If It Costs Too Much $$ To Pick In The Top Five, I Have a Question...

[CaptainAmerica]

...what would we have done if Cleveland's pick was a top 5 pick, (let's say even the #1 pick) as we all, (including Jerry Jones and the entire Cowboys organization), hoped it would be when the trade was made last year?

I understand the argument that we have other needs at CB, etc. and we shouldn't package our picks to move up for McFadden, but I don't understand the argument that it's too costly, (in terms of the salary cap) to pick that high.

Wouldn't we happily make that pick if Cleveland's pick was the #1 pick?

What am I missing?

 

[ajk23az]

I was thinking the same thing actually. HA

 

[superpunk]

People who say it's too costly (in terms of salary cap, not a trade-up scenario) either

(a) Don't understand that the cost is not all that great this season, and that most rookies renegotiate and extend before their initial contract hits the big cap-hit years, or

(b) Are afraid of missing on a high pick - no balls.

 

[Romo2Dez4six]

i was thinking this quite a bit when people said it would be expensive. think about this it would cost more if Clev. pick was #1 because we still would have to pay the 28 pick price too, so trading up now would save us money in that standpoint.

 

[Hostile]

I could be wrong, but I don't believe the Dolphins have the same rookie cap space as the Giants. The NFL understands slotting and escalation. Therefore we'd be alotted a bit more cap space to get a deal done.

We could afford to pick in the top 5, when people talk about cost it is more about how much it would cost to get up there. Then if the player busts (and that possibility always does exist no matter how much we like a player or believe in him) it becomes an outrageous cost. Not only do you have a high salary and a bust, but you don't have the picks it cost you to get there.

 

[skinsscalper]

I could be wrong, but I don't believe the Dolphins have the same rookie cap space as the Giants. The NFL understands slotting and escalation. Therefore we'd be alotted a bit more cap space to get a deal done.

We could afford to pick in the top 5, when people talk about cost it is more about how much it would cost to get up there. Then if the player busts (and that possibility always does exist no matter how much we like a player or believe in him) it becomes an outrageous cost. Not only do you have a high salary and a bust, but you don't have the picks it cost you to get there.

You nailed it Hos. Your rookie cap numbers are set in accordance with your draft position. Contrary to popular belief, you only have a certain amount of money that you can spend on rookie contracts. It's not a clear cut "If I can fit him under the salary cap I can sign him for whatever".

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I could be wrong, but I don't believe the Dolphins have the same rookie cap space as the Giants. The NFL understands slotting and escalation. Therefore we'd be alotted a bit more cap space to get a deal done.

We could afford to pick in the top 5, when people talk about cost it is more about how much it would cost to get up there. Then if the player busts (and that possibility always does exist no matter how much we like a player or believe in him) it becomes an outrageous cost. Not only do you have a high salary and a bust, but you don't have the picks it cost you to get there.

Ok, I understand your first point. That makes sense.

As for the second point, it may not cost as much as it normally would since you have teams like the Dolphins who want the extra picks and don't want their pick. After reading several articles, I question whether it will cost much more than our two #1 picks to get up there.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

You nailed it Hos. Your rookie cap numbers are set in accordance with your draft position. Contrary to popular belief, you only have a certain amount of money that you can spend on rookie contracts. It's not a clear cut "If I can fit him under the salary cap I can sign him for whatever".

Question: If a team trades up don't they get the benefit of the higher cap numbers? That would only make sense or no one would ever trade up would they?

 

[Hostile]

Ok, I understand your first point. That makes sense.

As for the second point, it may not cost as much as it normally would since you have teams like the Dolphins who want the extra picks and don't want their pick. After reading several articles, I question whether it will cost much more than our two #1 picks to get up there.

I think it is pointless to keep dreaming about getting a player that Jerry and Stephen Jones both have said they have no intention of paying the price for. We're too close to being the team to beat to roll the dice on one guy being the superstar we all dream of.

I'd love it, but it just isn't going to happen.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I think it is pointless to keep dreaming about getting a player that Jerry and Stephen Jones both have said they have no intention of paying the price for. We're too close to being the team to beat to roll the dice on one guy being the superstar we all dream of.

I'd love it, but it just isn't going to happen.

Hos,
I agree it seems like a long shot, but Peter King talks to a lot of people including Jerry and Parcells and he now says to include him in those that believe Jerry's desire for McFadden is real. That caught my attention.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

All teams have X amount of dollars available for the cap. Some teams have a little more or less because of LTBE incentives not earned and credited, pro bowl bonuses, and earned incentives, and dead cap money.

I think, teams drafting higher are allotted more money for their rookie salary cap BUT they have to clear that amount(i.e. have that amount available when they sign the draft picks).

For example, the Dolphins and every team have to abide by the cap of $116 million. Say the dolphins have a rookie pool of $8 million to sign all their draft picks. So the Dolphins have to be at least $8 mil under the cap ($108 million) to be able to sign all their picks. The Cowboys may have a rookie pool of $5million to sign all their picks. So the Cowboys would have to be $5 mil under ($116-$5=$111 million) the cap to sign all.

So, if the Cowboys were drafting a top 5 player this year, they would have to create some cap room (i.e. restructure/cut some players) because right now the Cowboys are only $4 mil under.

If the Cowboys were serious about drafting McFadden I don't think Flo would have gotten a big contract and Hamlin would not have been franchised at $4mil. Although, Hamlin's franchise offer can be pulled at anytime saving the Cowboys $4 mil on the cap. I think.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

All teams have X amount of dollars available for the cap. Some teams have a little more or less because of LTBE incentives not earned and credited, pro bowl bonuses, and earned incentives, and dead cap money.

I think, teams drafting higher are allotted more money for their rookie salary cap BUT they have to clear that amount(i.e. have that amount available when they sign the draft picks).

For example, the Dolphins and every team have to abide by the cap of $116 million. Say the dolphins have a rookie pool of $8 million to sign all their draft picks. So the Dolphins have to be at least $8 mil under the cap ($108 million) to be able to sign all their picks. The Cowboys may have a rookie pool of $5million to sign all their picks. So the Cowboys would have to be $5 mil under ($116-$5=$111 million) the cap to sign all.

So, if the Cowboys were drafting a top 5 player this year, they would have to create some cap room (i.e. restructure/cut some players) because right now the Cowboys are only $4 mil under.

If the Cowboys were serious about drafting McFadden I don't think Flo would have gotten a big contract and Hamlin would not have been franchised at $4mil. Although, Hamlin's franchise offer can be pulled at anytime saving the Cowboys $4 mil on the cap. I think.

Thanks.

 

[skinsscalper]

Question: If a team trades up don't they get the benefit of the higher cap numbers? That would only make sense or no one would ever trade up would they?

I believe you are correct. But your cap doesn't actually increase just the amount that you're allowed to spend on rookies. But, yes, I think you get a certain dollar amount for the "slot" that the player was drafted in (even in a trade up). I'm not 100% positive of that CA, but I think you're pretty spot on with that assessment.

 

[Hostile]

Hos,
I agree it seems like a long shot, but Peter King talks to a lot of people including Jerry and Parcells and he now says to include him in those that believe Jerry's desire for McFadden is real. That caught my attention.

If McFadden falls to around 10 or so I will believe it could be something to great for him to pass up. I just don't see that happening. In the meantime we've got daily scenarios about how to get that pick from the Dolphins, Raiders, Jets, and Patriots. It's funny how they always include the players the fans think the Cowboys are not happy with because they themselves are not happy with them.

I believe it is far more likely Jerry Jones and Co. will look to add a veteran WR (more immediate impact than a rookie) and hold firm on their picks. We have more than 1 need. If all we had was 1 need, and it was RB, I could be more open to this.

I said it before, Cleveland canceled the parade and some people are still showing up early to claim the good seats.

If I am wrong, I will eat my words. I won't be wrong.

 

[iceberg]

People who say it's too costly (in terms of salary cap, not a trade-up scenario) either

(a) Don't understand that the cost is not all that great this season, and that most rookies renegotiate and extend before their initial contract hits the big cap-hit years, or

(b) Are afraid of missing on a high pick - no balls.

or (c) we have enough other needs to where putting all your top picks on 1 player is just butt-nugget stupid.

your balls notwithstanding.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I think it is pointless to keep dreaming about getting a player that Jerry and Stephen Jones both have said they have no intention of paying the price for. We're too close to being the team to beat to roll the dice on one guy being the superstar we all dream of.

I'd love it, but it just isn't going to happen.

DING, DING, DING. As if arguing this point on a msg board is going to change anything.

 

[tomson75]

Was last year's offseason this acutely annoying?

I honestly can't remember.

 

[iceberg]

DING, DING, DING. As if arguing this point on a msg board is going to change anything.

no, they just say you hate mcfadden and are a whiner.

we all whine, i don't hate mcfadden, but i am sick and tired of being pummelled with madden type trades that won't happen in the real world cause the MOB (mcfadden or bust) crowd won't have it any other way.

 

[Rampage]

or (c) we have enough other needs to where putting all your top picks on 1 player is just butt-nugget stupid.

your balls notwithstanding.

c'mon berg, you're as cold as ice! you got to be willing to sacrifice.

 

[tomson75]

c'mon berg, you're as cold as ice! you got to be willing to sacrifice.

That was actually BORDERLINE clever.