I think this argument is bordering on ridiculous. I think the line of reasoning with DA's tender went something like this: we like the kid. he fits in with what we're doing, but for the foreseeable future, he's going to be a role player, and one that can be fairly easily replaced at that. We're willing to pay him 2nd round tender money, and other teams MAY be interested, but with only 17 catches last year, we'll take our chances. If someone is willing to give him WR2 money, good for him. He's not going to have the opportunity to be that here, barring injuries. If the offer he signs is in the ballpark of what we think he's worth for his role here, we'll match it. If not, we'll go in another direction. We've got 2 tight ends that can play from the slot if need be, so we'll be fine.
I don't really see any problem with that. I get that if a guy's in your plans, you don't want to risk losing him for very little, but I think this scenario played out with the second-best possible outcome from the team's perspective. He gets his second round tender money, at a (likely) lower cap figure for 09 than his 7th round tender would have cost. Are we lucky it shook out this way, sure we are; but as many of you have already said, it wouldn't have been the end of the world if we didn't match the offer. I know it doesn't exactly sit well, what with the vonta leach debacle still ringing from last year, but the bottom line is that this wasn't really botched. everything worked out. period.
|
03-06-2009, 05:03 PM
Threaded Mode