Comp picks: Pats get a 4th, 6th

[Sicilian]

The real motivation behind comp picks is by adding more picks,the league adds more cost-effective players to the labor pool. More rookies get drafted and more mid/low-tier FAs need to reduce their asking price.

Would that really matter though? Feels like the extra 20 or so players drafted would just end up being priority UDFA's if the comp picks didn't exist.

 

[borg]

The real motivation behind comp picks is by adding more picks,the league adds more cost-effective players to the labor pool. More rookies get drafted and more mid/low-tier FAs need to reduce their asking price.

Yet, less picks would also mean more quality UFAs available.

ze·ro-sum
[ˈˌzirōˈsəm]

ADJECTIVE

1. relating to or denoting a situation in which whatever is gained by one side is lost by the other

 

[RobertWeathers]

Would that really matter though? Feels like the extra 20 or so players drafted would just end up being priority UDFA's if the comp picks didn't exist.

Yet, less picks would also mean more quality UFAs available.

ze·ro-sum
[ˈˌzirōˈsəm]

ADJECTIVE

1. relating to or denoting a situation in which whatever is gained by one side is lost by the other

The draft allows teams to control more talented players at a controlled cost to backfill a need.

While UFAs are certainly cheaper, they are not as sought after prospects as mid-round players.

 

[Bill Lee]

For the second year in a row the nfl screws the Pats on comp picks

Came here for the "we got screwed" post, didn't have to wait long for it.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

It's compensation for drafting well, and losing players because a team can not keep everyone.

But that’s not exactly true. We received 3rd round comp picks for Welker, Talib, and Revis — we didn’t draft a single one of them. Yet Tampa Bay never received a comp pick when they lost Revis, because they decided he cost too much and released him - he wound up being the best FA on the market in 2014 yet he wasn’t eligible for a compensatory pick.

There’s no way to justify it in a salary cap and floor league, and in a league where other draft positions are entirely based on the inverse of prior season performance. You draft well, you sign street free agents well, you trade well? You get rewarded with your record on the field.

The reason the NFL has comp picks is because MLB had comp picks, they were the only other league that had true free agency at the time. MLB was rightfully concerned that every free agent would sign with the Yankees or Dodgers because the smaller market teams couldn’t afford to keep them. There was no salary cap and floor. All sports leagues copy each other when looking at implementing changes - and you wind up with MLB’s dumb challenge system because that’s what the NFL does. The NFL did the same by adopting compensatory picks. Anyway, even MLB had made major modifications to its compensatory system once the luxury tax was imposed and free agency attitudes changed. The NFL’s system has barely been touched, just minor tweaks around the edges. The NFL doesn’t have to worry about smaller market teams not being able to afford its players, the “concern” is that good teams get penalized, but that’s inherent in the NFL’s overall system.

I think comp picks should be abolished, and they should just increase the draft to 8 rounds. Same number of people drafted as before.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Looking at the rule, I believe you’re incorrect.

I hope I am.

 

[mike_usagisan]

While UFAs are certainly cheaper, they are not as sought after prospects as mid-round players.

Right, but the players would still be mid-round picks. 20 or so guys in the 7th round would become UDFA, which I don't think would affect anyone all too ,uch.

 

[Thunderhead]

Don’t even understand why injuries factor into the formula. It’s not like the original team chose not to re-sign him because he was going to get hurt the following year. The huge contract they lost him over is totally unrelated to the mid season injury he suffered 6+ months later. And that’s only in the first year of a big multi-year deal. Doesn’t make any sense to me.

I'm sure many in the league office are more than happy to err on the side of lower compensation for NE if there is any wiggle room in the rule/language. Weird that it feels open to interpretation(?) for lack of a better term.

 

[Sicilian]

The draft allows teams to control more talented players at a controlled cost to backfill a need.

While UFAs are certainly cheaper, they are not as sought after prospects as mid-round players.

Right, but these comp picks aren't adding mid round players, they're adding guys to the end of the 7th round that would normally be UDFAs. If the last comp pick of the 3rd round didn't exist, that player would likely be taken early in the 4th round instead, maybe even with the very next pick, and so on down the line. Adding a pick in the middle of the draft doesn't create a new middle round talent there.

 

[Sicilian]

Right, but the players would still be mid-round picks. 20 or so guys in the 7th round would become UDFA, which I don't think would affect anyone all too ,uch.

Knew I should have read the rest of the thread before replying. You beat me to it!

 

[RobertWeathers]

Right, but the players would still be mid-round picks. 20 or so guys in the 7th round would become UDFA, which I don't think would affect anyone all too ,uch.

Agree but some guys are 3rd rd picks as well which is a pretty high pick. Teams draft players in the 7th round so they don't have to compete in a bidding war for the UFA (but happens anyway). I see it as more of a control/get a decent player to replace the one lost thing.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Right, but these comp picks aren't adding mid round players, they're adding guys to the end of the 7th round that would normally be UDFAs. If the last comp pick of the 3rd round didn't exist, that player would likely be taken early in the 4th round instead, maybe even with the very next pick, and so on down the line. Adding a pick in the middle of the draft doesn't create a new middle round talent there.

Not true. 3rd rounders are also granted.

Again it's about controlling talent and labor cost.

 

[Sicilian]

Not true. 3rd rounders are also granted.

Again it's about controlling talent and labor cost.

I know that... let me try to explain a different way:

You have a player, let's call him Speedy McFlawed. He's fast, but raw, so he's projected to go near the end of the 3rd round, or beginning of the 4th.

In a world with comp picks, the Steelers get a 3rd round comp, and take Speedy McFlawed with that pick. In a world without comp picks, the Bears (who have the first pick in the 4th round), take Speedy with THAT pick. By adding the 3rd round comp pick, all you've done is move Speedy McFlawed up one draft position.

This in turn might move another player, Slowey O'Strongman from the 2nd pick in the 4th round, to the 1st pick of the 4th round, etc, etc, until you eventually get to the end of the draft, and the players that have truly been ADDED to the drafted pool are the guys at the end of the draft who would have gone undrafted normally.

If they were adding comp picks to the 1st round, I think you'd be spot on, because that would be adding players who would have 5th year team options built into their deals. But whether a guy goes in pick 104 or 105 really doesn't change anything.

 

[Family]

But that’s not exactly true. We received 3rd round comp picks for Welker, Talib, and Revis — we didn’t draft a single one of them. Yet Tampa Bay never received a comp pick when they lost Revis, because they decided he cost too much and released him - he wound up being the best FA on the market in 2014 yet he wasn’t eligible for a compensatory pick.

There’s no way to justify it in a salary cap and floor league, and in a league where other draft positions are entirely based on the inverse of prior season performance. You draft well, you sign street free agents well, you trade well? You get rewarded with your record on the field.

The reason the NFL has comp picks is because MLB had comp picks, they were the only other league that had true free agency at the time. MLB was rightfully concerned that every free agent would sign with the Yankees or Dodgers because the smaller market teams couldn’t afford to keep them. There was no salary cap and floor. All sports leagues copy each other when looking at implementing changes - and you wind up with MLB’s dumb challenge system because that’s what the NFL does. The NFL did the same by adopting compensatory picks. Anyway, even MLB had made major modifications to its compensatory system once the luxury tax was imposed and free agency attitudes changed. The NFL’s system has barely been touched, just minor tweaks around the edges. The NFL doesn’t have to worry about smaller market teams not being able to afford its players, the “concern” is that good teams get penalized, but that’s inherent in the NFL’s overall system.

I think comp picks should be abolished, and they should just increase the draft to 8 rounds. Same number of people drafted as before.

While some of what you say is true, there is no disputing it is a reward for drafting well. While you can name some hall of fame level players who received solid second contracts, the majority of players receive their best contract offer ever on first free agency.

By eight years or whatever it takes for a second stab at free agency, many players are fighting just to survive in the league.

The first shot at FA, a player is young, in his prime. Those are the free agents generally with most value.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I know that... let me try to explain a different way:

You have a player, let's call him Speedy McFlawed. He's fast, but raw, so he's projected to go near the end of the 3rd round, or beginning of the 4th.

In a world with comp picks, the Steelers get a 3rd round comp, and take Speedy McFlawed with that pick. In a world without comp picks, the Bears (who have the first pick in the 4th round), take Speedy with THAT pick. By adding the 3rd round comp pick, all you've done is move Speedy McFlawed up one draft position.

This in turn might move another player, Slowey O'Strongman from the 2nd pick in the 4th round, to the 1st pick of the 4th round, etc, etc, until you eventually get to the end of the draft, and the players that have truly been ADDED to the drafted pool are the guys at the end of the draft who would have gone undrafted normally.

If they were adding comp picks to the 1st round, I think you'd be spot on, because that would be adding players who would have 5th year team options built into their deals. But whether a guy goes in pick 104 or 105 really doesn't change anything.

That extra pick and improved draft spot means better draft capital to trade and improves the chances (however so small) a team can draft a player who is a better fit for the team who it lost the FA.

I understand you think it's doesn't change anything after the 1st round and i'll respectfully disagree. To NFL teams better draft position and more picks- even in the 7th round, are a big deal to a lot of teams.

In the end compensation picks accomplish two things for owners, they shrink the market and squeezes FAs market value and allows them to control labor costs.

 

[Pape]

Would that really matter though? Feels like the extra 20 or so players drafted would just end up being priority UDFA's if the comp picks didn't exist.

It helps artificially lower the cost of players by introducing more talent... Simple supply and demand

 

[notex]

Not sure I understand the nature of this diversity rule. Why does the pick go to the team that LOSES the diversity candidate? Why not give it to the NEW team for giving these individuals a promotion?

Why not give the same compensation to teams promoting diversity hires from within. In other words, Pats would get a pick for making Mayo DC this year? I guess I'm just confused why 49ers (and others, of course) are being rewarded for these hires?

Really not arguing against having some reward system in place, just seems backwards to me.

 

[Sicilian]

It helps artificially lower the cost of players by introducing more talent... Simple supply and demand

But it's not introducing more talent... the same number of players still declare coming out of college. There are still 2880 players on the preseason rosters. There will still be 1696 players on 53 man rosters come week 1. The only difference is less than 1 player per team on those 90 man rosters will now have been drafted in the last half of the 7th round, rather than be signed as UDFAs, and odds are overwhelmingly against any of those players making it to the 53 man week 1 roster.

 

[Pape]

But it's not introducing more talent... the same number of players still declare coming out of college. There are still 2880 players on the preseason rosters. There will still be 1696 players on 53 man rosters come week 1. The only difference is less than 1 player per team on those 90 man rosters will now have been drafted in the last half of the 7th round, rather than be signed as UDFAs, and odds are overwhelmingly against any of those players making it to the 53 man week 1 roster.

thats why its artificial ... its makes no real difference, but the perception could change as a result... "Free agency is over, now I got ten guys in my draft class, two who could replace you, want to renegotiate?" type scenario

 

[Sam Bam Cunningham]

Not sure I understand the nature of this diversity rule. Why does the pick go to the team that LOSES the diversity candidate? Why not give it to the NEW team for giving these individuals a promotion?

Why not give the same compensation to teams promoting diversity hires from within. In other words, Pats would get a pick for making Mayo DC this year? I guess I'm just confused why 49ers (and others, of course) are being rewarded for these hires?

Really not arguing against having some reward system in place, just seems backwards to me.

I think the idea is to encourage teams to initially hire and promote minority candidates into the system. By the time another team hires them away they are already established.
I suppose they could give comp picks to BOTH the team that is losing the coach and the team that hires them.
The end result is if you are team that is NOT bringing minority candidates into the system, like it or not those teams will be punished because all of their draft picks after the third round will be devalued by all the coaching and GM comp picks being handed out.

For example look at the Pats 4th round compensation pick this year. Because NFL handed out extra compensation picks in 3rd round to teams who lost a minority coach, that patriots 4th round comp pick is worth less than before the coaches and GM compensation rule was initiated.

Patriots really need to think about this.....it's a competitive disadvantage compared with a team like the niners who received multiple 3rd round comp picks this year for losing coaching and GM personnel.