Denver signs tender w/David Anderson [Texans Match Offer]

[cadams]

Originally Posted by barrett

What if, What if, What if?

Well, I guess it's good that our GM had a good feel for what his players were valued at and what other teams would offer. You can say he got lucky, but sometimes I'd rather be lucky than good. Bottom line is we got him for 3 years at 4.5. If we give him 1.5 for this year his extension will logically include a raise (like any extension for any young player), and we pay more. So no matter what you think, Rick Smith's way of doing things worked. Save your arm-chair GMing for an argument where you actually disagree with the outcome.

As for OD, you treat him differently because he is going to get paid more than the high tender. DA wasn't worth more than 1.5 to any other team, so there is no reason to start your offer at 1.5. But with Daniels he will get far more than that from someone when he does sign a longer deal. So it is fine to give him the higher tender since you are not jumping up his value by doing so.

Bottom line is I think giving DA a salary of 1.5 million through the tender inflates his value in your subsequent contract negotiations. Not to mention you can afford to lose DA if some team goes nuts.

OD will be paid far more so the 1.5 does not affect future negotiations, and you can't afford to lose him, so you tender him high. Seems like they were right on both counts and both situations worked out perfect for them.

You are wrong here. First of all, as a GM you have to take into account the "what ifs" that's part of the job. yes it worked out, but "what if" denver signed anderson to a contract with a poison pill as joshua discussed above? don't act like that isn't a valid point. it has happened before and will again. and if you want a guy around you don't subject yourself to that chance. denver could have signed anderson for less, and put a pill in there that would completely take the texans out of the market. now you are correct, it did not happen, but just because it worked out this time doesnt mean it was necessarily the best way to approach it.

they did the same thing with leach and it bit them. you seem to be overly confrontational when someone disagrees with you. if you don't like "armchair gms" then maybe a message board about a football team isn't where you need to be hanging out. "what ifs" and discussing what you think could be problems are as much a part of what these boards are for as anything else. now i am not bashing smith, i think he has done a pretty good job for the most part since being here, but he hasn't been perfect . . .especially in free agency and dealing with non-draft signings, but he is getting good players in here and they seem to be moving in the right direction.