Profootballtalk draft

[DaBruinz]

Re: I cant post new threads yet--lumping topics

Well, with qb's the teams that need em are playing a game of chicken, and when one foot drops all the others will rush to be the 2nd. I saw a stat that said there were 64 different starting QBs last year, thats AN AVERAGE OF 2 PER TEAM! Just about every team in the league could look at 2-3 of these guys and say he might be better than my #2, right?

Yes, but you had teams like Carolina go through 4 QBs because of injuries. I believe that TB used 3 different ones because of injuries. The Dolphins and Raiders both had 3 different starting QBs to my knowledge. To my knowledge, that was the main reason most teams used more than 1 QB. Injuries.

Only a few hours now until we lose the rights to franchise Moss, hope they are working overtime today--no lunch breaks!

Another reason to think OL is because you cant keep everybody....and there is a good chance we cant afford Mankins when his turn comes up. If we can find a guy that can play mulitiple positons inside we gotta replace Hochstien. I think Sapp finally had him pegged right.

Why do you think that there is a good chance the Pats won't be able to keep Mankins? 1st and foremost, the Pats are looking at a strong potential of uncapped years when his contract is up. Mankins is the type of player you build your O-line around. At the very worst, they franchise him. But he'll be worth it.

Trade scenarios I like--
1-- I still like the idea of trading back with Atlanta and grabbing maybe their #2 this year,#1 next year and considerations.....or if he wasnt from VA TECH(UNLV of college football) A HOLE how about this years 2, next years 2 AND Dante Hall?? I know he wants a long term deal, screw him! We get him cheap this year, franchise him like Asante if he does well next year, and start the corner we draft when he leaves! Atlanta with 2 picks in the top 7 would make alot of people very happy!
2--Ryan falls to us,(and we dont like Gholston) we HAVE to take him if we want to start a bidding war. All you have to do is compare him to Brady Quinn, who will likely be shopped draft day, and he will look that much better!
3--Everyone stop talking about trading down with Dallas if DMF is at 7....there will be at least 2-3 teams ahead of us willing to trade back with them for the same value so there is ZERO chance that it happens.

Geez, if I put this in 10 different threads I could post my own thread by now,lol.

I like the idea of the Pats trading down regardless. I just don't think that D'Angelo Hall is the answer. I'd like the Pats to trade back into the 14 to 16 range. So that they still get the 6 years on the contract, but the money isn't nearly as much.

 

[mike100915]

Someone is going to fall to the Patriots, maybe a Sedrick Ellis or a Darren McFaddden and someone is going to want to swoop in and trade for the pick.But, let's be honest look at how many picks maybe the team last year. So trading down and acquiring more picks might not be what the Patriots want. They want and need high impact personal on the defensive side of the ball, whether that be a linebacker or a D-back. Let's just wait and see who blows away the scouts at the combine this week.

 

[dryheat44]

Someone is going to fall to the Patriots, maybe a Sedrick Ellis or a Darren McFaddden and someone is going to want to swoop in and trade for the pick.But, let's be honest look at how many picks maybe the team last year. So trading down and acquiring more picks might not be what the Patriots want. They want and need high impact personal on the defensive side of the ball, whether that be a linebacker or a D-back. Let's just wait and see who blows away the scouts at the combine this week.

Depending on free agency and retirements, there could be significantly more openings on the roster for draftees than last year.

 

[mike100915]

That is very true, however I actually believe that both Bruschi and Seau will be back, now Colvin I am not so sure about. Also, even if they lose both Seau and Bruschi it's high unlikely they will draft a LB anyways, especially in the early rounds. They like to draft positions that are diffcult to fill in free agency early a la DL. Also, believe it or not they actually do draft for for need. That's why I believe this draft they will go heavy on dbacks. Look for Gay, Wilson and Samuel to leave and that's going to leave alot of holes. There going to need to most likely draft 2 cornerbacks, and one of if not both have to be high impact corners. That's why I think they take a corner at 7. This all being said watch them sign Ty Law, Chad Scott, and a couple others and not draft a corner till the 5th round.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Re: I cant post new threads yet--lumping topics

Trade scenarios I like--
1-- I still like the idea of trading back with Atlanta and grabbing maybe their #2 this year,#1 next year and considerations.....or if he wasnt from VA TECH(UNLV of college football) A HOLE how about this years 2, next years 2 AND Dante Hall?? I know he wants a long term deal, screw him! We get him cheap this year, franchise him like Asante if he does well next year, and start the corner we draft when he leaves! Atlanta with 2 picks in the top 7 would make alot of people very happy!

I am not thrilled with the concept of dropping out of the first round entirely. But having two first-rounders next year is also appealing.

2--Ryan falls to us,(and we dont like Gholston) we HAVE to take him if we want to start a bidding war. All you have to do is compare him to Brady Quinn, who will likely be shopped draft day, and he will look that much better!

No, no, no. As I and others have pointed out before, it is nearly impossible to trade a first-round player after he's drafted, because there's a rookie cap within the salary cap, and that rookie cap is not adjusted for trades.

3--Everyone stop talking about trading down with Dallas if DMF is at 7....there will be at least 2-3 teams ahead of us willing to trade back with them for the same value so there is ZERO chance that it happens.

Umm . . . not if they're being overly greedy (if they're smart, they'll realize what will happen--the Pats would gladly "lose" 10 or 20 cents on the dollar in trade value to save $15-20M in actual $).

 

[Seneschal2]

Crazy stuff with Felix Jones going as the 2nd RB and Chris Williams moving all the way to the top ten.

I'm not against an OT, we could use an upgrade at RT and I could see either line being seen as worth a top ten pick by Belichick. Gholston still intrigues me, though, with Colvin in the last year of his contract and Vrabel not getting any younger.

First of all, I like their mock. Felix is a definite surprise at #6 -- but the first 5 fit. The Pats going OT is not a surprise at all. We may go Chris Williams instead of Clady -- which wouldn't shock me considering he's thought by some to be the best pass blocking OT in this draft (Long and Clady are considered better run blockers).

JMO, but there seems to be too much focus on someone from the top 5 falling to #7. Those players are just ranked -- but it doesn't mean they automatically fit the Pats. That said, BB won't hesitate to select someone who's ranked in the top 15.

Also, the CB position is deep, so why bother at #7 when you can have a large body (OT/DT) or pass rusher (Gholston) first. If we remain at #7, IMO BB will select a proven talent (productive) -- rather than the over-hyped ones with upside. If we trade down -- then one of the CBs may enter the picture.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Well I was thinking about it in the terms of say the Philip Rivers/Eli Manning trade....Grab the value and haggle about it later(if you believe Ryan to be that value). A team like Tampa might not want to lose thier first this year in that 15 minutes haggling, but during the day I think it very likely you could wheel him back around for say 1sts in 09 and 10, picks and players, and alot of different combinations that cant be figured in that 15 minutes. If his VALUE is so much higher than the next guy,and there is supposed to be a HUGE drop off between 6 and 7, then you ante up. You own the rights to a player, you can trade those rights before a contract is signed...
And I dont understand how people can be so greedy when figuring mocks that Dallas would trade for us to get DMF at 7....they could offer the same value(22,28)to the Jets,KC and maybe others who need more players than just a high pick. DMF will NEVER get to 7, if he does then JJ doesnt want him to begin with..
When you get a team together like we do at some point you lose players because cap or no cap you cant afford to keep everybody. For the OL, LT,and C are more important...and you can argue RT too. Mankins is a 1st rd pick, all pro, not likely to take the small $$ and I would rather pay Koppen as he is the glue of the line. Like Ugoh last year, its a great idea to draft guys BEFORE you need them rather then looking at major holes like we likely will(until BB/SP do their magic).

 

[DaBruinz]

When you get a team together like we do at some point you lose players because cap or no cap you cant afford to keep everybody. For the OL, LT,and C are more important...and you can argue RT too. Mankins is a 1st rd pick, all pro, not likely to take the small $$ and I would rather pay Koppen as he is the glue of the line. Like Ugoh last year, its a great idea to draft guys BEFORE you need them rather then looking at major holes like we likely will(until BB/SP do their magic).

While the team can't afford to keep everyone, I think what you are CLEARLY missing is that by the time Mankins becomes a free agent, Light will be just about done and they can shift the cap expense from Light to Mankins. Also, you need to really look at how contracts are structured. The 1st 2 years tend to be low, cap wise. This is because the 1st year is off-set by the signing bonus and and the second year is limited by how much it can go up.

Umm, Ugoh was drafted the same year they needed him, so he's really a bad example.

As for Koppen being the glue of the line, that he may be. However, Koppen won't be very young either and you're not thinking clearly if you think they won't be able to re-sign him.

Mankins WILL be a priority, you can bank on it. And the Patriots have a history of treating their top picks and performers very well. One only needs to look at the contracts or extensions that Light, Koppen, Seymour, Brady, Vrabel, and Warren have gotten to realize this.

 

[GHOSTOFSAMGASH]

Dante Hall wouldn't be a good cb sir and he did not attend VT:bricks:

 

[DaBruinz]

Dante Hall wouldn't be a good cb sir and he did not attend VT:bricks:

It would be a good idea for you to actually QUOTE the person you are talking to. Jeffbiologist clearly got his "HALL"s messed up.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

It would be a good idea for you to actually QUOTE the person you are talking to. Jeffbiologist clearly got his "HALL"s messed up.

That is pretty good! Funny!

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Well I was thinking about it in the terms of say the Philip Rivers/Eli Manning trade....Grab the value and haggle about it later(if you believe Ryan to be that value). A team like Tampa might not want to lose thier first this year in that 15 minutes haggling, but during the day I think it very likely you could wheel him back around for say 1sts in 09 and 10, picks and players, and alot of different combinations that cant be figured in that 15 minutes. If his VALUE is so much higher than the next guy,and there is supposed to be a HUGE drop off between 6 and 7, then you ante up. You own the rights to a player, you can trade those rights before a contract is signed...

Except that's my point: you can trade those rights, but--correct me, Miguel et al., if I'm wrong--you can't trade the salary cap allocations. Let me use a concrete example from 2007 here to explain what I mean:

The #7 team last year, Minnesota, received $4.8M to sign their eight rookies. The #20 team last year, the G***ts, received $3.8M to sign their eight rookies. If Minnesota traded Adrian Peterson to the G***ts, the NYG would then have to fit Peterson's salary into that same $3.8M. That is why the scenario you suggest (draft then trade) almost never happens.

 

[dryheat44]

Except that's my point: you can trade those rights, but--correct me, Miguel et al., if I'm wrong--you can't trade the salary cap allocations. Let me use a concrete example from 2007 here to explain what I mean:

The #7 team last year, Minnesota, received $4.8M to sign their eight rookies. The #20 team last year, the G***ts, received $3.8M to sign their eight rookies. If Minnesota traded Adrian Peterson to the G***ts, the NYG would then have to fit Peterson's salary into that same $3.8M. That is why the scenario you suggest (draft then trade) almost never happens.

Yep. You'd have to trade two high picks for each other....and the two picks would have to be close to the same draft slot.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Well, you can argue how good any guard is, even if Light leaves, we will still have to spend that money at that position because it is more important than guard.
I think Ugoh was a good example, because in the NFL the future could be NOW. I cant imagine being a Pittsburgh fan coming of a super bowl and seeing Big Ben go through all the crap he did, I would be pulling my hair out! You draft the best FOOTBALL players you can, need/position is secondarily important.
And here is what I mean about drafting Ryan.....
Lets say Ryan gets to 7 and the phones are burning up but no deal gets finalized....I say you draft him with the idea that you continue to watch the board and talk to a couple/three teams. Maybe you have settled on a veteran and a later pick(which you wont know/use til that team is picking the player you want). You can play one against the other, maybe one of the other teams pulls off and gets the 2nd/3rd qb....it only magnifies his value to a team further down the order. The only question you have to ask is IF they can afford him, and thats a no brainer considering how we like to trade for future draft picks. Who knows, every year someone falls in love with a QB. Every year the numbers say you dont have to....but it ALWAYS happens. I equate it to holding an ace against a pr of 2s.....give me enough cards and I beat you.
Salary cap allocation doesnt count if you dont sign the draft pick, it cant.

 

[DaBruinz]

Well, you can argue how good any guard is, even if Light leaves, we will still have to spend that money at that position because it is more important than guard.
I think Ugoh was a good example, because in the NFL the future could be NOW. I cant imagine being a Pittsburgh fan coming of a super bowl and seeing Big Ben go through all the crap he did, I would be pulling my hair out! You draft the best FOOTBALL players you can, need/position is secondarily important.
And here is what I mean about drafting Ryan.....
Lets say Ryan gets to 7 and the phones are burning up but no deal gets finalized....I say you draft him with the idea that you continue to watch the board and talk to a couple/three teams. Maybe you have settled on a veteran and a later pick(which you wont know/use til that team is picking the player you want). You can play one against the other, maybe one of the other teams pulls off and gets the 2nd/3rd qb....it only magnifies his value to a team further down the order. The only question you have to ask is IF they can afford him, and thats a no brainer considering how we like to trade for future draft picks. Who knows, every year someone falls in love with a QB. Every year the numbers say you dont have to....but it ALWAYS happens. I equate it to holding an ace against a pr of 2s.....give me enough cards and I beat you.
Salary cap allocation doesnt count if you dont sign the draft pick, it cant.

First, learn how to quote someone, would you. Its not so hard. All you do is hit the QUOTE button on a particular post.

Second, A 2nd round draft pick doesn't cost 5 million a year against the cap during his rookie contract. Hell, even a mid to lower 1st round pick doesn't cost that much. Do your friggin homework, would you?

Third, an ALL-PRO guard is every bit as important as an above average tackle because of the ability he brings to the table that helps to cover the inability of the tackle.

Fourth, You could have used numerous Patriots examples (Ben Watson, Brandon Meriweather, Ellis Hobbs, Asante Samuel) and they'd have been better examples than Ugoh. Why? Because the rumors of Glenn's departure actually started prior to the draft. So the Colts had a fairly good idea that they'd need a LT.

Fifth, Drafting the best football player you can is a sure fire way to put together a LOSING team. GUARANTEED. Its why the Patriots draft by best VALUE. And that's been talked about, ad naseum during draft time, for the past 4 years on this board.

Lastly, You clearly don't know enough about the salary cap and the rookie signing cap and the differences between them. And, because you don't understand the difference, your argument on Ryan is flimsy at best.

 

[jeffbiologist]

First, learn how to quote someone, would you. Its not so hard. All you do is hit the QUOTE button on a particular post.

Second, A 2nd round draft pick doesn't cost 5 million a year against the cap during his rookie contract. Hell, even a mid to lower 1st round pick doesn't cost that much. Do your friggin homework, would you?

Third, an ALL-PRO guard is every bit as important as an above average tackle because of the ability he brings to the table that helps to cover the inability of the tackle.

Fourth, You could have used numerous Patriots examples (Ben Watson, Brandon Meriweather, Ellis Hobbs, Asante Samuel) and they'd have been better examples than Ugoh. Why? Because the rumors of Glenn's departure actually started prior to the draft. So the Colts had a fairly good idea that they'd need a LT.

Fifth, Drafting the best football player you can is a sure fire way to put together a LOSING team. GUARANTEED. Its why the Patriots draft by best VALUE. And that's been talked about, ad naseum during draft time, for the past 4 years on this board.

Lastly, You clearly don't know enough about the salary cap and the rookie signing cap and the differences between them. And, because you don't understand the difference, your argument on Ryan is flimsy at best.

OK, lets see if I got this right now---
I used the quote thing for the first time, and not a computer wizz so cut/paste is new,lol--
2nd I didnt mention numbers so I dont know what you are talking about a 2nd round pick for 5M?? Please explain
3rd If guards were as valuable as tackles(yes even all pros) they would be taken higher in drafts ...and they arent. I believe Mankins was taken higher to begin with was his flexibility...pay him if he converts to Tackle...
4th I used Ugoh as an example of a fortuitous pick that was at hand, I think most here can accept that life goes on outside the Pats camp,lol.
5th I think you mean ATHELETE, I dont see a problem drafting the BEST FOOTBALL PLAYER available despite position in most cases. I am not talking about falling in love with a player, I am talking about using all your talent and money spent in a scouting department to your advantage. At one time we were incredibly deep at LB and thin other places....but thats OK. You dont draft for starters regardless,especially on this team. You draft for depth, to create competition, and let the cream rise.
Lastly I might not know much about a rookie salary cap. I think I used the Manning for Rivers deal as a proper example. Does the league tell us how much to pay them? Is it mandated anywhere that we have to pay them ANYTHING? I dont know, I was thinking like an American in a free market here. If there are deals or structures I dont know about I will be eager to learn about them. Dont hold the fact that I just found this forum this year against me, you are not better than me.

 

[DaBruinz]

OK, lets see if I got this right now---
I used the quote thing for the first time, and not a computer wizz so cut/paste is new,lol--
2nd I didnt mention numbers so I dont know what you are talking about a 2nd round pick for 5M?? Please explain

While you didn't mention EXACT numbers, you did say that the Patriots would have to used the cap money (over 5 million) from Matt Light's contract on Matt Light's replacement at LT. I was pointing out to you that you were incorrect with that notion.

3rd If guards were as valuable as tackles(yes even all pros) they would be taken higher in drafts ...and they arent. I believe Mankins was taken higher to begin with was his flexibility...pay him if he converts to Tackle...

There have been plenty of guards who are taken in the 1st round of draft. Tackles are thought to be more valuable because most left tackles are protecting the "blindside" of the right-handed quarterbacks. There is the rare left-handed quarterback (Leinhart, Garcia) who requires an exceptional RT to protect their blindside.

Also, Mankins, if he wasn't drafted by the Patriots, was going to be taken by the 49ers with the next pick. Also, if you believe that guards aren't as valuable as tackles, then can you explain to my why Steve Hutchinson (ALL-PRO offensive guard formerly of the Seahawks and now with the Vikings) was so highly sought and given the highest contract of any o-lineman at the time?

4th I used Ugoh as an example of a fortuitous pick that was at hand, I think most here can accept that life goes on outside the Pats camp,lol.

You attempted to use Ugoh as an example of forward thinking when, in reality, the Colts trading up to get Ugoh was them scrambling to ensure that they had coverage at the LT position since they weren't sure if Glenn was going to be around or not.

5th I think you mean ATHELETE, I dont see a problem drafting the BEST FOOTBALL PLAYER available despite position in most cases. I am not talking about falling in love with a player, I am talking about using all your talent and money spent in a scouting department to your advantage. At one time we were incredibly deep at LB and thin other places....but thats OK. You dont draft for starters regardless,especially on this team. You draft for depth, to create competition, and let the cream rise.

Please do not presume to tell me what I meant when its clear that your interpretation is the problem. While you "don't see a problem with drafting the best football player available despite position in most cases" that doesn't mean that its not a sure way to screw a team over. The fact is that there are only 2 or 3 teams that have a scouting department as extensive as the Patriots do.

The last time the Pats were "incredibly deep at LB" was 2001. But they were running a 4-3 at the time. They had Vrabel, T. Johnson, Bruschi, Phifer, Cox, Chatham, and Izzo. I guess you could say that they were deep in 2003 prior to Colvin going down since they had Colvin, T. Johnson, Bruschi, Phifer, McGinest, Chatham, TBC and Vrabel.

Lastly I might not know much about a rookie salary cap. I think I used the Manning for Rivers deal as a proper example. Does the league tell us how much to pay them? Is it mandated anywhere that we have to pay them ANYTHING? I dont know, I was thinking like an American in a free market here. If there are deals or structures I dont know about I will be eager to learn about them. Dont hold the fact that I just found this forum this year against me, you are not better than me.

It is mandated that any 1st year/rookie player has to be signed to a contract that pays them no less than 295K.

After the draft, teams are told how much they can spend, salary cap wise, on signing their draft picks. This is called the rookie pool. 1st round picks are slotted. This means that each draft pick in the 1st round has a particular amount of money that can be spent on it. As was mentioned, when a PLAYER is traded, the salary cap money is not. And there is a significant different between the money slotted at #7 and the money sloted for #14 and the money slotted for #32.

The league also has stipulated that 1st round picks from pick #1 to Pick#16 can be signed to a maximum of 6 years. The rest of the 1st round picks can be signed to a maximum of 5 years. All other draft picks outside the 1st round can only be signed for a maximum of 4 years.

When you found this forum doesn't mean a damn thing. The information I've gone over is not new and certainly not exclusive to this site. Its information that came out of the last collective bargaining agreement and available to anyone who read the newspaper or who was inclined to be knowledgable about the workings of the league they follow.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I'm not going to address any of the other stuff; I'm just going to focus on this portion.

Lastly I might not know much about a rookie salary cap. I think I used the Manning for Rivers deal as a proper example. Does the league tell us how much to pay them? Is it mandated anywhere that we have to pay them ANYTHING? I dont know, I was thinking like an American in a free market here. If there are deals or structures I dont know about I will be eager to learn about them. Dont hold the fact that I just found this forum this year against me, you are not better than me.

The Manning-for-Rivers trade is just about the only possible way of doing a trade involving draftees, and that only because they were relatively close together.

The point I've been trying to make is this: each slot carries with it a certain amount of $ that the team can use to sign drafted rookies. The total amount a team gets is based on the slots they use (e.g., the Colts and Browns should have the lowest totals at the moment, as neither has a first-round pick), not the players they have. So, the Manning-for-Rivers trade was feasible because the Giants were able to work Manning's salary into the cap space they got from drafting at #4.

Once you run out of rookie cap room, you can't sign more drafted rookies. Period. So, if, for example, the Patriots traded the player they drafted at #7 to some other team, that team would have to let some of its other drafted rookies go because the team simply wouldn't have the rookie cap room to sign all of them. And that is why trades of the kind you suggested just don't happen.

 

[dryheat44]

I'm not going to address any of the other stuff; I'm just going to focus on this portion.



The Manning-for-Rivers trade is just about the only possible way of doing a trade involving draftees, and that only because they were relatively close together.

And even then, the Giants had two throw in two more picks to balance it off....whichever ones were used to draft Merriman (#14 or so overall) and Kaeding (which was a fourth or fifth rounder).

So you'd have to get a team that wanted a particular player so badly that they were willing to trade three rookies for him. I don't think that player is Matt Ryan.

 

[LiveShot]

He doesn't list Matt Ryan from BC in the top 32 players? He will be a top five pick. Hope he slide to the Pats and someone will give a lot to pick up a franchise quarterback.