captain stone
PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2004
- Messages
- 34,316
- Reaction score
- 27,617
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Brady wanted somebody, whether it be Mo' Snuze, Emmanuel Sanders, whoever...He also might've been talked into him by the Rutgers Mafia...You can’t criticize trading a second for Sanu because Brady wanted him and then turn around and criticize the patriots for not getting Brady weapons.
And deservedly so, too.Of course they can - and will. How long have you been around here?
because its the second tag which would cost $37, 680, 000 for 2021, and the Cowboys only have $19 million in cap space.
Brady specifically requested Sanu.Brady wanted somebody, whether it be Mo' Snuze, Emmanuel Sanders, whoever...He also might've been talked into him by the Rutgers Mafia...
And deservedly so, too.
On the surface your "logic is correct, but I think on the whole too much weight is give to "first round picks". Most of the draft gurus tell us that there is usually 5-8 that can be labeled "game changers" in every draft. Guys that you not only predict with be instant starters, but IMPACT starters by year 2. Then there is another 5-10 guys who would be drafted with the expectation that they will be first year starters. After that say 15 guys, there will be about 25-30 guys who will all carry about the same grade. Some will be drafted in the first round and some in the 2nd.No it isn’t.
Money devalues due to inflation. Otherwise a dollar today and a dollar in a year would be the same thing.
A football franchise is not an inflationary object.
The need to have players this year is no greater or less than the need to have players next year
if I can pick a 1st round talent next year, in the long run my franchise is better off than it I pick a 2nd round talent this year.
I don’t get the 2nd rounder for any longer, it’s not like I get an extra year of use out of him.
And yes there are desperate teams. And if I want your second round pick there is no value to you in getting my second round pick next year, it’s just a wash. So the desperate trader has to give more than equal value. Which is why normally you see a 2nd and maybe a 4 happen. But if its pick for pick the only thing I have to offer you better than my second is my first.
That doesn’t mean the value of this years pick is one round higher than next years. It means bad traders overpay in the rare case it ever even happens.
My point really was a first round pick has the same value in 2016 as 2017 or 2020 of 2025.On the surface your "logic is correct, but I think on the whole too much weight is give to "first round picks". Most of the draft gurus tell us that there is usually 5-8 that can be labeled "game changers" in every draft. Guys that you not only predict with be instant starters, but IMPACT starters by year 2. Then there is another 5-10 guys who would be drafted with the expectation that they will be first year starters. After that say 15 guys, there will be about 25-30 guys who will all carry about the same grade. Some will be drafted in the first round and some in the 2nd.
The point being is that we put WAY too much importance on the term "first round pick" ESPECIALLY where we have pick in the last 20 years, because we have always been picking in that 3rd level of the draft talent even with our first picks. This year we FINALLY get a chance to get a 2nd level player.
BTW- this isn't to say there aren't busts at all the levels, I'm just saying when the "experts" put grades on these kids coming out of college THAT's just how they group them. And remember the same personnel guys who drafted Harry, where the same guys who signed JC Jackson as an UDFA. You just never know.
Right? Lmao, I thought the same thing. But it makes a certain sort of sense...I never, in a million years, thought I’d see a time value of money comp to draft pick/player.
This isn't economics. Franchises are run by humans. Teams go all in even though it doesn't make long-term sense. And also these trades for future picks happen a lot.
I didn't say that only 2nd rounders are constantly traded into the future. I wrote that draft picks are traded in every round for future picks in a higher round. It's common.My point IS that it doesn’t make sense because it’s just not correct. A 1st is a first, it isn’t worth less because it’s next year, that perception is flawed.
When is the last time a 2 was traded for a 1 next year?
Economics is also run by humans.
The big difference is you can always hold money......you can't hold draft picks.
This leads into what's actually the most important- cashflow timing.
People who trade forward will do so to see immediate returns. If you see a player that helps now, you see an immediate desirable return on investment
Likewise, trading back is cash conservation (you don't see viable investments) or you want to see cash flows in the future. (I want these additional picks in the future to overhaul the Oline in 2 years.)
Getting players now has other problems money doesn't have- You have to pay the guy from CAP and having him on the roster means someone else isn't on the roster.
I don't see a difference either. Instead of having that player from 2020 to 2024 on a rookie contract you have him from 2021 to 2025.My point really was a first round pick has the same value in 2016 as 2017 or 2020 of 2025.
Because you get a player of the same caliber and whether you have him for 5 years starting 2015 or 2025 it’s still the same thing. Trading a first rounder, whether it’s this year or next year has exactly the same impact, it’s just impacted a different time frame, in terms of the overall success of your franchise.
Of course there are minor differences, but the point that delaying the pick a year gives it less overall value is wrong. It gives it sooner value that also ends sooner.I don't see a difference either. Instead of having that player from 2020 to 2024 on a rookie contract you have him from 2021 to 2025.
What about a 1st in a year with a lower cap vs a 1st in a year with a much higher cap, which I think will be the case going forward? I would think that a 1st in a year with a much lower cap would take up more of the total cap space.
My point really was a first round pick has the same value in 2016 as 2017 or 2020 of 2025.
Because you get a player of the same caliber and whether you have him for 5 years starting 2015 or 2025 it’s still the same thing. Trading a first rounder, whether it’s this year or next year has exactly the same impact, it’s just impacted a different time frame, in terms of the overall success of your franchise.
It’s not really a debate of value it’s a debate of whether you want to give away a better asset in order to get a lesser one sooner.I think the logic behind that thinking is usually just about how teams might value it, and value is always subjective. If I'm a GM like Belichick, and I'm in a really secure position where I know I'm going to be around for a long time, then 100% a first is a first, no matter the year. If I'm a GM who needs results soon in order to keep my job? I value a 1st rounder this year MUCH higher than one next year, because I can't guarantee I'm even around to use it next year if my team doesn't improve THIS year. So it's definitely not a hard and fast rule, but I think that's why that "rule" was coined. In a league that only cares what you've done lately, I think most GM's are in the latter position.
Such as?
17.5 and 24.5 aren’t massive cap hits for a qb. It’s what you have to pay, just a matter of whether he’s the right guy to do it with. Coupled with a 1st or high 2nd round qb draft choice, I think he’s be near the top of my reclamation projects.
Wentz carries a huge risk for not only the coach and gm who hire him, but could also set a franchise back 2 or 3 years. Maybe even more.
He shot out of a cannon into this league and looked every bit a wrecking machine. Blew out the knee and he has spiraled downhill since. That was 3 years ago btw, if he hasn’t got his mojo back by now, than I’m not sure he never will. You never know though. Again though, the kind of move that coaches and front office people lose jobs over. Too much of a risk imo.
I’ll take let’s make things up and post them for 1000 Alex.$24.5m is not a massive hit for a QB? Tell that to BB. He offered Brady $22m for 1 yr and wouldn’t go to $25m. In that context $24.5m for Wentz is obscene.
Ok that was funnyI’ll take let’s make things up and post them for 1000 Alex.