks, and we have a bad record and they hold their value. But thats not a good outcome either.
So other then some definition of 'culture' that is impossible to truly define either way, what was the benefit of keeping these guys last year, this year, etc if we know they don't have a place on the team even medium term? But agree they should all be traded ?
I fail to see any benefit that is worth the multiple risks unless we think we are making the playoffs - But then you dont trade them at all...
|
I just think it more than likely that you will get x% more players developing and being part of the future of the team (and x% better for a handful of players individually) by retaining some culture and direction.
I personally don't think they are wrong to keep "some" veterans.
Who and how many is the issue as discussed before.
It's certainly not a simple recipe like "keep 3 guys over 30 at all times"