Friday, March 02, 2007

Dockery Signs $49M deal

Crazy. This is as zany of a contract as I can ever recall. Have the Bills watched Dockery as an offensive lineman? I mean he's decent, but I'm not sure he's in the top 50 percent of the league, let alone worthy of a contract analogous to that Steve Hutchinson received. That means this is going to be quite the offseason as far as the contracts go. We're going to see some amazing contracts being given out with all the money to go around. Puts even more value on the draft.

The Redskins are apparently interested in bringing back Fred Smoot. Which makes me happy. I always liked Smoot and would love to see him back.


Anonymous mean dean said...

I'm just happy the Browns got Steinbach. Now if they can just get Porter or Adalius I'll be set 'til the draft.

6:53 PM  
Anonymous Phil said...

Adalius Thomas, the best available FA, is almost certainly headed to New England, reports ESPN and the Boston Globe. The Nate Clements contract seems crazy as well given that most metrcs leave him square out of best CB in football discussion and yet he is now is the highest paid defensive player in NFL history. The Dockery deal probably tops them all, though.


8:56 PM  
Anonymous dan said...

Clement's deal is more like a 6 yr / $44 M deal. Dockery's deal is backloaded as well. Both Dockery and Clements won't see the last couple years of the contract without it being restructred.

As a Bills fan, I'm pumped about our O-Line. We can finally play some power football.

As for Clements, he's good, not great, but very hot and cold. I'm glad we used the money on the O-line instead

10:36 AM  
Anonymous Charlie Kane said...

The one thing y'all need to remember about these huge deals that players sign is that, since none of the contracts are guaranteed, the players seldom actually get all the money that is reported ( see Lavar Arrington's deal last season with NYG at, like, 7 years for 49 million or some such thing...well, he's already been cut, so, outside of an ego boost, these contracts really mean nothing.). That said, it does affect the salary caps for at least one season, so there is some damage done, but in the long-term, not so much. Basketball is still reeling from the fact that all of it's deals are guaranteed, and baseball, those sports, these outrageous deals can cripple a team. In the NFL, not so much. That being said, I think the Bills were wise to invest something on their OL...although, I understand they are looking to trade McGahee, so who will they be blocking for? Clements, on the other hand, is not worth that kind of bread...but then, as a life-long Broncos fan, I may be a little biased towards a fellow named Champ. Clements is a good ball player, but the numbers don't dictate that kind of surface-level deal. Niners may well take over that division in the next year or so, however, as Seattle's running on fumes. The sad irony of sports is that, because of the tragic murder of Darrent Williams, the Broncos were forced to trade for Dre Bly, and, on the field, are likely much improved. It's hard to look at things in that light, but that's the way it is.

11:12 AM  
Blogger Tyson said...

Am I the only one still waiting for the "what the fuck were you thinking" signing of the offseason?

Dockery to the Bills is good signing and London Fletcher heading to the Redskins seems like a decent talent swap without the trade manuevering.

Something had to go wrong with the Steelers and Porter, they had some problems early in the year. But like with the Hines Ward situation, as bad as that got, they were never forced to waive him. And the Steelers usually try to keep everything in house. With Cowher gone I could see Porter finding another team. And with the money a guy like Julian Peterson was able to command, Porter should have no problem finding another team.

Worst case scenario Porter comes to the Giants, which is not only a perfect fit for them, but they have the money to sign him. Disappointing on so many level.

How happy could Steve McNair possibly be with the release of Jamal Lewis? I mean last year was cruise control for him. Just don't make mistakes. But when it came down to it, they didn't have enough to put them over the Colts. I realize that they're trying to resign him, but if he walks, to a team like say the Tennessee Titans, the Ravens, with only Mike Anderson and Musa Smith on the charts will severly regret it.

It is officially the best time of the year for sports. Tournament Time.

Todd, congratulations on having the most overrated team in the entire top 10. The YUCla Bruins. I know you miss that greaseball Steve Lavin, but is there anyone who thinks he didn't line his pockets with that "recruiting money"?

Champ Bailey was the best corner in the league long before he saved the Broncos defense.

As much as I'd like to believe the Broncos will be better, fact is they were 7-2, benched their starting QB for a rookie who went 2-5 (his only wins coming against Arizona, and the Bengals on a botched snap for last second PAT). That and Mike Shanahan gets way too much credit for the success of not only John Elway, but Terrell Davis and the Broncos as a whole. Is making the playoffs and winning one game really that much of an improvement? From 5-11, hell yeah. 9-7? Not so much. Oh yeah, Mike Bell was overrated.

Top 5 Picks (in no particular order):
Adrian Peterson
Calvin Johnson
Joe Thomas
JaMarcus Russell
Dwayne Jarrett

12:57 PM  
Anonymous Charlie Kane said...

I doubt you'd find too many in this town (hell, state) who would disagree with you that last year was, in many ways, a downturn for the Broncos. Still, I couldn't and wouldn't argue against putting Jay Cutler in at QB...Shanahan, whatever you may think of him, and I don't entirely disagree with you, saw the writing on the wall and decided to get a leg up on next season by getting Cutler some work. It was obvious that Denver was going nowhere last season, so may as well see what the kid can do. Trust me, he will be terrific. But there are no doubt some holes on the Tatum Bell was expected, and while I think that Mike Bell worked hard (I'd not call him 'overrated' as he was undrafted, and technically not rated at all) but doubt that he'll get the lion's share of carries next season. Talk in town is that they are seriously pursuing Willis McGahee, which would be a step in the right direction, although I'm not certain how big a step. They may try to trade up to get one of the backs in the draft, but don't know how high they could go. There's no question that Champ made his rep in DC...but if that trade hasn't gone down as the steal of the decade (all respect to Portis, but backs break down faster ), than find me a better example. I wish that they would focus a bit more on the unit that really hurt them the most last season, which is the offensive line. We all know Jake Plummer is limited, but he was rarely given much time to throw last season due to terrible pass protection. It's doubly important to improve that with Cutler, who isn't as mobile. I'm not claiming any Super Bowl for them anytime soon, as there are glaring weaknesses, but the pluses outweight the minuses, and at least they are careful not to clog up the roster with duds every year, like Daniel Snyder has (sorry, Todd. Not that I'm telling you something you don't already know.).

2:11 PM  
Anonymous Charlie Kane said...

Also...does anybody have any guesses as to what the Raiders are gonna do with that first pick? I am thinking they may trade it, as that team is such a disaster, I'm not sure how much one player (in particular if it's say, Russell, who I think will be fine but would take a beating in Oakland )will help them. Logic says Peterson but, again, the o-line is so bad I don't know how much a running back is gonna help. Someone's gotta pull the trigger on a deal. Maybe somebody who wants Calvin Johnson bad enough (i.e. everybody.).

2:17 PM  
Anonymous Charlie Kane said...

Flash update---Broncos just picked up Big Daddy Wilkinson. Consider the Lombardi Trophy Denver-bound.
(sarcasm...just in case)

2:24 PM  
Anonymous Phil said...

The number one rule of the NFL draft is if there's a franchise QB available, and your team doesn't have one, take him.
The Raiders, after passing up Matt Leinart last year, will and should select Brady Quinn or JaMarcus Russell. Most analysts project Russell but would favor Quinn personally.

3:40 PM  
Anonymous mean dean said...

The number one rule of the NFL draft is if there's a franchise QB available, and your team doesn't have one, take him.

The teams that drafted Joey Harrington, Tim Couch, Akili Smith, Ryan Leaf, Heath Shuler, Rick Mirer, David Klingler, Jeff George, Andre Ware, Kelly Stouffer, Todd Blackledge, (and hell, even some guys like Cade McNown, David Carr and Trent Dilfer) would beg to differ.

10:46 PM  
Blogger Tyson said...

Define Irony

at least they are careful not to clog up the roster with duds every year,

Flash update---Broncos just picked up Big Daddy Wilkinson.

10:48 PM  
Anonymous Phil said...

"The teams that drafted Joey Harrington, Tim Couch, Akili Smith, Ryan Leaf, Heath Shuler, Rick Mirer, David Klingler, Jeff George, Andre Ware, Kelly Stouffer, Todd Blackledge, (and hell, even some guys like Cade McNown, David Carr and Trent Dilfer) would beg to differ. "

That only argues that there's a measure of risk involved with the selection as there is with every other position. It does not refute, in any way, the fact that the quarterback is the most pivotal position, by far, on an NFL team. Consider that, according to Football Outsiders, the difference between the Colts' QB performance and the Raiders' was about 215 points or ten wins. Obviously, the superiority of the O Line and receivers of the Colts plays a role in that, but the magnitude of difference is still astounding.

10:17 AM  
Anonymous Charlie Kane said...

I'd hoped that by ending my huge news about Dan Wilkinson with the 'sarcasm' alert would be enough; next time I'll be more clear. That being said, one bulky defensive lineman does not equate to innumerable third-string wide receivers, safeties, et al signed to enormous deals and left to rot.
The Redskins shopping sprees are the dictionary definition of the Barnum maxim involving suckers born every minute, etc. Not that every team doesn't have problems in this area, but the Redskins are consistently wrong personnel-wise.

5:01 PM  
Blogger Tyson said...

Let's just all hope London Fletcher works out better than Napoleon Harris would have.

Still need some help on run defense and maybe some safety help, Arch needs to perform this time around. Smoot and Fletcher are nice pieces so far.

49ers are loadin up.

7:37 PM  
Anonymous mean dean said...

I never made any attempt to refute the importance of the quarterback. The importance of the quarterback, though, does in no way refute that the draft is an incredibly inexact science, with a less than 50% probability of producing a "franchise" quarterback from the positions in the draft where "franchise" quarterbacks are typically perceived to be taken. Just because you're sitting on a top pick, and someone who is perceived to be a savior at QB is there does not mean you should take them.

Undoubtedly, if a team is fully confident a QB will be that "franchise" QB, then they should take him. But your initial point mentions that Oakland should take Quinn or Russell, noting that the analysts are high on them, speaking nothing of the Raiders (which we obviously don't know). You couldn't fault Oakland for taking Thomas or Peterson or Calvin, or trading down.

8:19 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home