[KJ3]

Originally Posted by Bigtinylittle

If Smith and Kubiak are as good at judging talent as I am thinking and hoping they are, then signings like Reeves will probably become rarer.

it's about 1 a year for them. it's not terrible but it's not like the "meh" contracts are non-existant.

So you have to see the Reeves deal for what it is.

i think you should probably look at what we are saying before you go on another 7 paragraph schtick. i don't think anyone here is out-of-the-know on this. reeves was plan b in case plan a fell through. maybe it was "insurance", maybe it was a little bit of overplanning.

If we don't need or want Reeves next year, the dead money after one year for his contract, as I understand it, is only 3 million or so. That is cheap considering he is a cornerback.

In evaluating whether it was a bad deal, the only thing to consider is whether we could have gotten Reeves for a lot less, or whether we could have gotten a better deal by going with another cornerback. Whether Reeves is being overpaid for the production he will give us is really irrelevant to the situation. The only thing worth considering is what were the alternatives. We were very thin at CB without Dunta, and Smith/Kubiak did something about it.

how is contract not a factor in this? because there were alternatives to reeves? wouldn't alternatives make variables like contract terms more relevant? if reeves was considered by a majority of people to be a below average corner in the wrong system who has some workable skills, am i misrepresenting him with that statement? we gave him a deal for an average starting corner...because he deserved it? because that's what they needed him to be? or because the better corners wanted more money? i'm guessing it was the latter. smithiak knew it was taking a corner, upper round of the draft too. my guess is they were down to charles godfrey or molden, regardless they knew the hole was going to be covered with a decent prospect. so why overpay for a guy you expect to be a spot starter/dime corner (if molden turns out well and dunta returns on time)? filling the 4th hole down isn't near as important or pressing as filling one of the two starting holes.

At this point, I'm thinking CB probably won't be one of our very weakest positions. Considering that it is one of the most critical positions on the field, that makes me happy with the deal.

man why don't me and you just have a big disagreeing session? haha...

considering our best CB won't be around for a while, our 2nd best CB has a ton of potential to prove, our 3rd CB is widely known as a piece of toast, and our 4th is a rookie who also has potential the only other group i would put lower on the totem pole is RB.