Adam Schefter Tweets About The Draft *Merge*

[Phoenix]

Adam Schefter ‏ @AdamSchefter (https://twitter.com/#%21/AdamSchefter) Promises to be an active, unpredictable draft. One NFL GM went so far as to say today, "Picks 3-16 are all trying to trade back."




...just tweeted that...

[Zaxor]

Adam Schefter ‏ @AdamSchefter (https://twitter.com/#%21/AdamSchefter) Promises to be an active, unpredictable draft. One NFL GM went so far as to say today, "Picks 3-16 are all trying to trade back."




...just tweeted that...

should mean a buyers market so you might be able to move up for well below normal cost

[Gaede]

Makes sense. Not alot of elite talent, but tons of depth

[cowboy_ron]

Makes sense. Not alot of elite talent, but tons of depth
That's what I like about this draft

[DBOY3141]

Then we should focus on quality and not quantity. We do not need another 2009 draft, which also lacked elite talent.

I would rather trade up for Cox or even Barron then trade back to add a 4th rounder.

This draft scares me.

[CaptainAmerica]

Don't we hear this every year?

"Unpredictable, going to be wild, everyone trying to trade down"

[Cajuncowboy]

Adam Schefter ‏ @AdamSchefter

Promises to be an active, unpredictable draft. One NFL GM went so far as to say today, "Picks 3-16 are all trying to trade back."


Looks like if we really want to move up, the price may not be as steep as in previous years but is there value in doing so?

Edit: Dang, should have been in the Draft Zone.

[MonsterD]

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=234690

[Cajuncowboy]

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=234690

Crap! Sorry 'bout that.

[cowboy_ron]

Don't we hear this every year?

"Unpredictable, going to be wild, everyone trying to trade down"
Notice anything different about this off season?

[Oh_Canada]

Don't we hear this every year?

"Unpredictable, going to be wild, everyone trying to trade down"

Pretty much.

Is it possible that info was provided by a GM who wants to move up???

[CATCH17]

That's what I like about this draft

Yes and with the holes we have it's a good year to get some quantity on this team for the positions we need.

[irvin88]

Then we should focus on quality and not quantity. We do not need another 2009 draft, which also lacked elite talent.

I would rather trade up for Cox or even Barron then trade back to add a 4th rounder.

This draft scares me.

Trust Jerry!

[jobberone]

Then we should focus on quality and not quantity. We do not need another 2009 draft, which also lacked elite talent.

I would rather trade up for Cox or even Barron then trade back to add a 4th rounder.

This draft scares me.

I'd do the opposite which is what it appears most are trying to do. Fall back and draft players in the same relative tier. I'm sure they're ranked but there are many players very roughly the same talent in the first three rounds.

[theogt]

The rookie wage scale really throws a wrench in things.

[cowboy_ron]

Yes and with the holes we have it's a good year to get some quantity on this team for the positions we need.
exactly

[AKATheRake]

Pretty much.

Is it possible that info was provided by a GM who wants to move up???

Yes!!!

[Picksix]

Not sure how big of a deal this will become, but it's got the middle of the first round talk at least. Florio reported this first over the weekend, and let me expand on it. In the new collective bargaining agreement, there's a provision that could affect trading of draft choices in the first round. Each first-round pick can be signed to a four-year contract with a club option for a fifth year that has to be exercised in May following the third season of the contract. So rookies this year will sign for four years, through the end of the 2015 season; but in May 2015, teams have to tell the players if they intend to exercise the fifth years of the contract and lock up players through 2016. For picks 1 through 10 of the first round, that fifth-year salary will be the transition number, the average of the top 10 salaries at the position that season. For picks 11 through 32, the fifth-year salary will be the average of the third through 25th salaries at the position that year.

I'll give you an example. Let's use Tannehill. The transition number for quarterbacks this year is $14.3 million. The average of the third through 25th quarterback salary this year is $8.1 million. Who knows what the numbers will look like in May 2015, but they probably won't be smaller, or the gulf narrower. In other words, if you pick Tannehill at eight, you'll be paying $6.2 million more in a five-year deal for him than if you picked Tannehill at 12. Crazy. But true.

Now, some teams I spoke with over the weekend say the fifth year in the deal will simply be used as leverage in negotiations for a long-term deal. But I can see sticklers like Scott Pioli in Kansas City, Howie Roseman in Philadelphia and Mike Brown in Cincinnati holding players to fifth years at a lower price. There's a reason Pioli went on last week in his press conference with local writers about why he loved picking at 11. That's where the more team-friendly numbers begin.

In case you're interested, the difference in fifth-year numbers for defensive ends picked in the top 10 versus in the final 22 picks of round one ($4.3 million), and defensive tackles ($2.6 million), could come into play because of the big numbers of each position in the first round. "In any case,'' one club official told me over the weekend, "the old draft trade chart is obsolete.''

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/04/22/mmqb/index.html#ixzz1ssduognZ


Could make a difference.

[CCBoy]

DeCastro or Barron...there you go.

[theogt]

Not sure how big of a deal this will become, but it's got the middle of the first round talk at least. Florio reported this first over the weekend, and let me expand on it. In the new collective bargaining agreement, there's a provision that could affect trading of draft choices in the first round. Each first-round pick can be signed to a four-year contract with a club option for a fifth year that has to be exercised in May following the third season of the contract. So rookies this year will sign for four years, through the end of the 2015 season; but in May 2015, teams have to tell the players if they intend to exercise the fifth years of the contract and lock up players through 2016. For picks 1 through 10 of the first round, that fifth-year salary will be the transition number, the average of the top 10 salaries at the position that season. For picks 11 through 32, the fifth-year salary will be the average of the third through 25th salaries at the position that year.

I'll give you an example. Let's use Tannehill. The transition number for quarterbacks this year is $14.3 million. The average of the third through 25th quarterback salary this year is $8.1 million. Who knows what the numbers will look like in May 2015, but they probably won't be smaller, or the gulf narrower. In other words, if you pick Tannehill at eight, you'll be paying $6.2 million more in a five-year deal for him than if you picked Tannehill at 12. Crazy. But true.

Now, some teams I spoke with over the weekend say the fifth year in the deal will simply be used as leverage in negotiations for a long-term deal. But I can see sticklers like Scott Pioli in Kansas City, Howie Roseman in Philadelphia and Mike Brown in Cincinnati holding players to fifth years at a lower price. There's a reason Pioli went on last week in his press conference with local writers about why he loved picking at 11. That's where the more team-friendly numbers begin.

In case you're interested, the difference in fifth-year numbers for defensive ends picked in the top 10 versus in the final 22 picks of round one ($4.3 million), and defensive tackles ($2.6 million), could come into play because of the big numbers of each position in the first round. "In any case,'' one club official told me over the weekend, "the old draft trade chart is obsolete.''

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/04/22/mmqb/index.html#ixzz1ssduognZ


Could make a difference.
That's pretty interesting. I hadn't thought about that. I'm not sure it should dissuade someone from moving up to take someone they're targeting, but it's interesting nonetheless.

[AmishCowboy]

Not sure how big of a deal this will become, but it's got the middle of the first round talk at least. Florio reported this first over the weekend, and let me expand on it. In the new collective bargaining agreement, there's a provision that could affect trading of draft choices in the first round. Each first-round pick can be signed to a four-year contract with a club option for a fifth year that has to be exercised in May following the third season of the contract. So rookies this year will sign for four years, through the end of the 2015 season; but in May 2015, teams have to tell the players if they intend to exercise the fifth years of the contract and lock up players through 2016. For picks 1 through 10 of the first round, that fifth-year salary will be the transition number, the average of the top 10 salaries at the position that season. For picks 11 through 32, the fifth-year salary will be the average of the third through 25th salaries at the position that year.

I'll give you an example. Let's use Tannehill. The transition number for quarterbacks this year is $14.3 million. The average of the third through 25th quarterback salary this year is $8.1 million. Who knows what the numbers will look like in May 2015, but they probably won't be smaller, or the gulf narrower. In other words, if you pick Tannehill at eight, you'll be paying $6.2 million more in a five-year deal for him than if you picked Tannehill at 12. Crazy. But true.

Now, some teams I spoke with over the weekend say the fifth year in the deal will simply be used as leverage in negotiations for a long-term deal. But I can see sticklers like Scott Pioli in Kansas City, Howie Roseman in Philadelphia and Mike Brown in Cincinnati holding players to fifth years at a lower price. There's a reason Pioli went on last week in his press conference with local writers about why he loved picking at 11. That's where the more team-friendly numbers begin.

In case you're interested, the difference in fifth-year numbers for defensive ends picked in the top 10 versus in the final 22 picks of round one ($4.3 million), and defensive tackles ($2.6 million), could come into play because of the big numbers of each position in the first round. "In any case,'' one club official told me over the weekend, "the old draft trade chart is obsolete.''

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/04/22/mmqb/index.html#ixzz1ssduognZ


Could make a difference.
Didn't know this, Thanks for the info!

[Idgit]

Not sure how big of a deal this will become, but it's got the middle of the first round talk at least. Florio reported this first over the weekend, and let me expand on it. In the new collective bargaining agreement, there's a provision that could affect trading of draft choices in the first round. Each first-round pick can be signed to a four-year contract with a club option for a fifth year that has to be exercised in May following the third season of the contract. So rookies this year will sign for four years, through the end of the 2015 season; but in May 2015, teams have to tell the players if they intend to exercise the fifth years of the contract and lock up players through 2016. For picks 1 through 10 of the first round, that fifth-year salary will be the transition number, the average of the top 10 salaries at the position that season. For picks 11 through 32, the fifth-year salary will be the average of the third through 25th salaries at the position that year.

I'll give you an example. Let's use Tannehill. The transition number for quarterbacks this year is $14.3 million. The average of the third through 25th quarterback salary this year is $8.1 million. Who knows what the numbers will look like in May 2015, but they probably won't be smaller, or the gulf narrower. In other words, if you pick Tannehill at eight, you'll be paying $6.2 million more in a five-year deal for him than if you picked Tannehill at 12. Crazy. But true.

Now, some teams I spoke with over the weekend say the fifth year in the deal will simply be used as leverage in negotiations for a long-term deal. But I can see sticklers like Scott Pioli in Kansas City, Howie Roseman in Philadelphia and Mike Brown in Cincinnati holding players to fifth years at a lower price. There's a reason Pioli went on last week in his press conference with local writers about why he loved picking at 11. That's where the more team-friendly numbers begin.

In case you're interested, the difference in fifth-year numbers for defensive ends picked in the top 10 versus in the final 22 picks of round one ($4.3 million), and defensive tackles ($2.6 million), could come into play because of the big numbers of each position in the first round. "In any case,'' one club official told me over the weekend, "the old draft trade chart is obsolete.''

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/04/22/mmqb/index.html#ixzz1ssduognZ


Could make a difference.


Cool.

[DFWJC]

They have some updated trade charts, but suspect even they are out of whack somewhat.

The argument that a top ten pick may be less valuable based on the 5th year claus is not intirely true though. Top tem picks are more team friendly now than they were a couple of years ago. I think we all know that. But maybe the jump fro 12 to 9 (for example) may be less based on the arbirtray cutoff at pick 10 for salalry escalations.

I guess maybe a new chart could reflect that.

In the end, it does like pick 14 is in a bit of sweet spot.

[Picksix]

If Schefter is right, the one thing I fear (sort of), is a situation like we had a few years ago, where every team was taking the whole time to make their pick, simply because they were waiting for the phones to ring. I know that's part of the deal, but when about 20 teams in a row do that, it makes the first round that much longer (and later). I think it was after that year, that they shortened the first round to 10 min per pick, instead of 15, so that helps.

[Fla Cowpoke]

The news above at length of contracts could mean a lot of people not interested in trading into the top ten but making those picks from 11-15 to be very popular.