Compensatory picks

[iceberg]

anyone else view them as hogwash more or less? if you can't resign your own players WHY should you be rewarded with more picks that only drag the draft out that much longer? why should you be rewarded and encouraged to NOT keep your players?

i just don't care for this particular practice and would rather just drop it. keep 'em or lose 'em, no reward for loss.

 

[Hostile]

anyone else view them as hogwash more or less? if you can't resign your own players WHY should you be rewarded with more picks that only drag the draft out that much longer? why should you be rewarded and encouraged to NOT keep your players?

i just don't care for this particular practice and would rather just drop it. keep 'em or lose 'em, no reward for loss.

I'm in complete agreement. It's like rewarding teams for doing a poor job.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

Good point

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I think it is a lame way of saying sorry we screwed up with the cap.

 

[Hostile]

I think it is a lame way of saying sorry we screwed up with the cap.

...and the Draft.

 

[iceberg]

I'm in complete agreement. It's like rewarding teams for doing a poor job.

it just seems brought about by the overly PC generation where if you lose, they don't want you to feel like a loser so you get a "prize" anyway. it's a sad thing to teach / preach reward for losing and not doing your job right. or even if you choose to let a player go for your own reasons, that shouldn't give you a reward either - you don't want the player, don't keep him.

just seems like the kid who lost the race has the adult running around saying "oh, you came in 15th place - isn't that great!!! you're a winner!!!!!!

no, you came in 15th freaking place - you suck and get better if you wanna "win".

damn pc generational garbage spillover.

 

[DawnOfANewD]

I don't know, since '93 we've been among the top teams in terms of the amount of compensatory draft picks awarded to us, plus we were able to get Rob Pettiti and Justin Beriault with the 2 compensatory 6th-round picks we got last year. I'm not sure what my point is...

 

[iceberg]

I don't know, since '93 we've been among the top teams in terms of the amount of compensatory draft picks awarded to us, plus we were able to get Rob Pettiti and Justin Beriault with the 2 compensatory 6th-round picks we got last year. I'm not sure what my point is...

oh, i'm sure you can get players out of it. i'm sure people can get "value" out of it. but you:

1) draft a player
2) he plays 3-5 years - whatever.
3) you choose to NOT resign him
4) you get another pick

why? it was your choice to NOT resign him why the "bonus" for not keeping your own players?

 

[Cowboys&Caps]

How is it hurting you so much? It gives more college players a chance to be drafted which is not a bad thing.

 

[iceberg]

How is it hurting you so much? It gives more college players a chance to be drafted which is not a bad thing.

cause it rewards failure and i don't see the point in that. i doubt very seriously that it was done to give college players more exposure or they'd have lobbed what, 6 rounds off the draft itself?

it was done cause some owner whined about losing players cause they probably didn't want to spend for them so they're rewarded for this by getting "free" picks simply because they FAILED to keep their own players.

you want him, sign him. you don't, let him go. but letting him go should NOT be rewarded.

 

[DawnOfANewD]

cause it rewards failure and i don't see the point in that. i doubt very seriously that it was done to give college players more exposure or they'd have lobbed what, 6 rounds off the draft itself?

it was done cause some owner whined about losing players cause they probably didn't want to spend for them so they're rewarded for this by getting "free" picks simply because they FAILED to keep their own players.

you want him, sign him. you don't, let him go. but letting him go should NOT be rewarded.

Not to belabor the argument, but instead of the reason being you can't afford him, what if you don't want to re-sign him because you think he's overrated and not worth the money he's asking for or he's older and/or no a longer a good fit for your team? From a purely practical standpoint, getting a draft pick for someone you think is past his sell-by date and/or is no longer of use to you, ie. say he's a DE who's too small for your new 3-4 scheme or he's an older expensive starting RB who got injured and replaced by your younger backup RB who showed he could put up superior production (just hypotheticals, no one specific in mind), isn't a bad thing.

 

[iceberg]

Not to belabor the argument, but instead of the reason being you can't afford him, what if you don't want to re-sign him because you think he's overrated and not worth the money he's asking for or he's older and/or no a longer a good fit for your team? From a purely practical standpoint, getting a draft pick for someone you think is past his sell-by date and/or is no longer of use to you, ie. say he's a DE who's too small for your new 3-4 scheme or he's an older expensive starting RB who got injured and replaced by your younger backup RB who showed he could put up superior production (just hypotheticals, no one specific in mind), isn't a bad thing.

then don't sign him and then he musta been a bad pick, huh? but choosing to NOT sign a pick of your own should NOT mean you get a "mulligan" more or less.

you wanna move on in a different scheme, build it. fine. let players go who no longer fit, trade them, whatever. but losing your own picks shouldn't mean you get them again even if in different rounds.

i just don't see why owners should get a benefit when for whatever reason they choose to not keep their picks.

 

[big dog cowboy]

3) you choose to NOT resign him

it was your choice to NOT resign him why the "bonus" for not keeping your own players?

Salary cap is what killed us. We wanted to keep our free agents in the 90's but couldn't.

 

[iceberg]

Salary cap is what killed us. We wanted to keep our free agents in the 90's but couldn't.

then those are business decisions to make to me, not to be rewarded. i realize if you can't afford a player because of the cap it sucks, but that's the idea *of* the cap.

again, i just see it as rewarding failure.

 

[Hostile]

How is it hurting you so much? It gives more college players a chance to be drafted which is not a bad thing.

Bad example. If you poll most players heading to the NFL you'll find that once the first 5 rounds are gone and they haven't been drafted most don't want to be. They can negotiate larger signing bonuses and go to a team they are interested in playing for as opposed to one who "owns" their rights. There are undrafted Free Agents who actually get better contracts than guys drafted in the 6th and 7th rounds.

 

[theogt]

again, i just see it as rewarding failure.

Actually its just the opposite. Teams that are good at scouting talent, drafting well, and developing/coaching players into all stars simply cannot afford to sign all their players.

 

[DawnOfANewD]

then don't sign him and then he musta been a bad pick, huh? but choosing to NOT sign a pick of your own should NOT mean you get a "mulligan" more or less.

you wanna move on in a different scheme, build it. fine. let players go who no longer fit, trade them, whatever. but losing your own picks shouldn't mean you get them again even if in different rounds.

i just don't see why owners should get a benefit when for whatever reason they choose to not keep their picks.

Well, if Greg Ellis' agent asks for a 6-year $90 million contract when he becomes a FA and we decide to say naahh, it won't be because he was a "bad draft pick", it'll be because we don't think he's worth the money. And, getting a 1st-rounder or another relatively high compensatory pick for him as he was a 1st-round draftee would be pretty sweet, wouldn't you think?

 

[Hostile]

Actually its just the opposite. Teams that are good at scouting talent, drafting well, and developing/coaching players into all stars simply cannot afford to sign all their players.

Not at all true. Look at the cap room of the Patriots and Eagles and the job their front offices have done.

 

[iceberg]

Well, if Greg Ellis' agent asks for a 6-year $90 million contract when he becomes a FA and we decide to say naahh, it won't be because he was a "bad draft pick", it'll be because we don't think he's worth the money. And, getting a 1st-rounder or another relatively high compensatory pick for him as he was a 1st-round draftee would be pretty sweet, wouldn't you think?

but why should we? just "because" it's cool?

 

[theogt]

Not at all true. Look at the cap room of the Patriots and Eagles and the job their front offices have done.

The Patriots have had to release players because of cap room. Fortunately for them, they've been freakishly good at drafting/signing even more young talent. However, this does NOT affect my point. In fact it somewhat reinforces it. Most would say the "window is closing" for these teams.

All of that said, I would say that I think compensatory picks are a bit silly. Though they may be silly, they DO NOT AT ALL reward failure. That's an even more silly idea.