Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

The race for the #1 pick


Chief Dick
 Share

Recommended Posts

I think at some point, Detroit, Cinci, and Oakland are going to be able to step up and beat somebody. Hell, both Cinci and Oak took what appear to be good teams to the brink this last week.

 

Detroit, while they look like garbage are going to be able to outscore a few teams this year.

 

None the less, the only change I make to your list is to put St. Louis at the top and skip like 5 steps before #3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be excited about the pick except that the Rams are incapable of drafting a decent player. :wacko:

You shouldn't be excited regardless. Until the NFL is able to put in a rookie salary structure, a top 5-10 pick is actually a bad thing for your team. Even if you don't totally botch it, you're paying a ton more for players who historically have statistically no better chance of panning out than players taken later in the same round.

 

I ran the numbers not long ago, dividing up the 1st round into 3 sections, rating players primarily on total starts made as a percentage of games in the league and awarding subjective bonus points for All Pro status. Over all, there was no 1/3 of the round that showed any better than the others. However, if you look at how much these players are getting paid, it's insane. Guys in the back end of the draft are looking at contracts like $8mil over 4 years while guys at the front are getting $8 mil per year for 5 (or more). That's a lot of scratch for a guy who's really no more likely to be a productive player for you than a guy taken 15 picks later.

 

Remember, in most cases, maybe 4-5 players at any one position are being taken in the 1st round. That means, out of the 100s of college prospects at that position, you're getting no worse than the 4th or 5th best. And paying 1/4th the money as you would for a guy rated (which is also just the educated opinion of the scouts) 3-4 spots better. I'll take the 4th best thank you.

 

If you end up with top 5-10 picks a few years in a row, you'll have a huge percentage of your cap tied up in rookies (which you'd have to agree are the hardest to predict success since they haven't played a down in the NFL) and have no money left over to resign players that do end up being good or bringing on free agents. And if such a team couples it's high priced rookies with one or two marquee FA signings, they'll be scraping the bottom of the barrel for the rest of their starters because they'll be totally capped out. Considering that you need to pay about 30 guys who you expect to give significant playing time to (and that's before injuries), that seems like a recipe for being pretty bad.

 

The contracts for the top rookies has only recently exploded, so the effects haven't manifested yet but it seems rather inevitable. A rather unintended consequence of "rewarding" the worst teams in the league with the 1st picks.

 

Sorry to digress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information