Which do you prefer - Jets/Dolphins losing streak or better 49ers draft pick

[bradmahn]

Give me the better draft pick. No brainer.

Which do you think is more humiliating to the Jets/Dolphins:

A.) They have the two worst records in the league,

or...

B.) They have the 2nd and 3rd worst records in the league AND we win the Super Bowl AND we pick ahead of them in the Draft.


Yeah, give me B, all day every day.

Short term vs. long term, my friend. A defeated season is historic, them feeling like douches on draft day will last all of three months, if that.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I agree 100%, the higher pick the better imo. If they really want to move the pick they will be able to move it.

I don't get all the Dolphin hate, I feel bad for them. I always liked Jason Taylor & Zach Thomas, great great football players.

I am really hoping the Jets lose out though, I would laugh my ass off if Mangenius got fired after this season & ended up coaching in some crappy D3 school for the rest of his career.

You take the Top 5 pick. So what about $$$ for a top 5 pick. if we get a cover corner or the next Ray Lewis, the Jets or 'Fins can win the rest of their games (excluding the ones with the Pats of course).

 

[JJDChE]

Short term vs. long term, my friend. A defeated season is historic, them feeling like douches on draft day will last all of three months, if that.

I don't care about the Dolphins feeling bad, I care about us getting the most value possible out of our draft pick.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Give me the better draft pick. No brainer.

Which do you think is more humiliating to the Jets/Dolphins:

A.) They have the two worst records in the league,

or...

B.) They have the 2nd and 3rd worst records in the league AND we win the Super Bowl AND we pick ahead of them in the Draft.


Yeah, give me B, all day every day.

But one does have to admit there is a cost benefit analysis that needs to be considered when talking Top 5 draft picks.

#5 = a guy like Richard Seymour (who we took at #6). Expensive rookie contract? Yes - and one that he outplayed and represented great value for us.

Draft Seymour at #1 and you've still got a Pro-Bowl player, but the value isn't as high.

And since rookie salaries wind up being slotted with inflation over the previous year, a #2 or #1 draft pick is going to get a HUGE salary - to the point where a great many teams have NO interest in the #1 pick.

So for me, and for a great many GMs, the increased salary cost of a #1 pick compared to #5 doesn't necessarily match how much better the #1 pick is compared to the #5.

Furthermore, I don't think one can say one can "easilly" trade a #1 pick. Not every team wants the #1 pick for the reasons just discussed and would trade down if equal draft value were offered - but sometimes they get "stuck" with the #1 pick.

So for me, #5 plus a "perfect" Dolphins season, plus a 2-14 Jets season represents the best value for my viewing dollar.

 

[JJDChE]

But one does have to admit there is a cost benefit analysis that needs to be considered when talking Top 5 draft picks.

#5 = a guy like Richard Seymour (who we took at #6). Expensive rookie contract? Yes - and one that he outplayed and represented great value for us.

Draft Seymour at #1 and you've still got a Pro-Bowl player, but the value isn't as high.

And since rookie salaries wind up being slotted with inflation over the previous year, a #2 or #1 draft pick is going to get a HUGE salary - to the point where a great many teams have NO interest in the #1 pick.

So for me, and for a great many GMs, the increased salary cost of a #1 pick compared to #5 doesn't necessarily match how much better the #1 pick is compared to the #5.

Furthermore, I don't think one can say one can "easilly" trade a #1 pick. Not every team wants the #1 pick for the reasons just discussed and would trade down if equal draft value were offered - but sometimes they get "stuck" with the #1 pick.

So for me, #5 plus a "perfect" Dolphins season, plus a 2-14 Jets season represents the best value for my viewing dollar.

The #1 pick is more valuable than the #5 pick, period. You may have to give a discount to get out of that spot but you'll no doubt get something. Even if it's just a 2nd or 3rd. Someone will give it to you, I guarantee.

The Dolphins having an 0-16 season has absolutely zero value to me.

 

[bunzoburns]

If STL beats SF this week, SF moves into the #3 pick based on SOS.

 

[abdul7]

For me, a no brainer. High as possible Draft pick say 1, 2 or 3 and in BB we trust. How can anyone just say we cant trade whichever pick we get !
Secondly why not pick THE player BB and Pioli are praying to get. All i know is wichever way it ends up right now , high ie 1,2 or 3 pick is what Patriots front office want. Dont you think they will just love that Good Headache ?

 

[JoeSixPat]

The #1 pick is more valuable than the #5 pick, period. You may have to give a discount to get out of that spot but you'll no doubt get something. Even if it's just a 2nd or 3rd. Someone will give it to you, I guarantee.

The Dolphins having an 0-16 season has absolutely zero value to me.

uh - yeah, I'd imagine if you are seeking only a 2nd or 3rd pick to trade for the #1 pick you'd probably not have a problem trading it.

Of course, that seems to undermine the "value" of the pick.

There's no question that for the risk/reward of using and paying for a #1 pick, some teams just do not want it... they'd prefer to drop back to #5.

Trading out of the #1 spot in many years is difficult, if not impossible if one wants equal draft value - which teams almost always do.

Ask the 49ers how they feel about the value of their previous #1 pick and whether he's worth the money.

No doubt having your choice of ALL the players in the draft is a benefit of a #1 pick but you have to pay a lot for that privilege, and many teams prefer not to take that risk given the cost.

It seems to me that BB has made his name on the recognition that there's better value to be had later in the first round of the draft and I really question how happy he'd be if he got "stuck" with a #1 pick and the accompanying salary.

 

[JJDChE]

uh - yeah, I'd imagine if you are seeking only a 2nd or 3rd pick to trade for the #1 pick you'd probably not have a problem trading it.

Exactly...which is why it's better than having #5. It's pretty simple.

There's no question that for the risk/reward of using and paying for a #1 pick, some teams just do not want it... they'd prefer to drop back to #5.

Trading out of the #1 spot in many years is difficult, if not impossible if one wants equal draft value - which teams almost always do.

Yup, and it's easy to trade back to #5 if you're not demanding the full "trade chart value". If you really want out of that spot, you'll make the deal for lesser value.

It seems to me that BB has made his name on the recognition that there's better value to be had later in the first round of the draft and I really question how happy he'd be if he got "stuck" with a #1 pick and the accompanying salary.

He didn't trade down when we had the #6 overall and he traded up in the middle of the first to get Warren.

He knows what he wants. If it's not there he'll trade out.

There is no possible scenario where you are "stuck" with the #1 if you don't want it. If you were desperate you could trade straight up #1 for #5.

 

[onegameatatime]

I occasionally have to remind myself that whether I am rooting for one team or another has zero effect on the outcome.

So ... I will be rooting for the Jets and Phins to lose, but thinking that there is an upside if I "lose."

My head agrees with what's been said that #1 > #5. So if we could trade down from #1 to #5 and pick up a 2nd round this year and third or fourth next year, we've had a good day. (Actually, based on the chart, the #1 should be worth the entire draft of the #5 picker or even #4 picker, but who wants to look like a fool like Ditka trading his entire draft for Ricky Williams.)

Unfortunately, there is no blockbuster QB that we would have no interest in.

 

[onegameatatime]

There is no possible scenario where you are "stuck" with the #1 if you don't want it. If you were desperate you could trade straight up #1 for #5.

How could you not at least get a 2nd even if you have to bank it for a year.

 

[JJDChE]

How could you not at least get a 2nd even if you have to bank it for a year.

I'm not saying it would happen, I was just using it as an example that it's truly impossible to get "stuck" with the #1 overall pick.

If we did get the #1 and traded out, we'd probably get at least a future year first rounder and an '08 2nd rounder...and that would be a bargain for the team getting the #1.

 

[onegameatatime]

Assume we win the SB and then get the 4th overall pick and keep it.

How psyched would our pick be to not have to join some perennial dog team in rebuilding mode!

 

[JoePats]

First off I see absolutely no way that our pick will be ahead of the Dolphins...Even if San Fran were to go winless, Miami would have to win two games, and if San Fran got one win, and they have a few spots where its possible, then Miami would have to win 3.

So I'd love to see the Dolphins go winless.

As for the Jets, its possible that our pick from San Fran is ahead of the Jets pick, so I am rooting for that...The Jets have already endured an embarassing season they're going to go from the playoffs to double-digit losses. The further embarassment of having the Pats pick ahead of them in the draft is the cherry on top for me (after Vince Wilfork catches an 80 yard TD against them).

 

[Hollywood_Brady]

destroy them both... it doesnt matter if they get higher picks... one pick wont change their whole team around anyway...

 

[The Gr8est]

Higher pick is better. Also, we'd all LMAO if we had a higher pick then the Jets and Dolphins, who each had, say, 3 wins, if we'd also won the SB.

Talk about rubbing their noses in it...

That's a start, but what if we pick immediately in front of the Rats or Fins and are going to pick the player they covet?

They would have to give us a pick or player to swap places with us. :rocker:

 

[JoeSixPat]

There is no possible scenario where you are "stuck" with the #1 if you don't want it. If you were desperate you could trade straight up #1 for #5.

Actually there is. Though I wouldn't make the case that it would happen in this draft so its a bit academic.

But in a draft where there is no consensus #1 draft pick - i.e. the quality of players say between 1 & 5 or even 1 & 10 are generally looked at as being the same, no team is going to want to devote #1 cap space money to a player who could be taken later.

And when you consider that many teams that have perrenial top picks that automatically eat up huge amounts whether the players are worth it or not, you've got a situation where having the #1 pick is a curse rather than a help.

This reality has even caused some to contemplate whether to change the draft structure, giving the #1 team the option to draft where they want rather than forcing them to spend the incredible amount of money it takes to sign the #1 draft pick in a year when there is no consensus "best" player who is worth the high cost.

We know next year's number 1 pick is going to get as much as Jamarcus Russell - $60 million with $32 million guaranteed - and not too many teams are going to be clammoring to give that salary to the same caliber of player later in the draft

So yes, there is a scenario and it may actually prompt a change in the draft structure - its so real that the Commissioner actually had to make it clear that teams can't "miss" their draft slot on draft day.

 

[Patters]

The best draft pick possible. With the Pats being so good, there's sort of a lack of suspense. While I love the Pats beating up on teams, I'd like to get the feeling that the Pats are the best of a good group, and I'd really likethe Fins and Jets to be a lot more competitive just for the sheer excitement. I'd rather there were more competitive teams in the league, even if the Jets and Fins. That said, I of course want the Pats to win, win, win.

 

[nowayback]

best pick so we can trade down with more value....our point has been proved with the jets

 

[JJDChE]

Actually there is. Though I wouldn't make the case that it would happen in this draft so its a bit academic.

But in a draft where there is no consensus #1 draft pick - i.e. the quality of players say between 1 & 5 or even 1 & 10 are generally looked at as being the same, no team is going to want to devote #1 cap space money to a player who could be taken later.

Personally, I doubt there's ever been a draft where you couldn't have traded out of the #1 pick straight up with another team in the top 10, but it's speculation either way.

And, yes, I agree the top pick gets a salary that is totally unrealistic. Jonathan Kraft has brought up the fact that the owners will push hard for a rookie salary slotting system.