ESPN: Why the fifth-year option could help Cowboys on draft day

[jobberone]

Why the fifth-year option could help Cowboys on draft day

Todd Archer, ESPN Dallas Cowboys reporter

IRVING, Texas -- With the 27th pick in the first round, the Dallas Cowboys could be in an advantageous position.

Maybe not to get the player they prefer in the first round, but to have to the chance to have more than seven draft picks.

With the advent of the fifth-year option on first-round picks, there is added value to those selections. What team wouldn't want to guarantee a fifth year for a player that has been a starter without having to use a franchise or transition tag?

The Miami Dolphins gave center Mike Pouncey a contract over the weekend that guaranteed him $22 million. The Cowboys can delay a decision on a long-term extension for Travis Frederick, their Pro Bowl center, if they want because of the fifth-year option.

So for a team looking to move up to the end of the first round, the value in a trade has to account for the fifth-year option.

Last year, the Minnesota Vikings gave up picks Nos. 40 and 108 to the Seattle Seahawks to take quarterback Teddy Bridgewater with the final pick of the first round. In 2013, the Vikings gave up picks Nos. 52, 83, 102 and 229 for the 29th overall pick in a trade with the New England Patriots to take wide receiver Cordarrelle Patterson.

In 2012, the Patriots received picks Nos. 36 and 101 from Tampa for the 31st and 126th pick so the Bucs could take running back Doug Martin. The Vikings picked up Harrison Smith with the 29th pick after giving the Baltimore Ravens picks Nos. 35 and 98.

In 2011, the New Orleans Saints traded with the Patriots at No. 28 to take Mark Ingram for a second-round pick and their first-rounder in 2012.

At No. 27, the Cowboys could find themselves in a sweet spot to move down and acquire more picks. If they stand pat, cornerbacks such as Byron Jones, Kevin Johnson and Marcus Peters could be available, or they could pick up an extra second- or third-rounder to find a cornerback a little later (P.J. Williams?) while having the ability to fill their needs at running back and defensive line or offensive line.

Currently the Cowboys have three picks in the top 91 selections. In the more is better department, gaining two more picks inside that range could allow them better flexibility in terms of matching up value and a player’s ability with need.

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas-cowb...lp-cowboys-on-draft-day?ex_cid=espnapi_public

 

[Stash]

I think this is how Bryce Petty would factor in for Dallas. If they were to trade down and acquire additional picks, I think he would be ticketed for one of them.

 

[DBOY3141]

I think this is how Bryce Petty would factor in for Dallas. If they were to trade down and acquire additional picks, I think he would be ticketed for one of them.

Agree, but I think the Cowboys look at the 1st round now as keeping that 5th year option for themselves. I don't see them trading out of the 1st round this year.

 

[xwalker]

Why the fifth-year option could help Cowboys on draft day

Todd Archer, ESPN Dallas Cowboys reporter

IRVING, Texas -- With the 27th pick in the first round, the Dallas Cowboys could be in an advantageous position.

Maybe not to get the player they prefer in the first round, but to have to the chance to have more than seven draft picks.

With the advent of the fifth-year option on first-round picks, there is added value to those selections. What team wouldn't want to guarantee a fifth year for a player that has been a starter without having to use a franchise or transition tag?

The Miami Dolphins gave center Mike Pouncey a contract over the weekend that guaranteed him $22 million. The Cowboys can delay a decision on a long-term extension for Travis Frederick, their Pro Bowl center, if they want because of the fifth-year option.

So for a team looking to move up to the end of the first round, the value in a trade has to account for the fifth-year option.

Last year, the Minnesota Vikings gave up picks Nos. 40 and 108 to the Seattle Seahawks to take quarterback Teddy Bridgewater with the final pick of the first round. In 2013, the Vikings gave up picks Nos. 52, 83, 102 and 229 for the 29th overall pick in a trade with the New England Patriots to take wide receiver Cordarrelle Patterson.

In 2012, the Patriots received picks Nos. 36 and 101 from Tampa for the 31st and 126th pick so the Bucs could take running back Doug Martin. The Vikings picked up Harrison Smith with the 29th pick after giving the Baltimore Ravens picks Nos. 35 and 98.

In 2011, the New Orleans Saints traded with the Patriots at No. 28 to take Mark Ingram for a second-round pick and their first-rounder in 2012.

At No. 27, the Cowboys could find themselves in a sweet spot to move down and acquire more picks. If they stand pat, cornerbacks such as Byron Jones, Kevin Johnson and Marcus Peters could be available, or they could pick up an extra second- or third-rounder to find a cornerback a little later (P.J. Williams?) while having the ability to fill their needs at running back and defensive line or offensive line.

Currently the Cowboys have three picks in the top 91 selections. In the more is better department, gaining two more picks inside that range could allow them better flexibility in terms of matching up value and a player’s ability with need.

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas-cowb...lp-cowboys-on-draft-day?ex_cid=espnapi_public

It makes it less enticing to trade down but it also makes it worth more to teams in the 2nd to trade up.

 

[jobberone]

It makes it less enticing to trade down but it also makes it worth more to teams in the 2nd to trade up.

If no one is there you want then trade down if fairly done and get the next guy.

 

[Idgit]

That value for the 5th year argument, imnsho, is always silly. One, the cost of giving up the option is baked into the trade, obviously. Two, you're still getting two players for 4 years, or 8 years of contract coverage for the slightly lower-potential players. Overall, that's a cap boon to the team moving back, assuming you're getting a high enough pick that that player can give you something right away. Which you'd pretty much be guaranteed of getting moving from 27 down to the top 3rd of the 2nd round.

 

[RonSpringsdaman20]

anything is possible.

 

[PoundTheRock]

It'll do them a lot of good when they draft Morris Claiborne 2.0.

 

[DFWJC]

This is fairly amazing evidence that at least later in the 1st round and beyond, teams still at least somewhat use the Trade Value Chart

http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php

Trade 1:
Pick 32 for picks 40 and 108
Value : 590 for 578

Trade 2:
Pick 29 for picks 52, 83, 102, 229
Value: 640 for 649

Trade 3:
Pick 29 for picks 35 and 98
Value: 640 for 658

Trade 4:
Picks 36 and 101 for picks 31 and 126
Value: 636 for 646

Trade 5:
Pick 28 for 56 for following year 1st round same slot (many say further 1st equal current year 2nd...whether we agree or not) so 28 for 56 + 56
Value: 660 for 680

Uncanny how close these match up...and it shows no evidence of overpaying by either side. All with in 10% and most within 4-5%.

Another note. I think if you look at Jerry's recent trades you'll see that the other team gets an extra 80-100 points (10-20)....so his odds of being able to make a trade are very high because he gives up (on paper) more than he gets.

yes, a trade down is very possible.

BrainPaint had a thread on this earlier today.

 

[daveferr33]

I would love to imitate the Patriots and trade the 27th for a first (2016) and second (2015) like they did in 2012.

 

[NorthwestDallas40]

If we are targeting a RB not named Gurley or Gordon, a trade down to the top of the 2nd round makes perfect sense. That is the sweet spot for Coleman, Ajayi, Yeldon IMO. Then get a CB and DT with our 2 and additional 3.

 

[Hoofbite]

That value for the 5th year argument, imnsho, is always silly. One, the cost of giving up the option is baked into the trade, obviously. Two, you're still getting two players for 4 years, or 8 years of contract coverage for the slightly lower-potential players. Overall, that's a cap boon to the team moving back, assuming you're getting a high enough pick that that player can give you something right away. Which you'd pretty much be guaranteed of getting moving from 27 down to the top 3rd of the 2nd round.

I'm mixed on it. I think most teams should know what they have in a player after 4 years, but see the potential power in being able to retain a player for an additional year at little cost as a pretty useful tool. I think teams who are unsure of what they have after 4 years would be better off just signing the guy to a reasonable contract than risk the potential of having to renegotiate a new contract a much higher price if the player turns out to be a late bloomer and plays well in year 5.

If you're unsure of a guy, you could simply offer the 5th year option total as a SB and give him a $1M base salary. You're only committing $1M more to the guy but you could probably sign the guy to a deal that is much less than what the guy would make if he were to perform well in the 5th year and become a FA.

From the team's perspective, they stand to lose only a little more than they would with the 5th year option and could possibly gain a good player at a discount. From the player's perspective, they gain a little more in year 1 but stand to lose some money but that's only provided that they buck the trend and perform at a much greater level than what history has suggested they will.

I guess maybe you could use it for a player who has risk just to retain him as long as possible. Not sure you should go after such players in the first place but it might be helpful to hold onto such a player for an extra year with the option.

 

[darthseinfeld]

A poster brought a great point to my attention when I talked up a trade down a couple days ago that is very relevant here.

Jones really values the 5th year option. Thats why he didnt trade out of the first and take Frederick.

 

[Idgit]

I'm mixed on it. I think most teams should know what they have in a player after 4 years, but see the potential power in being able to retain a player for an additional year at little cost as a pretty useful tool. I think teams who are unsure of what they have after 4 years would be better off just signing the guy to a reasonable contract than risk the potential of having to renegotiate a new contract a much higher price if the player turns out to be a late bloomer and plays well in year 5.

If you're unsure of a guy, you could simply offer the 5th year option total as a SB and give him a $1M base salary. You're only committing $1M more to the guy but you could probably sign the guy to a deal that is much less than what the guy would make if he were to perform well in the 5th year and become a FA.

From the team's perspective, they stand to lose only a little more than they would with the 5th year option and could possibly gain a good player at a discount. From the player's perspective, they gain a little more in year 1 but stand to lose some money but that's only provided that they buck the trend and perform at a much greater level than what history has suggested they will.

I guess maybe you could use it for a player who has risk just to retain him as long as possible. Not sure you should go after such players in the first place but it might be helpful to hold onto such a player for an extra year with the option.

Yeah. It's kind of a fun wrinkle. Just saying that it's the kind of detail you just absorb and then work your trades around it accordingly. It makes a 1st round pick 25% more valuable, for example, since you get that extra year, and you adjust the trade chart accordingly. It's not the mythical barrier to trading down that, say, Brian Broaddus might have us believe when he's drumming up debate for one of his draft shows. And it's not a reason Jerry won't trade out of the first round. Like anything else, if the value is there, he'll obviously make the deal.

And for some positions, RB, for one, I kind of like having the guy from 22 until he's 27. You can basically use up most of his career on that first contract. Not that I want to be taking RBs in the first round in the first place, necessary. But for a guy like Gurley, for example, that extra year takes me from not wanting to do it at all to considering doing it if I'm back at the end of the round.

 

[reddyuta]

If we trade down then it should only be for a high 2nd rd pick and a 3rd RDer,we are giving up a 5th year option on a guy like Kendricks.

 

[Nightman]

You get the extra year, but it is not cheap.

At 27 it is less than the Franchise tag but it would be close to 5m for a RB or 8m for a DE