Interesting pre draft piece from Bedard

[MoLewisrocks]

Regarding the impact of the rookie wage scale on the draft value process. Some insight on the current thinking from AFC personnel sources and also Casserly, Pioli, Dimetroff and Lombardi (as it relates to Belichick). At the end of the day while the $$$ has come down to earth the value of picks remains what it has always been, the picks themselves. So you still don't make the trade unless the player is worth the trade off. The money just makes it a little easier calculation if you are so inclined.

Rookie cap could mean more draft trades - The Boston Globe

 

[randomk1]

What's the max deal for a high 1st round pick now? Can somebody explain how the rookie cap works?

And as long as we have BB/TB12 i'd prefer for ****ty teams to overpay for unproven rookies. I mean..how else would Mark Sanchez make Tom Brady money?

 

[jsull87]

Regarding the impact of the rookie wage scale on the draft value process. Some insight on the current thinking from AFC personnel sources and also Casserly, Pioli, Dimetroff and Lombardi (as it relates to Belichick). At the end of the day while the $$$ has come down to earth the value of picks remains what it has always been, the picks themselves. So you still don't make the trade unless the player is worth the trade off. The money just makes it a little easier calculation if you are so inclined.

Rookie cap could mean more draft trades - The Boston Globe

Sorry but i disagree that the value of the picks haven't changed. The risk of an early 1st has decreased therefore the value of a top 10 should go up.

It's basically garanteeing no more jamarcus russel and vernon gholston type deals anymore where you have to sit there and cop a massive cap hit for a terrible player.

 

[Triumph]

Bedard at least gets this right.

Those fans see the clock ticking for their hero Brady, who will be 35 in August. They saw a thin Patriots team take players off the street and come just a few plays short of winning a fourth Super Bowl title under Belichick.One more dynamic playmaker - in the front or back of the defense - could put the Patriots over the top.


I disagree with Lombardi saying you dont go into the draft with the end result in mind. Thats crazy.Beleichick went into the 2010 draft wanting to run a TE based offense and drafted Gronk and Hernandez. He wanted a younger RB corp last year and drafted Vereen and Ridley. There was some sort of plan, BJGE was heading to FA and could be gone.

 

[Wretch]

Sorry but i disagree that the value of the picks haven't changed. The risk of an early 1st has decreased therefore the value of a top 10 should go up.

It's basically garanteeing no more jamarcus russel and vernon gholston type deals anymore where you have to sit there and cop a massive cap hit for a terrible player.

The Russel's and Gholston's deals didn't prevent either team from cutting the players or signing other players. There were salary cap issues but as both the Jets and Redskins have proven you can work around the cap to sign players, inside of the rules. Additionally the salary cap hits that did exist were extremely transitory. If they had an affect on a teams ability to sign other players it was only for 1 or 2 years.

The rookie wage scale was put in place to protect owner's profits not the salary cap. Teams didn't want to pay massive signing bonuses to unproven player only to have them out of the league in 3 or 4 years and not contributing to the teams on field product. Also the rookie salaries were pushing up the veteran salaries. How can you pay Matthew Stafford 40-50 million in bonuses and not pay Brady, or Manning the same amount or more.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

What's the max deal for a high 1st round pick now? Can somebody explain how the rookie cap works?

And as long as we have BB/TB12 i'd prefer for ****ty teams to overpay for unproven rookies. I mean..how else would Mark Sanchez make Tom Brady money?

Now projected to top out at around $24M for the #1 pick. Less than half of what it generally had been and it was trending upwards at breakneck speed. That in turn was fueling veteran deals exceeding cap growth and driving up the price of tenders and tags - which in turn drove up everyone's prices...

Under the new CBA there is a formula tied to cap/revenue growth that basically slots individual contracts and that formula will only increase as the cap increases. Basically you don't need an agent for rookie deals because he isn't going to gain you anything in relation to the formula. He may still help hype you up a draft board and land you endorsement deals, but what you get signed for is pretty much formula driven. Should end the holdouts and holdups in getting rookies signed - at least until some agent like Condon figures out an end around it. Has eliminated the loophole that allowed teams to stay within rookie salary cap in year one by using excessive signing bonus/guaranted money or incentives or escalators in longer term deals to end around the intended cap limitations. The tradeoff is shorter deals, 4 years max and an option on first rounders at their franchise tag value in year 3 for an additional year 5. But franchise tag values have dropped substantially as well and should not increase except in relation to the cap/revenue going forward as well due to the new formula for computing tags and tenders.

The real reason Dallas and Washington got penalized for their uncapped year behavior was because while they were among a handful of teams who were driving the cost of contracts up artificially via cash over cap - that season they did so via restructure and frontloading. The high revenue or big market teams are always going to have an advantage, the league simply stepped in to mitigate as much of that as possible in order to maintain a somewhat level playing field.

 

[upstater1]

Bedard at least gets this right.

Those fans see the clock ticking for their hero Brady, who will be 35 in August. They saw a thin Patriots team take players off the street and come just a few plays short of winning a fourth Super Bowl title under Belichick.One more dynamic playmaker - in the front or back of the defense - could put the Patriots over the top.


I disagree with Lombardi saying you dont go into the draft with the end result in mind. Thats crazy.Beleichick went into the 2010 draft wanting to run a TE based offense and drafted Gronk and Hernandez. He wanted a younger RB corp last year and drafted Vereen and Ridley. There was some sort of plan, BJGE was heading to FA and could be gone.

He really wanted Gronk. He traded up for him after all. But Hernandez was an afterthought who fell into the Patriots' laps. The Patriots had a great many picks before Hernandez, but waited until the 4th round? If they knew how important Hernandez might become, they would have used a second on him.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Sorry but i disagree that the value of the picks haven't changed. The risk of an early 1st has decreased therefore the value of a top 10 should go up.

It's basically garanteeing no more jamarcus russel and vernon gholston type deals anymore where you have to sit there and cop a massive cap hit for a terrible player.

I think you missed the part about how the cost of those picks had essentially invalidated historic draft value charting over the last couple of decades. Now those will be more in line with where they were when first developed. But the thing to remember is there was always tremendous cost in the value of picks required to move up or received to move down. The financials just underscored or exacerbated it. Now it's more of an is what it is decision...based on the value of the picks and not financial implications.

As in the case of Dimetroff where he made the WR move last season in part because he knew a rookie contract cap was coming, while Bill advised him against doing it despite of that because of the value of the picks required to make the move for a player/position he didn't see as worth the tradeoff. The financial changes will make it more likely GM's who fixate on a particular talent or need make the move, while those who don't will still do business as usual. Cost in dollars seldom drove decision makers from making those choices one way or the other. It's really always been about how you perceive the value (impact) of the pick.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Bedard at least gets this right.

Those fans see the clock ticking for their hero Brady, who will be 35 in August. They saw a thin Patriots team take players off the street and come just a few plays short of winning a fourth Super Bowl title under Belichick.One more dynamic playmaker - in the front or back of the defense - could put the Patriots over the top.


I disagree with Lombardi saying you dont go into the draft with the end result in mind. Thats crazy.Beleichick went into the 2010 draft wanting to run a TE based offense and drafted Gronk and Hernandez. He wanted a younger RB corp last year and drafted Vereen and Ridley. There was some sort of plan, BJGE was heading to FA and could be gone.

Not having the end result in mind means remaining flexible and having any number of alternate scenarios you can adapt to depending on how things largely beyond your control unfold while still adding value to your team. It doesn't mean clueless...it means not succombing to pressure to reach for the perceived big ticket quick fix.

Lombardi was talking about the GM's/HC's who fixate on a player or position to their own long term detriment. And contrasting that approach to Bill's, who generally doesn't. He may stretch a bit for a particular player but that generally balances out due to his willingness to bend in the other direction when similar talents at that or other positions and scenarios remain within range. And it ties in with his capacity to mine FA ranks for under developed mid level or aging previously elite talent to plug gaps. And to value and be capable of maximizing the value of those players by coaching them into productive role players at minimum.

Flexibility is one of the tenents of this system, on and off the field from the FO on down. Don't ever back yourself into a corner if you can avoid it. They pride themselves in avoiding them. So Bedard got this part right, too:

Then there are the dreamers. Despite recent history, they will snuggle onto their couches, wearing their blue Tom Brady jerseys, and hope this is the year Belichick makes a dramatic leap up the board to take an impact player.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

He really wanted Gronk. He traded up for him after all. But Hernandez was an afterthought who fell into the Patriots' laps. The Patriots had a great many picks before Hernandez, but waited until the 4th round? If they knew how important Hernandez might become, they would have used a second on him.

But even Gronk fell to a place where Bill was comfortable trading up for him... Had Gronk not had the back issue that knocked him out of first round contention, Bill might not have moved up for him and almost certainly not moved up dramatically. It's always a risk/reward, cost/value calculation.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

but what you get signed for is pretty much formula driven.

This is absolutely correct, but where the agent comes into play is in the one thing that *isn't* formula-driven: the amount of the contract that's guaranteed; IIRC, teams are allowed to guarantee as much or as little of the contract as they choose.

 

[unoriginal]

I disagree with Lombardi saying you dont go into the draft with the end result in mind. Thats crazy.Beleichick went into the 2010 draft wanting to run a TE based offense and drafted Gronk and Hernandez. He wanted a younger RB corp last year and drafted Vereen and Ridley. There was some sort of plan, BJGE was heading to FA and could be gone.

Belichick goes into every draft wanting to run a TE-based offense. No season has gone by without Belichick saying something in the press about how it would be preferable to have great TEs instead of great WRs in his offense, your offense, any offense, because they could do more things.

Over Belichick's long tenure here, TE has probably been the most overdrafted spot on the roster. Before Wes Welker came on board and the Pats went to more of a spread concept, it was a veritable lock that a TE would get drafted. Even if there was clearly no available roster spot for them, Belichick would draft them, and draft multiples of them, seemingly only because he liked watching as many TEs as possible during training camp. Belichick once drafted a TE in the fourth round (Garrett Mills) because he wanted him on the practice squad, and then got publicly upset when Mills was claimed on waivers. That is how much Belichick has loved collecting TEs.

Gronk and Hernandez were drafted not because Belichick suddenly woke up the day after the 2009 season ended and went "TEs are going to be big this year! Let's draft two!" but because that was the year injury and character concerns pushed two very talented TEs down the board to where the Pats were happy to draft them.

Likewise, the key feature about Vereen and Ridley is not that the Pats had to have them in order to get younger, but that that was the year the Pats felt there would be value in drafting some running backs high due to other teams undervaluing the position. The Pats traded back because another team, the Saints, saw value in trading up to take the first running back (Ingram), then took the third (Vereen) running back off the board at a spot (56) far lower than the third running back came off the board in 2008 (Felix Jones, 22), 2009 (Beanie Wells, 31) and 2010 (Jahvid Best, 30).

Further emphasizing that the Pats were targeting value, there was a run on running backs right after Vereen at 56. (Leshoure at 57, Thomas at 62, Murray at 71) Ridley got drafted at 73 because he was one of those sleepers the Pats identify; every draft "expert" felt was a reach that high.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

He really wanted Gronk. He traded up for him after all. But Hernandez was an afterthought who fell into the Patriots' laps. The Patriots had a great many picks before Hernandez, but waited until the 4th round? If they knew how important Hernandez might become, they would have used a second on him.

If there were no "issues" regarding Hernandez, I think he would have been a second-round pick for somebody.

That said, given what happened in that round of the draft, it seems like Hernandez was in a "Bradyesque" situation where even at the previous pick, he was higher on the Patriots' board, talentwise, than everyone else available; the Pats just couldn't bring themselves to pull the trigger.

But by the fourth round, they simply couldn't justify passing over him (and had the pick in within about 30 seconds of going on the clock). They also "made it up" to him by giving him a contract that will give him third-round money if he stays out of trouble.

 

[Don_the_patfan]

Gronk and Hernandez were drafted not because Belichick suddenly woke up the day after the 2009 season ended and went "TEs are going to be big this year! Let's draft two!" but because that was the year injury and character concerns pushed two very talented TEs down the board to where the Pats were happy to draft them.

Agreed. What it comes down to is what players fall and whether they are available when we pick or close enough for us to trade up. We need pass rush but if the players they want are not there they will not just pick for the sake of picking.

 

[Triumph]

He really wanted Gronk. He traded up for him after all. But Hernandez was an afterthought who fell into the Patriots' laps. The Patriots had a great many picks before Hernandez, but waited until the 4th round? If they knew how important Hernandez might become, they would have used a second on him.

The Pats were still planning to run a 2 TE offense and change from a Randy Moss and Wes Welker driven offense that had been played out. Stop Welker and you stopped the Patriots.

The Pats waited until the 4th because Hernandez had issues with marijuana which hurt his draft stock. Report: Failed drug tests caused Aaron Hernandez's draft fall | ProFootballTalk

 

[Triumph]

Not having the end result in mind means remaining flexible and having any number of alternate scenarios you can adapt to depending on how things largely beyond your control unfold while still adding value to your team. It doesn't mean clueless...it means not succombing to pressure to reach for the perceived big ticket quick fix.

Lombardi was talking about the GM's/HC's who fixate on a player or position to their own long term detriment. And contrasting that approach to Bill's, who generally doesn't. He may stretch a bit for a particular player but that generally balances out due to his willingness to bend in the other direction when similar talents at that or other positions and scenarios remain within range. And it ties in with his capacity to mine FA ranks for under developed mid level or aging previously elite talent to plug gaps. And to value and be capable of maximizing the value of those players by coaching them into productive role players at minimum.

Flexibility is one of the tenents of this system, on and off the field from the FO on down. Don't ever back yourself into a corner if you can avoid it. They pride themselves in avoiding them. So Bedard got this part right, too:

Then there are the dreamers. Despite recent history, they will snuggle onto their couches, wearing their blue Tom Brady jerseys, and hope this is the year Belichick makes a dramatic leap up the board to take an impact player.

There is a plan in mind.

You draft Solder if Matt Light is nearing retirement. You draft McCourty when the other CBs you have taken in previous drafts arent working out. You dont draft more TEs with upper picks when you already have Gronk and Hernadez. You dont draft another LT just because he is there.

There are other needs that should be addressed whether the BB polesmokers want to admit that or not.

 

[jmt57]

There is a plan in mind.

You draft Solder if Matt Light is nearing retirement. You draft McCourty when the other CBs you have taken in previous drafts arent working out. You dont draft more TEs with upper picks when you already have Gronk and Hernadez. You dont draft another LT just because he is there.

There are other needs that should be addressed whether the BB polesmokers want to admit that or not.

Yep; basically Best Value = a combination of Best Player Available + Position Need. It's not a case of drafting strictly the BPA, or drafting solely based on need. The question would remain how much weight you place on those two in a team's formula.

 

[PlainOldEd]

Regarding the impact of the rookie wage scale on the draft value process. Some insight on the current thinking from AFC personnel sources and also Casserly, Pioli, Dimetroff and Lombardi (as it relates to Belichick). At the end of the day while the $$$ has come down to earth the value of picks remains what it has always been, the picks themselves. So you still don't make the trade unless the player is worth the trade off. The money just makes it a little easier calculation if you are so inclined.

Rookie cap could mean more draft trades - The Boston Globe

If I may paraphrase BB here.... When was the last time Charlie Casserly was right about anything?

 

[jmt57]

What's the max deal for a high 1st round pick now? Can somebody explain how the rookie cap works?

And as long as we have BB/TB12 i'd prefer for ****ty teams to overpay for unproven rookies. I mean..how else would Mark Sanchez make Tom Brady money?

Projecting the Year 1 NFL Rookie Allocations

The salary cap has remained virtually level from 2011 to 2012, so you would presume the 2012 draftees will make about the same or just slightly more than 2011 draft picks did.

2011 NFL Rookie Signings & Contracts

Last year Cam Newton signed a 4-year deal for $22 million.

#17 pick Nate Solder's 4-year deal was for $8.5 million, with a $4.7 million signing bonus. His 2011 cap number was $1,552,500.

The #27 pick was CB Jimmy Smith with the Ravens; his 4-year deal was for $7,461,000

The #31 pick was DE Cameron Heyward; his 4-year deal was for $6.7 million.



Looking at a mid first round pick like Solder and what his cap figure is, to me first round picks have gone from a huge financial/cap risk to a great financial/cap value.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

This is absolutely correct, but where the agent comes into play is in the one thing that *isn't* formula-driven: the amount of the contract that's guaranteed; IIRC, teams are allowed to guarantee as much or as little of the contract as they choose.

Actually even that is also somewhat formula driven as their are rules stipulating what can and can't be guaranteed and it can't be done piecemeal or solely by discretion (short of you can guarantee everything that is guaranteeable...). If you guarantee it in year one you have to guarantee it in year two or you can't guarantee it in year 3... The role of agents in years past was to push the envelope and find/propose creative ways to do so within the rules. There aren't any of those remaining. Andrew Luck's uncle can negotiate his rookie deal as easily as Tom Condon could have, and the 3% remains in the family with the only decision remaining possibly how much guaranteed salary you hold out for when it's limited to several million at best because of the 25% rule among others. And bonus money is now largely forfeitable so... Gone are the days of other than prescribed incentives or escalators (everything is per schedule) or select guarantees or guaranteed option clauses or voidability clauses, etc.