Cleveland's 2008 1st Round Pick ....

[Bob Sacamano]

I do not doubt that. I would take into account two things.

1. #2 Overall is more valuable than the #6 overall. Of course it is possible that there are no takers, but not likely.

2. There may be no takers because of the asking price in terms of picks. Some teams no doubt want the world in return for their valuable pick.

Not saying there is not some truth to the argument, but you will have a hard time convincing me top 10 picks are not worth much anymore and no one really wants them.

i'm not saying they're not worth much, just the cost to get the pick in that range, plus the cost to sign the pick, is pretty astronomical nowadays, you're talking about 2/3 1st day picks, and 20-30 mil in guaranteed money for a player who has a 50/50 chance of busting, which is probably why teams picking in the top 10 aren't finding many trade-down partners

 

[Big Dakota]

I do not disagree with that. I agree that the draft chart is probably somewhat dated now.

What I am saying is that I believe the top picks still have value. Lets just say the #1 pick overall used to be worth in the range of 3000 points, well lets just say you had the #1 pick overall and you were not interested in keeping it. Would you settle for 1500 points instead?

My contention is the pick still has value, maybe not as much but it still has value.

Oh for sure they have high value, just not what they once were. When the new CBA comes around again, after the 2011 season, you can bet the biggest bone of contention will be the rook salaries. Not much can be done till then, but a restructuring of these up front monies is in order and it will make the top picks worth more again. You have to build through the draft in the NFL and these bonuses are really making it hard on the bad teams in the top 10 every year. You had better hit on these kids or it hurts for several years.

 

[gbrittain]

i'm not saying they're not worth much, just the cost to get the pick in that range, plus the cost to sign the pick, is pretty astronomical nowadays, you're talking about 2/3 1st day picks, and 20-30 mil in guaranteed money for a player who has a 50/50 chance of busting, which is probably why teams picking in the top 10 aren't finding many trade-down partners

Are they not finding trade partners because their asking price is too high or is it because no teams are not interested in the big contract?

If they asking price is too high then that proves the top picks are in high demand. If the risk of a bust and huge contract is too big wouldn't the value of the pick bring the asking price down and therefore facilitate trades more easily?

Of course that is not the case which indicates to me that although the risk is there, the value is still very high for these premium picks.

 

[gbrittain]

Oh for sure they have high value, just not what they once were. When the new CBA comes around again, after the 2011 season, you can bet the biggest bone of contention will be the rook salaries. Not much can be done till then, but a restructuring of these up from monies is in order and it will make the top picks worth more again. You have to build through the draft in the NFL and these bonuses are really making it hard on the bad teams in the top 10 every year. You had better hit on these kids or it hurts for several years.

I agree with that and that is why I say no team that essentially inherits a top 5 pick overall like the Patriots is kicking themselves and saying woe is me for having a top 5 pick. It still has considerable value and the Patriots are sitting pretty with a potential #2 overall pick.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Are they not finding trade partners because their asking price is too high or is it because no teams are not interested in the big contract?

I think it's both, the asking price, plus the big contract

If they asking price is too high then that proves the top picks are in high demand.

not really, it just proves that top 10 picks are the premium picks, and are valued much higher

If the risk of a bust and huge contract is too big wouldn't the value of the pick bring the asking price down and therefore facilitate trades more easily?

the amount deemed as compensation would bring the price up or down IMO

if someone's asking for your 1st, 3rd and a 2nd in next year's draft in exchange for their 1st, as opposed to your 1st and 4th for their 1st, which offer would be more appealing to you? obviously the higher the pick, the more the compensation, the less appealing the trade then becomes

trading up all depends on how much you value the player, if you think that player stands a better chance to boom rather than bust, plus your need for that player, so if you think the player is worth the risk of the compensation given up, plus the huge contract, then you're more likely to go through w/ it, no matter the asking price, see New York Giants and Eli Manning

 

[gbrittain]

I think it's both, the asking price, plus the big contract



not really, it just proves that top 10 picks are the premium picks, and are valued much higher



the amount deemed as compensation would bring the price up or down IMO

if someone's asking for your 1st, 3rd and a 2nd in next year's draft in exchange for their 1st, as opposed to your 1st and 4th for their 1st, which offer would be more appealing to you? obviously the higher the pick, the more the compensation, the less appealing the trade then becomes

trading up all depends on how much you value the player, if you think that player stands a better chance to boom or bust, plus your need for that player

When it is all said and done lets assume the Patriots win the SuperBowl (they will not Dallas will )

Would they rather have the #2 pick overall or the #32 pick overall? Maybe I am really naive, but I still think the #2 overall pick is the more enviable pick.

My whole point is the Patriots are sitting pretty with the 49ers pick. I guess some think that is not the case.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

When it is all said and done lets assume the Patriots win the SuperBowl (they will not Dallas will )

Would they rather have the #2 pick overall or the #32 pick overall? Maybe I am really naive, but I still think the #2 overall pick is the more enviable pick.

My whole point is the Patriots are sitting pretty with the 49ers pick. I guess some think that is not the case.

oh yeah, definately, I'm just pointing out that it's going to be harder for the Pats to trade down and have 2 1st round picks again next year

which some are worrying will happen

 

[TheCount]

Doubt Talib lasts till our pick but i'd be thrilled. Smith has been shooting up boards so it'll be interesting to see if he's around in the 60's Right now my day 1 mock goes like this(if we keep every pick)

1. CB Talib
1. RB Rice
2.WR/ST Avery
3. NT Bryant

I seriously doubt Bryant will be around that low, but i can wish.

If we don't make a move for DMAC, I find it highly unlikely we'll take a RB in the first round. It's harder to hit on a WR in later rounds than it is to hit on a RB in later rounds.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

Can you believe the Pats?

Everything they do turns to gold.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

When it is all said and done lets assume the Patriots win the SuperBowl (they will not Dallas will )

Would they rather have the #2 pick overall or the #32 pick overall? Maybe I am really naive, but I still think the #2 overall pick is the more enviable pick.

My whole point is the Patriots are sitting pretty with the 49ers pick. I guess some think that is not the case.

Until something is done about rookie salaries, I'd rather have the 32nd pick.


Have you noticed how little movement there's been in the top 10 the last few years? That's because no one wants to move up any longer. It's too early to judge this year's picks but are any of last year's top picks living up to their contracts? Williams isn't, Bush isn't, Young isn't......All have shown the ability to be decent players but the value just isn't there.

Indy took Manning #1 overall and the Rams had a couple of top 10 picks playing for them when they won it all including #1 overall Pace, but other than that, there's not a whole lot of SB success by high draftees in the cap era.

 

[Kangaroo]

I did not expect a top 5 pick from Cleveland despite some people thinking otherwise. Go back and look I said B more would not be as good as the 13-3 the year before and I thought the Bengals would stay around .500 with all the turmoil and how bad the defense was.

I thought the Browns division was over rated by the media and I thought the

Steelers​

would be solid but not great

Did I expect

Bmore​

to be this bad no I expected a drop but not this free fall they have taken

Did I expect

Cincy​

to be in the basement nope expected about mediocre

I predicted 6-8 win range for the Browns no way did I think they be a playoff team

Steelers​

are about what I expected from them


What also sucks in the Browns last 6 games right now 3 teams are some of the worse in the league and 3 are at .500 mark right about the level of play as the

Browns​

so it could go either way

Nov 25 Houston (.500 team)
Dec 2 @Arizona (.500 team)
Dec 9 @N.Y. Jets (vying for a top 10 pick)
Dec 16 Buffalo (.500 team)
Dec 23 @Cincinnati (vying for a top 10 pick)
Dec 30 San Francisco (vying for a top 10 pick)

 

[Kangaroo]

Until something is done about rookie salaries, I'd rather have the 32nd pick.


Have you noticed how little movement there's been in the top 10 the last few years? That's because no one wants to move up any longer. It's too early to judge this year's picks but are any of last year's top picks living up to their contracts? Williams isn't, Bush isn't, Young isn't......All have shown the ability to be decent players but the value just isn't there.

Indy took Manning #1 overall and the Rams had a couple of top 10 picks playing for them when they won it all including #1 overall Pace, but other than that, there's not a whole lot of SB success by high draftees in the cap era.

Thats one thing I think the NBA has done right about draft picks is they have a set range for this many years with this % of increase by where you are drafted