good dolphin wrote:
Nope. Sunk cost in sports context deals with cutting an underperforming veteran player with a bad contract.
Player development is an entirely different consideration. Money isn't a negative issue, in fact, it is a benefit. I don't think Mitch's performance last year was definitive. It's just that the development is in conflict with a window of opportunity created by surrounding talent.
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
It's actually not anywhere close to a sunk cost. Whether they cut (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky today or he is on the roster for next season he costs the exact same price. A sunk cost fallacy is spending extra money because you have already spent money. There is no decision for this year to spend even a single extra dollar on (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky. Even if you think there is a 1% chance that (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky returns back to the form of his 2nd season you must keep him. Draft a rookie or sign a potential starter but (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky must be on the team for next year.
We're focusing too much on the money here - sunk cost is inclusive of things beyond money, including opportunity costs. It doesn't matter if (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky's contract is 500M/year or 100.00/year - he's a sunk cost because you will not recoup the time and money you've invested in him (i.e. he'll never be the reason you're in a Super Bowl, which was the goal of the investment at no 2 +), and keeping him around as the starter simply because you've paid him/picked him at no. 2 is the fallacy part. The cost of (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky that's really hurting the Bears is not his cap hit but the fact that you can't capitalize on the Super Bowl-contending defense because the QB's performance is holding the team back from contending. That's really all that matters.
In each of your posts you failed to mention the enormous opportunity cost we're currently paying (failing to capitalize on the strength of the defense) to keep (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky around simply because he's a high draft pick. Optimize your chances of winning on the strength of the defense by making changes at the position that's holding you back from succeeding. Like IMU said, cut your losses (i.e. stop believing (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky can lead the team to the SB) and move on (replace him and/or plan to replace him by signing someone who has a viable chance of beating him out in a competition). You don't stick with him simply because he's a high draft pick. That analysis is extremely short-sighted for many reasons, including how it ignores that there's a Super Bowl caliber defense sitting right in front of our eyes that is being wasted by the same guy you want to retain for no persuasively objective reason
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
