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!

     

Is the BPA philosophy really valid given the rookie contracts (CBA)?


jarhead

Recommended Posts

Let me start by saying how can teams like the panthers that have multiple holes to fill follow the BPA philosophy in the draft with the new CBA in place ? Unless a player is really elite why would you pick a position like safety when they cost less than say a QB, CB DE or LOT in the FA Market? The same could be said for 4-3 LBs,RBs,OG.s and etc.Last year we did with Luke but in my book he was elite..

For example,are Kenny V at safety and Chance Womack at guard elite enough to draft over positions like CB left OT,and DE which are so costly in the FA market ?. This may mean nothing but I have never seen such a deep draft for the dt position at the same time as an extremely deep FA market for DT. Could this new CBA agreement be a way to purge these outrageous contracts at expensive positions ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me you would draft those positions that are the least expensive to fill during FA and draft the most expensive positions with the draft with the exception if one is an elite prospect (once in a five year talent) like Luke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Truly drafting BPA is a stupid concept. You could end up with 7 centers in the draft. Of course the talent on your team is going to influence your draft. To say otherwise is just dumb. But, not reaching to draft needs is another concept. This requires positioning yourself via free agency and trades to take advantage of draft strengths and weaknesses.

Financial incentive caused by the rookie wage scale is a fantastic new concept! I am sure smart GM's are going to take full advantage of this. I am confident that Gettleman will consider this. He has not given me a reason to doubt yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing about drafting a position like safety versus DT and considering the cost difference would surely be a factor for me. I don't know if that applies to Gettleman as well. Still the argument could be made that the top safety in the draft like Barron last year might cost more than the average safety come FA time. Likewise the third or fourth rated DT might not come at such a high premium compared to the top safety. More perhaps but no t so much that it would keep you from drafting at another position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever decision we make, it will probably be the wrong one. That's the Panther way.

Thats right. We always screw up, particularly in the first. Especially lately..... Wait........ what?????

We had the offensive rookie player of the year 2 years ago and this past year the defensive rookie of the year.......................

As Emily Latella would say..........

Nevermind.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BPA is always based off need and your scheme. That's why BPA is always different for each team.

It is more than just BPA. The CBA should make you think about the position you are drafting in the first rounds with the exception of elite players at there positions.My feeling is you want to draft the most expensive players at their perspective positions such at QB,DE,Left OT or OLB (3-4 defenses) etc..the cost differential is immense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...