Interesting 2004-5 FA breakdown

[USSoccer]

I foudn this on SoSh. I thought it was a really thorough breakdown of last winter's FA's.

 

http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?showtopic=1731

 

For all it's hype, last season's FA class was really dissapointing this past season. I think a few of the bigger signings might pan out, but for the most part, teams took big financial risks and got burned for it.

 

 

My question is, can we learn a lesson based on this info as to what was undervalued, and what might be undervalued (and therefore something worth signing) this winter?

[stitchface]

I think there are some good points there as to contracts not signed can be a good decision. There weren't too many signings last year that made me say "the Cubs should have done that."

[UK1679666180]

Polanco wasn't a FA though, he was someone I wanted last year at SS, but somehow accepted arbitration and went back to Philly despite Utley and Rollins.

[MeatampPotatoesMan]

Trying to fill holes through free agency is just asking to be stuck with a bad contract. Sometimes it has to be done though. Hopefully we only get one player via FA (we have so many holes, it's hard to imagine filling them all via trade), and not 2 or 3 of the top FAs (Burnett, Furcal, Giles), which will burden us for 4-5 years.

 

Keep in mind that those FA contracts listed on the link were for the first year of their contracts. How many of those players are going to regress as those contracts mature?

[indifferent]

Tony Clark looks like the best deal on the list. Cards fared very well with Eckstein (.87) and Grudz (.43). Interesting list, glad the Cards said farewell to Womack and Renteria.