Report: Two Comp Pick For Pats. Round 3,Round 5.

[jah]

I'm sure there's a joke there somewhere.

This isn't strictly true anymore now that comp picks can be traded.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

I believe the Pats can trade the Seattle 4th round pick as long as they have their 4th round pick to pay extortion with.

I think you are right and that the Pats should be able to maneuver at least until the draft starts, if not until the 4th round starts.

From Troy Vincent's letter:

For the violation of the playing rules and the failure to cooperate in the subsequent investigation, the New England Patriots are fined $1 million and will forfeit the club's first-round selection in the 2016 NFL Draft and the club's fourth-round selection in the 2017 NFL Draft. If the Patriots have more than one selection in either of these rounds, the earlier selection shall be forfeited. The club may not trade or otherwise encumber these selections.

I would leave it up to the lawyers to determine exactly what it means from an operations perspective....... except that Goodell will say it means whatever he wants it to mean on whatever day of the week he wants.

 

[flasox27]

I think it means that the Pats must have at least one pick in the round.. However, the POS can do whatever he wants and I doubt the owner of the Pats would protest.

 

[The Gr8est]

Now the Pats couldn't do it last year because of cap ramifications, but imagine if a player BB likes, slides to the 4th pick in the 4th round.

If the Pats trade up, they lose the 4th pick immediately, but what if Team X drafts the player, and the Pats trade for him one day later.

What then Mr Omissioner?

 

[nabwong]

Worse still is the Pats will basically have to sit on their hands during the 4th round, since if they try and trade up for anyone they will immediately lose the pick!

That poison pill was vindictive as hell, and most fans only think about the lost 1st and 4th rounder, and not the opportunity loss of being unable to trade in that round.

I believe not entirely true. We lost the Seattle pick. So if we traded for a new 4th, we'd lose that and gain the Seattle one right, if new 4th is higher? We can still maneuver. Just have to picture a shadow 4th. I think Ernie has got this. Lol.

 

[jah]

Now the Pats couldn't do it last year because of cap ramifications, but imagine if a player BB likes, slides to the 4th pick in the 4th round.

If the Pats trade up, they lose the 4th pick immediately, but what if Team X drafts the player, and the Pats trade for him one day later.

What then Mr Omissioner?

I think trading rookies puts the contract entirely (or almost entirely) on the team that drafted them. Thus, we rarely see rookies drafted earlier than round 6 traded. I think the Pats would have to overpay in trade compensation to convince a team to do such a thing.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Yup, it's just one part of the overall strategy, but it's also a useful one. What's telling to me is - if you take a look at the historical chart the NFL lists at the bottom, if you divide that group in the top half and the bottom half, on the whole the teams in the top half have been more successful in that time period than the team in the bottom half (granted that Cleveland and Houston had a few missing years). It's not a guarantee as there are exceptions in each group, but on the whole, that's how it's been.

PFT just stole my post!

Compensatory picks are a reward for smart teams

I love this from the comments - makes me wish I had an account to reply:

1. vikingjack73 says:Feb 24, 2017 5:54 PM
   Packers are winning because of their compensatory picks??
   Really???
   
   I smell B.S.
   They won 2 titles due to have TWO Hall of Fame QBs for the past 25 years!
   
   No Favre, no Rodgers…no Super Bowls!
   Period
   
   Has absolutely nothing to do with their compensatory picks
   Name ONE star player that was drafted with a COMPENSATORY draft pick
   One player that made the difference between being a 9-7/10-6 team vs a Super Bowl champ…..
   

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I would leave it up to the lawyers to determine exactly what it means from an operations perspective....... except that Goodell will say it means whatever he wants it to mean on whatever day of the week he wants.

I think it's pretty clear to determine the meaning. NE can't do anything with the highest pick they have in the 4th round (other than let Roger steal it). So the pick from SEA is frozen (being the higher of the two) but NE can do whatever it wants with its own pick (since it is the lower of the two).

Not that NE would do this (not much point to it) but if they traded some other picks and acquired another 4th round pick that was even higher than the pick from SEA that that new pick would become frozen to be stolen and the SEA pick would be freed up to do whatever NE wanted with it.

 

[goheels22002]

I just edited the title. Yes, we do get the third rounder for Mack

19-0

 

[Tuck]

There are 11 third round picks, which is going to really confuse the people that said there wouldn't be more than six.

The 11 number is an alternate fact.

 

[The Gr8est]

I think it's pretty clear to determine the meaning. NE can't do anything with the highest pick they have in the 4th round (other than let Roger steal it). So the pick from SEA is frozen (being the higher of the two) but NE can do whatever it wants with its own pick (since it is the lower of the two).

Not that NE would do this (not much point to it) but if they traded some other picks and acquired another 4th round pick that was even higher than the pick from SEA that that new pick would become frozen to be stolen and the SEA pick would be freed up to do whatever NE wanted with it.

I don't think that is correct. I think once the trade window is open, the Pats are free to trade the Seattle pick since they have two. I felt the Pats traded for the pick last year to ensure they were not shut out of the 4th round this year.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I don't think that is correct. I think once the trade window is open, the Pats are free to trade the Seattle pick since they have two. I felt the Pats traded for the pick last year to ensure they were not shut out of the 4th round this year.

I don't believe that. Here's the language of the punishment:

"For the violation of the playing rules and the failure to cooperate in the subsequent investigation, the New England Patriots are fined $1 million and will forfeit the club's first-round selection in the 2016 NFL Draft and the club's fourth-round selection in the 2017 NFL Draft. If the Patriots have more than one selection in either of these rounds, the earlier selection shall be forfeited. The club may not trade or otherwise encumber these selections."

The closing "these selections" phrase clearly (IMHO) refers to whichever selections are subject to forfeiture. Which makes both grammatical and operational sense. If the league is going to deny NE the benefit of their highest pick in the rounds in question (which is obviously the point of the punishment), the NFL needs to prevent NE from trading it or otherwise encumbering it. There's no point in saying NE has to forfeit their highest pick in the 4th round but then let them trade it.

 

[long distance]

Here final (before new trades) list of Pats picks that Miguel is going by




I think the first 7 are correct here . the seventh is still unclear which 7th DET pick Pats got in KVN trade - 239 or 250

 

[Jlaff]

Not really. If you just reverse engineer the usual "A year later is a round lower" to "A year earlier is a round higher", the Patriots just got the equivalent of a 2nd round comp pick for an under performing player who wasn't going to be coming back. That may not be top dollar, but it's not terrible value, either.

I'm confused, so for example, if we got a 3rd round pick this year that we were supposed to get in 2019, it's a first round pick?

 

[deroc5050]

Not really. If you just reverse engineer the usual "A year later is a round lower" to "A year earlier is a round higher", the Patriots just got the equivalent of a 2nd round comp pick for an under performing player who wasn't going to be coming back. That may not be top dollar, but it's not terrible value, either.

I don't completely get what your referring too? Are you saying getting the Browns pick this year is like a #2 round pick instead of getting a 4th round pick in 2018?
Reverse engineering what?

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Here final (before new trades) list of Pats picks that Miguel is going by




I think the first 7 are correct here . the seventh is still unclear which 7th DET pick Pats got in KVN trade - 239 or 250

If the NFL draft order PDF is from the NFL itself (presumably it is), then I'd assume that settles the question and I was wrong. I certainly know better than to question Miguel on such things!

 

[AtomicDawg]

Posted this video in another thread and find it appropriate here as well.

 

[convertedpatsfan]

The Donkeys seem to be really killing it at getting compensatory picks the last few years. Perennial comp picks champ ratbirds still doing well with the 3rd round comp pick but that was their only pick this draft.

Yeah, but I think something has changed in the comp pick universe, and it may have cost them quite a bit.

The formula for comp picks is not published, so we can't possibly know it. But based on evaluations of past picks, there have been really good guesses about it. Average per year was considered the most significant factor, then uses a bunch of other criteria like player performance.

OverTheCap projected Brock Osweiler's $18M/average per year would give the Broncos the top comp pick this year.

Projecting The 2017 Compensatory Draft Picks | Over the Cap

Excluding Brock, they correctly projected the order of the first 5 picks, so there's some predictability in what they're doing. The Seahawks jumped up a bit, but then the next few picks were projected correctly.

OTC projected 2 3rds, a 4th, and a 7th for the Broncos. In the final picks announced, the Broncos got 1 3rd, 1 5th, and 2 7ths.

The 3rd is probably Malik Jackson since it was projected in the same order as OTC had. The 7th is probably Ryan Harris, as he was projected there. That means that either:

- Osweiler was projected as a 3rd and given a 5th, while Trevathan was projected as a 4th and given a 7th, or

- Trevathan was projected as a 4th and given a 5th, while Osweiler drops from a 3rd to a 7th.

So they actually kind of lost some value based on projections, which means either the projection is off, or the formula has changed.

It might mean that player performance matters more than it did in the past, and that a player with a high contract like Osweiler who doesn't perform may not necessarily guarantee a high comp pick like in years past.

This also has a bit of a trickle-down effect to the Collins trade and Hightower's potential free agency as well. If performance matters, then just letting them sign for more money elsewhere may not guarantee that 3rd round comp pick. So if Hightower were to go elsewhere for a lot of money, but potentially get injured, then that may affect the comp pick we receive.

Not sure if that affects the idea of how we would approach his free agency, but it potentially carries a bit more risk for that pick than originally thought.

 

[Off The Grid]

We didn't get a 3rd Round Comp Pick.

We traded Jamie Collins for a 3rd Round Comp Pick.

There's a rather gigantic Difference.

...Which is not to imply that the Collins Trade was a Mistake...for 'twas not.

 

[DaBruinz]

Worse still is the Pats will basically have to sit on their hands during the 4th round, since if they try and trade up for anyone they will immediately lose the pick!

That poison pill was vindictive as hell, and most fans only think about the lost 1st and 4th rounder, and not the opportunity loss of being unable to trade in that round.

I was thinking about that.. I think that once the draft starts, the league can't enforce that rule because they will have already taken the Seattle 4th and things will be locked in. The league can't go adding the Seattle pick that the Patriots own back into the order just because the Patriots got a higher pick..Things will go totally nutty if that happens..