RealSNR |
03-26-2017 01:57 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rain Man
(Post 12798627)
I've always found this system odd. When you think about it, it helps the more powerful teams against the weaker teams, because they're more likely to lose players. I thought that parity was a league goal, and this works against it.
|
I don't know if it necessarily favors powerful teams, but it does favor certain types of teams.
The Browns could easily use this system to their advantage. They've been terrible for a long time, so they often see a lot of players leave them just because those guys want to get the **** out. At the same time, they struggle to attract the high quality free agents because they suck. It makes total sense to just **** the market, only spend money on your own guys you want to keep, and not try to fill in gaps with free agents that will lose you those extra picks. Eventually, even if you're Cleveland, you'll probably hit on enough of them to generate a competitive team.
That's not exactly what they do, though. They're constantly going out and trying to use free agency to their advantage, under the illusion that they can get out of this mess by filling in the big games with mediocre veterans and assemble some kind of team that will eventually be good enough to crack the playoffs.
That being said, it would be interesting if the league took away the comp picks. We'd see a lot more balance when it comes to the structures of teams, and it would be better for getting players to stick around the league longer instead of running out their rookie deals and then getting dragged by the dick because they're too expensive. Why pay solid important contributor when you can let him walk and find another one with the extra 5th rounder you'll get next year?
|