Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Comp Pick - Norwell


Tepper's Chest Hair

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, countryboi said:

ironically he has been pretty bad with the Jags, the grass is not always greener.

Actually he’s played quite well, if you actually pay attention and also consider what kind of offense he has to worth with, 90% trash.

I believe he’s also been playing injured.

Worth his contract? Maybe not. But to say we dodged a bullet by not spending on him in order to pay Matt Kalil even more money I mean...joke is ultimately on the Panthers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, stbugs said:

Yep, some sites had us getting 99 (over Watkins) but it’s as expected. It means our 4th is 116. Not bad, 7 3rd round comps is a lot. As usual NE is good at this.

So for the pleasure of Dontarie Poe we lost a 3rd or 4th for Star and gave Atlanta a 4th and spent a lot of money as well.

Heck, we didn’t get a 6th for Dickson either because of other FAs who didn’t even play. I’m just glad we didn’t burn the 3rd for Norwell. We are going to need it. 

So many of the average fans around here look at these free agent deals in a vacuum and never understand the total cost of some of these deals.

I'm guessing everyone of them would happily trade Poe for a third now.

It takes a bit of discipline for the teams.  The less UFAs you sign the more comp picks you tend to get.  The more picks you get the less free agents you should need in theory at least.  I think it is no surprise that some of the teams that historically receive the most comp picks, Patriots and Ravens have been some of the most stable and successful over the last 10-15 years.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying you should never go after free agents, just be smart about it.

I think teams would be better off by staggering it.  For example if you (in simplest terms) lose 2 and gain 2 you receive no comp picks.  If you do that over 4 years you will have received none over that four years.  If you were to do 3G-1L, 1G-3L, 3G-1L, 1G-3L you would have singed the same number of free agents over that 4 years but you would also have 4 comp picks to show for it.

Also waiting for the in the summer to sign guys that are cut can be wise.  They don't count towards the comp pick formula and also they tend to be a lot cheaper at that point.  Could we have signed someone later do give the same production as Poe?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...