What to Consider when you Draft in Round 1

[MHS831]

BPA!!! Wouldn't life be great if it were that simple?  Need??? To some degree.  I realize that we like life simple:  Instant oatmeal.  self-stick envelopes.  I get it.  BPA people:  Go back and look at teams' needs in prior drafts--even when they scream BPA!, they end up drafting for need.  I guess you should say, "BPA4U" (Best Player Available for Us).  There are many variables. You should know the skill sets for your system.  You should understand your locker room and gauge character.  In my view, another consideration should play into your decision of how you rate a player to be the "best" and the cost of meeting your overall needs.  All needs are not equal.  The talent pool drops off and dries up at different points for different positions.  Each draft is unique.  We have inflation for some positions in free agency, yet the rookie pay scale is based on a formula that is not determined by position or player evaluations:  The 1st overall pick receives the highest salary, with each subsequent pick earning less, regardless of position.  Therefore, if you have seven needs, and three are at positions that pay veterans a ton of money--you should draft those players over those who play positions that would not save you much money.  You have to consider the savings and what that means to the cap as a whole--not just focus on BPA or need.

These numbers are based on the average salary of all players and then only the starters by position:

Now take a look at what the players make based on the position they are drafted:

Sorry they did this in pink.  So let's say the Jets think Sadiq is the BPA on their board with the second pick.  He meets their biggest need, aside from QB, but there are no QBs close to checking the BPA box.  Are you going to pay a rookie TE $13m per year for 4 years ($52m guaranteed)?  According to the chart above, a STARTING TE costs half that.  So Need and BPA are not the only factors (this was an example only).

It makes more sense to draft, especially in the first round, a QB, edge, WR, OT, or DT if they are one of your needs and one of the BPAs.  At worst you are getting close to market value if they start.  

Looking at the Panthers needs, expected BPAs at #19, and cost vs. what a starting-level free agent makes, we are spending about $5m per year.  Many of us want to draft a S there--if the rookie starts, we'd save about $1.7m per year.  The difference would add a bottom-of-the-roster depth player.  If we drafted a LB, for example, the difference is $1.4m.  

I see our needs (right now) as follows:  S, ILB Will, OT, C, TE, and DT.  Of those needs, a veteran starter at OT or DT would save us the most.  For example, an OT veteran who starts averages $13m.  We'd get the player for 4 years (not including the 5th year option for this) and we'd save $8m per year.  To be honest, Walker is an average OT and we got him for a bargain at $10m.  So if we draft an OT, we not only have a starter for next year (regardless of Ickey), we have 2 starting-level LTs on the roster NOW for $15m.  If the OT we draft works out and we do not re-sign Walker, we save $8m x 3 years--$24m. 

So the BPA model might be the code you live or die by, but I ask it this way:  Would you rather have a Safety and $1.4m in cap room savings or an OT and $8m per year cap savings?  Both are needs.  Both would be rated in the middle of the draft's first round. The OT and the $8m in savings would get you a starting OT AND the $8m would get you a starting free agency safety, if you think about it.

If you step back and see the big picture, use the rookie scale to your advantage, you can improve your roster beyond merely taking the BPA, whatever that means.

Looking at the Panther's draft, if they draft OT in round 1, DT in round 2, and both start, they could save about $16m of cap space per year when compared to what average veteran free agents would cost.  LB, C, TE, and S can come later, if you follow this blueprint.  

I am not saying that I would draft based solely on this concept, but I am saying that it would be a variable--a big one. 

 

[LinvilleGorge]

This is always accounted for in the draft. Positional value matters. Sime positions are more valuable than others and those positions are paid more and all else being equal drafted higher.

https://www.foxsports.com/stories/nfl/nfl-draft-which-positions-most-least-valued-over-past-decade

 

[Basbear]

Surprised CB is that low. 

19th is odd spot. For many recent drafts, teams only felt there were around 14 first round players. 

So to many 19 is just an early second and doesn't hold the value of a first. 

If you go off- the smart path of LT, QB, edge, WR, CB, etc. Whatever your OG, Safety, ILB, etc needs to be a difference maker, that's the key point. I've said the 8th best edge is better than the 1st safety. Same for QB and even WRs.

You should 100% factor in position value. 

MHS you've been wanting a FS, let me tell you its super difficult to be a difference making FS. You're just sooo farrrr away from the action and the end result most times. If you're in the play, defense made mistakes in order. Now to talk out of both sides, maaaaaann that white boy from Oregon....I thought he crushed the combine and honestly that alone made me rethink "is he worth 19 now?!?!" he's now in the discussion for me, but still below others. 

 

Plus I feel TE is vastly underrated in value terms. But looking at the last 20 years of TEs in the first, its down right bad. You're better like X10 better drafting one in 4th or 5th.  

[LinvilleGorge]

6 minutes ago, Basbear said:

MHS you've been wanting a FS, let me tell you its super difficult to be a difference making FS. You're just sooo farrrr away from the action and the end result most times. If you're in the play, defense made mistakes in order.

I view FS almost as the NT of the secondary. Oftentimes the true measure of his impact isn't necessarily in the plays that he makes but what he allows you to do with the rest of your defense to allow them to make plays. When you have that elite true sideline to sideline FS safety blanket over the top of the defense it allows you to be a lot more aggressive with everyone else. Where as when you have a Nick Scott as your last line of defense you gotta be mindful to not have to rely too heavily on that.

[Growl]

fans view “box safety” with the same disdain they have when they hear “game manager” QB.

but there’s a reason most 1st round safeties are “box safeties”-it’s a much longer list of requisite skills to be a good box safety than it is to be a guy whose only real responsibility is to not get beat over the top.

Fans crave the ed reed type and as someone who has never been able to enjoy this franchise having a guy like that, I get the enthusiasm-but I’m not really prepared to spend a first round pick on a free safety. If it happens it’ll be fun, it’ll address a need with a good player and that’s well and good. But those guys end up walking after their first contract because their pedigree usually outpaces what their teams feel like they’re adding to their overall win total.

Edited 1 hour ago by Growl

[Captain Morgan]

great points.  I want the FS too, but OT is where I'm hoping we'll find our value in the first.  Getting Walker at 10 mill for one year should raise some dadgum eyebrows....nobody wanted to pay more?

I fear I'm forever scarred at the years we went without Jordan Gross after he retired.  It was like they just didn't make any LTs for 6 years that came anywhere near our draft position.  If one is there around 19, I feel we need to take him.  We can't just go into next year hoping a good LT will fall to us.  We've seen that before and it wasn't pretty.

And one injury to Walker or Moton, and we are looking scary bad in Bryce's most important prove it season. 

 

[Basbear]

10 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I view FS almost as the NT of the secondary. Oftentimes the true measure of his impact isn't necessarily in the plays that he makes but what he allows you to do with the rest of your defense to allow them to make plays. When you have that elite true sideline to sideline FS safety blanket over the top of the defense it allows you to be a lot more aggressive with everyone else. Where as when you have a Nick Scott as your last line of defense you gotta be mindful to not have to rely too heavily on that.

 

4 minutes ago, Growl said:

fans view “box safety” with the same disdain they have when they hear “game manager” QB.

but there’s a reason most 1st round safeties are “box safeties”-it’s a much longer list of requisite skills to be a good box safety than it is to be a guy whose only real responsibility is to not get beat over the top.

Fans crave the ed reed type and as someone who has never been able to enjoy this franchise having a guy like that, I get the enthusiasm-but I’m not really prepared to spend a first round pick on a free safety. If it happens it’ll be fun, it’ll address a need with a good player and that’s well and good. But those guys end up walking after their first contract because their pedigree usually outpaces what their teams feel like they’re adding to their overall win total.

You simply cannot trust a true rookie FS. He has no clue at the levels of confusion and the level of athletes he is going against. Hed need to study non-stop in order to not be a total spaz. Its just one of weird spots.

[Cpt slay a ho]

Fs, time for the panthers to get modernized in the nfl. 

matter of fact anything defense related I’m all for. Been beating the drum about how close the defense is to elite, so a dt, a fs, wlb, cb are all green lights for me. 

Fs is long over due for an investment
 

[Aussie Tank]

I want Kayden McDonald