If you are a Jets fan and are trying to figure out how the roster is filled out you probably are considering three things:
1. UFA signings 2. Prospects coming up 3. Trades
As we heard from Gary Lawless today about the contract talk between Stafford and the Jets being 'well-intentioned' the thoughts immediately lead to value and term. For how much and how long will Stafford be signed for?
If the Jets have to fill holes in their roster and choose to look at UFA what is the best way to go about doing it? The market is thin and there may be less suitors than usual but it's doubtful a significant decline in price happens even though it is speculated every year. However that does not mean a GM can make some good moves.
If Stafford and the Jets reach a deal, one that is in the 3 years at 9 million range (but preferably less) is there a way of filling his position without him? Huh. Would it be better to find a UFA who can play that position and give him a bit more money on shorter term?
For instance, what if the Jets offered Joel Ward one year at 4 million? Why would they do this?
First it means less time commitment and less money tied up but it also allows for movement from within so that developing players see opportunity and space. When the Jets signed Jokinen it was not a huge risk because he was only here for two years, and that would be the same as offering Ward a one year deal at slightly higher salary.
Players want term because it provides security and stability but they also want top dollar. The compromise always comes in between term and cost; more term for less cost per year or more per year for shorter term. So look at contracts another way... is player A more valuable for 3 years at double the salary of player B for half the salary for 1/3 of the time?
Drew Stafford could very well be a smart signing depending on term and cost but there's a threshold that should not be crossed if it has to be should the Jets pull back and consider other options? I use Ward as an example as he has similar underlying numbers as Stafford
The point here is not to suggest that teams should be built using 1 or 2 year deals on aging vets while they still have some life, rather it's about deciding on how long it is you need to fill a hole before your system fills it naturally. There is risk in either option but one seems less risky but it all depends on how much faith an organization has in it's prospects and when those same prospects might materialize.
There could be several options for the Jets if they need a top 6 RW should Stafford find a more appealing offer and team. The question would still be the same though- how long and how much and that also should give some indication into the faith the Jets have within their prospect pool. Draft and development is only as good as the assets developing and right now it appears there is still a weakness on the right side. That's why the Jets want Stafford back, it's just how much they want him and does it overlook other less risky options?
As it pertains to Stafford this may not be an issue of the Jets see him as far more than a place holder and hole filler. If so that's an entirely different set of questions and probably a lot more criticism. While Stafford had a great run to finish his year in Winnipeg is he really more than an accessory anymore? Like I said, that's a different topic.