PFT: Will the receiver market go the way of the running back market?

[Hawkeye0202]

It is a fair question and you can argue unless you are extending Dak, why invest $30M+ into CeeDee? Would a trade ( 2 first-round picks ) bring better value? It is exactly the position the Packers took when Adams was traded after Rogers left.

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profo...-market-go-the-way-of-the-running-back-market

Will receiver market go the way of the running back market?​

• By
• Mike Florio

Published May 26, 2024 12:12 PM

Multiple receivers have gotten paid this offseason. Multiple others are still waiting.

Last month, 35 more were drafted — including nine in the first 34 selections.

As more and more competent receivers enter the NFL via the low-cost rookie wage scale, it’s fair to wonder if/when more and more teams will decline to pay a receiver and look for a replacement instead in the draft.

Two years ago, three teams did it. The Titans traded A.J. Brown, the Packers traded receiver Davante Adams, the Chiefs traded Tyreek Hill. (Tennessee used the first-round pick it got for Brown on his replacement, Treylon Burks. The Packers opted for quantity, drafting Christian Watson, Romeo Doubs, and Samari Toure. And the Chiefs went with a low-cost committee approach that has helped deliver every Lombardi Trophy awarded since Hill was traded.)

Now, with Vikings receiver Justin Jefferson, 49ers receiver Brandon Aiyuk, Bengals receiver Tee Higgins, and Cowboys receiver CeeDee Lamb still clamoring for new contracts (all have stayed away from OTAs), the question becomes whether they’ll eventually end up with other teams, too

 

[FoxF]

Maybe the NFL should just get rid of the salary cap? Let the market decide.

The prevailing theory is contracts would sky rocket and smaller markets would not be competitive. However, the salary cap just seems to create an environment where teams, or the NFL product are lessened.

Instead of talking football we all become capologists not rooting for our QB because he costs too much or wanting to get rid of our best WR, because ya know we have a cap to consider.

Remove it and maybe economic principles kick in and the NFL adjusts To solid business management techniques.

 

[DallasDW00ds0n]

I find it hard to believe Stephen thinks that hard about it

 

[VaqueroTD]

Packers got rid of their #1. Aaron Rodgers was the QB.
Chiefs eliminated Tyreek. Patrick Mahomes was QB.
I put CeeDee with both those receivers, but I don’t put Dak with Rodgers or Mahomes.
Get rid of CeeDee and keep Dak, and you’re looking at another midseason Coop trade.

 

[Havic]

It may not be the team that drafted them, but once they hit fa, someone out there is gonna break the bank

 

[fivetwos]

It is a fair question and you can argue unless you are extending Dak, why invest $30M+ into CeeDee? Would a trade ( 2 first-round picks ) bring better value? It is exactly the position the Packers took when Adams was traded after Rogers left.

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profo...-market-go-the-way-of-the-running-back-market

Will receiver market go the way of the running back market?​

• By
• Mike Florio

Published May 26, 2024 12:12 PM

Multiple receivers have gotten paid this offseason. Multiple others are still waiting.

Last month, 35 more were drafted — including nine in the first 34 selections.

As more and more competent receivers enter the NFL via the low-cost rookie wage scale, it’s fair to wonder if/when more and more teams will decline to pay a receiver and look for a replacement instead in the draft.

Two years ago, three teams did it. The Titans traded A.J. Brown, the Packers traded receiver Davante Adams, the Chiefs traded Tyreek Hill. (Tennessee used the first-round pick it got for Brown on his replacement, Treylon Burks. The Packers opted for quantity, drafting Christian Watson, Romeo Doubs, and Samari Toure. And the Chiefs went with a low-cost committee approach that has helped deliver every Lombardi Trophy awarded since Hill was traded.)

Now, with Vikings receiver Justin Jefferson, 49ers receiver Brandon Aiyuk, Bengals receiver Tee Higgins, and Cowboys receiver CeeDee Lamb still clamoring for new contracts (all have stayed away from OTAs), the question becomes whether they’ll eventually end up with other teams, too

Trading Lamb instead of paying him is one topic, but I respectfully ask why…if the WR market is really headed the other way, why another team would pay more for Lamb (two firsts as you suggest) than either Adams or Hill fetched.

Our front office has neither the balls or knowledge to pull off deals like that, nor would they admit being in full rebuild mode, which would be the only reason dealing him makes sense.

Throw in that they have never dealt a player of significance…one that sells jerseys. Don’t forget that’s Jerry’s Jrs job, and they have to make him feel accepted too.

 

[mcmvp]

Maybe the NFL should just get rid of the salary cap? Let the market decide.

The prevailing theory is contracts would sky rocket and smaller markets would not be competitive. However, the salary cap just seems to create an environment where teams, or the NFL product are lessened.

Instead of talking football we all become capologists not rooting for our QB because he costs too much or wanting to get rid of our best WR, because ya know we have a cap to consider.

Remove it and maybe economic principles kick in and the NFL adjusts To solid business management techniques.

They will never remove the salary cap. It has made them too much money. The NFL is in the business of selling hope. The more widespread the hope is, the more viewers. TV deals continue to increase because of this. The salary cap maintains a level of parity that a non-capped league can’t.

As for the OP, no. I don’t see the WR position becoming devalued like the RB position was.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

it’s important for the Cowboys to realize what works for one team may not work for them. Getting rid of your best player may work for other teams but not this Dallas team. I would’ve never traded Adam’s or Reek.

The receiver position never became devalued despite these trades. Teams still gave up big compensation and money to get them.

 

[viman96]

It would take multiple late round WR picks over a few years to excel year 1 for their respective market to be anything like the RB market.

 

[kskboys]

Maybe the NFL should just get rid of the salary cap? Let the market decide.

The prevailing theory is contracts would sky rocket and smaller markets would not be competitive. However, the salary cap just seems to create an environment where teams, or the NFL product are lessened.

Instead of talking football we all become capologists not rooting for our QB because he costs too much or wanting to get rid of our best WR, because ya know we have a cap to consider.

Remove it and maybe economic principles kick in and the NFL adjusts To solid business management techniques.

The opposite. The salary cap improves the NFL product.

The biggest detriment to the product is FA. If you have one, gotta have both. Hand in hand.

Getting rid of the salary cap would create a clusterfudge, a real olio.

 

[kskboys]

it’s important for the Cowboys to realize what works for one team may not work for them. Getting rid of your best player may work for other teams but not this Dallas team. I would’ve never traded Adam’s or Reek.

The receiver position never became devalued despite these trades. Teams still gave up big compensation and money to get them.

If KC doesn't trade Reek, they don't win super bowls. WR's don't win super bowls, D wins super bowls. The players KC would've had to let walk to sign Reek would've destroyed their team.

 

[kskboys]

Trading Lamb instead of paying him is one topic, but I respectfully ask why…if the WR market is really headed the other way, why another team would pay more for Lamb (two firsts as you suggest) than either Adams or Hill fetched.

Our front office has neither the balls or knowledge to pull off deals like that, nor would they admit being in full rebuild mode, which would be the only reason dealing him makes sense.

Throw in that they have never dealt a player of significance…one that sells jerseys. Don’t forget that’s Jerry’s Jrs job, and they have to make him feel accepted too.

And that is one of the biggest reasons for the super bowl drought. The resources brought in by player trades are often the catalyst for super bowl contention.

 

[jazzcat22]

The cap will not go away. But what they need to do is to put a cap on certain positions. I know that seems like it like it is putting a premium on those players.

Like the case with Micah, his 5th year option gave him more as they paid him more as a DE over a LB. So should those positions be capped the same.
CB vs. S, who should get more.

So group them. DB's, DL, OL, WR, TE, RB, QB. But where to draw that line. In the corporate world there are pay scale structures. So why not in the NFL.
Just a thought, but it would be very hard to make it work.

 

[Bobhaze]

It is a fair question and you can argue unless you are extending Dak, why invest $30M+ into CeeDee? Would a trade ( 2 first-round picks ) bring better value? It is exactly the position the Packers took when Adams was traded after Rogers left.

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profo...-market-go-the-way-of-the-running-back-market

Will receiver market go the way of the running back market?​

• By
• Mike Florio

Published May 26, 2024 12:12 PM

Multiple receivers have gotten paid this offseason. Multiple others are still waiting.

Last month, 35 more were drafted — including nine in the first 34 selections.

As more and more competent receivers enter the NFL via the low-cost rookie wage scale, it’s fair to wonder if/when more and more teams will decline to pay a receiver and look for a replacement instead in the draft.

Two years ago, three teams did it. The Titans traded A.J. Brown, the Packers traded receiver Davante Adams, the Chiefs traded Tyreek Hill. (Tennessee used the first-round pick it got for Brown on his replacement, Treylon Burks. The Packers opted for quantity, drafting Christian Watson, Romeo Doubs, and Samari Toure. And the Chiefs went with a low-cost committee approach that has helped deliver every Lombardi Trophy awarded since Hill was traded.)

Now, with Vikings receiver Justin Jefferson, 49ers receiver Brandon Aiyuk, Bengals receiver Tee Higgins, and Cowboys receiver CeeDee Lamb still clamoring for new contracts (all have stayed away from OTAs), the question becomes whether they’ll eventually end up with other teams, too

This is a great question.

I’ve always been reluctant to sink a ton of cap space on a WR. Especially when you look at all the SB winners, or even conference champions of the last decade or more who win without highly paid WRs.

Here are some recent SB winners and conf champs and their WR group:

• 2016 pats- SB champs- WRs were Julian Edelman, Danny Amendola, and Chris Hogan (Brady as QB)
• 2017 eagles- SB champs-WRs were Alston Jefffey, Tory Smith and Nelson Agholor (with Nick Foles as QB)
• 2018 rams- NFC champs- WRs- Tavon Austin, Sammy Watkins, Robert Woods (Jared Goff as QB)
• 2018 pats- SB champs - WRS Julian Edelman, Phillip Dorsett and Chris Hogan (Brady as QB)
• 2023 chiefs - SB champs- WR- Marquez Valdes-Scantling, Rashee Rice, Kadarius Toney (Mahomes as QB)

Yes, obviously Brady and Mahomes make any receiver look good but Jared Goff? Nick Foles?

My bigger point is I think it is way harder to find great OL than good enough WRs. Which is why I lean toward thinking WRs are not as important as the market currently treats them.

 

[gtb1943]

IN a passing league WRs are not going the way of the RB. simple as that.

 

[Bobhaze]

IN a passing league WRs are not going the way of the RB. simple as that.

I agree that the passing game isn’t going away. Remains to be seen if the market for WRs continues to get more cap space. We will see.

 

[Bobhaze]

If KC doesn't trade Reek, they don't win super bowls. WR's don't win super bowls, D wins super bowls. The players KC would've had to let walk to sign Reek would've destroyed their team.

This!

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

If KC doesn't trade Reek, they don't win super bowls. WR's don't win super bowls, D wins super bowls. The players KC would've had to let walk to sign Reek would've destroyed their team.

I disagree. As long as Chris Jones and Mahomes are there I can’t say they wouldn’t have won. If they made the decision to get rid of Kelce and a few other guys instead of Tyreek would they have struggled? Hard to say.

I’m looking at their salary now from last season and the money is not being spent on defense it’s being spent on offense….

CEH accounted for 3 million.
MVS accounted for 10 million
Butker 5 million
Kelce 14 million
Reid 12 million

Their big contributors on defense were Sneed and Trainquill who don’t cost much. Chris Jones as well who accounts for 20 plus million.

So if the question is would I rather have Kelce, MVS and Reid over Reek? I wouldn’t. I’d rather have Reek and draft a tight end to replace Kelce.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

This!

It’s not entirely true though. They spent 25 million on Justin Reid, MVS and CEH alone. Their best defensive players would still be on the team without them.

 

[Mr_437]

I've been saying this for a couple years. The only reason the WR isn't like RBs right now is there's 3 starting WRs per team. Supply of WRs has exploded and probably won't stop anytime soon.

Keep your WR1 then fill out the other spots in a cost effective manner.