Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Watching Beason and Co vs the Lions


Mother Grabber

Recommended Posts

This is much the same tired argument that we get into during draft day:  your perception of our needs is irrelevant in so far as how the draft board plays out.  Regardless of if you want a certain position drafted, we have to draft whatever the best player is within reason, because needs-drafting is a sure-fire way to draft a bust.  Likewise, demanding that we get higher compensation than a 7th round pick for a guy who hadn't really done anything in 3 years is fool's gold at best, and drastically unlikely. 

 

We had to take whatever we could get, and as mentioned in a previous thread about this topic, there were very precious few teams who could've actually taken Jon and used him at his best position anyway.  Too many 3-4 teams or teams with an already established MLB.  We all loved and will love Jon, but sitting on him for a year as a backup at a position he was inferior at didn't make sense for anyone involved.  Besides, with his various injuries he's probably not going to last a whole lot longer anyway, and he may as well try to take the best position he can for himself.  Currently, that's with the Giants, and I truly hope it works out for him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he had no value to us (aside from maybe a cheerleader on the sidelines). there was no way he was going to be taking any more than a handful of snaps from kuechly.

 

he was behind blackburn and would have likely been behind klein. he was/is not an OLB. he's a mike and just because you can play one LB position doesn't mean you can play them all. you can't really trust a Mike to play the Will any more than you can trust a Will to play the Mike. takes a different skill set.

 

also, he had been hurt for two years and was looking pretty unhealthy in the action he saw this year. was he going to be able to get back to anywhere close to 100%. who knows?

 

the only thing that we knew about beason was that

1) as a backup for keek he wasn't going to be seeing anymore than a couple snaps a game and really couldn't be trusted there because he hadn't done anything to show he could be trusted after missing two years.

 

2) he was a liability playing OLB and we couldn't afford to have him on the field playing that spot just because we like the guy and he used to be good. blackburn was better there. klein is probably better there. makes no sense to have beason taking more snaps than those two.

 

3) there was no guarantee that he could get healthy or stay healthy longer than a couple games.

 

4) he wasn't happy in his massively reduced role here. (thus cutting down on the positive affect on the locker room)

 

5) there was noting within the last couple years that would tell a team that he was ready to go if they gave him a shot at Mike.

     - he had lost his job to a rookie (doesn't matter on the outside that it was to a future all-pro)

     - he had dropped down far enough on the depth chart that he wasn't even getting a jersey for a couple games

     - he had been put on IR two years in a row

     - he still looked hurt

 

6) his market was really small.....

     - limited to 4-3 teams

     - limited to 4-3 teams who were in need of a Mike

     - limited to 4-3 teams who were in need of a Mike with starting experience

     - limited to 4-3 teams who were in need of a Mike with starting experience RIGHT NOW

     (this means a very small niche and while the demand may have been great with that limited number of interested parties (that pretty much consisted of just one team), there wasn't any competition for his services. if there is limited competition for services/product, the value for that service/product is limited. if you want to move a product/service of any kind, there has to be demand for it if you want any kind of return. competition for product/service increases the potential return. a lack of interest from multiple parties really limits the amount of return you can expect from a shrewd buyer.

 

so basically he had very limited real value here. he was going to be a risk for any team that would be interested based on his health the past couple years. there were only a couple teams who would have interest, esp. immediate interest. this limited the amount that any team would give up for him and limited our chances of getting much of anything in return.

 

holding on to him would have done us no good. waiting until the end of the season would have benefitted us nothing since he was a free agent.

 

how good he is performing now doesn't matter at all. all that matters is what was stated before about his very limited value to us and to the rest of the league.

 

the giants got lucky. they were in a position where they couldn't afford much but they also couldn't afford to turn down an opportunity to pick up someone who might be able to help. they gave what was appropriate considering the lack of demand for a player who had been injured two+ years and was limited to just one role....the Mike. he wasn't going to help anywhere else.

 

we didn't get hosed. we got something for a player that there wasn't much demand for and that we wouldn't have gotten anything for had we waited till the end of the season. might we have gotten a comp pick? maybe, but based on his play time (which was very limited to those few games he would be getting a jersey in) and his pay (which was barely above the vet min) we wouldn't have gotten anything more than a 7th or maybe a 6th round comp pick which can't be packaged and traded and sits at the end of the round it's in).

 

we weren't going to be getting much. we were kind of lucky to be getting anything for him. it's likely the only reason we were able to get anything for him was because the giants had a bit of a need and the giants wanted to work with gettleman. gettleman likely had to sell the giants on beason because beason sure wasn't doing anything to sell himself production-wise.

 

did the giants little gamble pay off? yep. in spades. that doesn't have any impact on us, tho. we weren't going to be getting anything out of him anyway. it's good to see him doing well, but he wouldn't have helped us get further than we have. we've done quite well without him.

 

we did well to get anything for him. hindsight means nothing in that transaction. the reality of the situation was he had very little value to only a couple possible buyers and no value here and that's the bottom line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...