- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Should you draft based on the slot value?
Posted on 4/29/16 at 11:21 am
Posted on 4/29/16 at 11:21 am
I've always been under the impression that rookie salaries were scaled based on their draft slot AND position, but apparently that is not the case.
The 4th pick in the draft is going to get a $16.35MM signing bonus and a 4 year contract worth almost $25MM, or $6.24MM per year whether he is a center, QB, or PK.
You can find the slot values here.
So last night Zeke Elliot just became the 10th highest paid RB in the NFL with respect to average annual value, slightly behind DeMarco Murray's $6.25MM/year contract and far outpacing C. J. Anderson's $4.5MM.
Carson Wentz ($6.67MM/yr) will be making less per year than new Eagles' signee Chase Daniel ($7.00MM/yr).
On the other hand, someone like Laremy Tunsil is going to cost the Dolphins 40% less than Ronnie Stanley will cost Baltimore, despite being separated by only 6 players. Tunsil will be the 47th highest paid OT in the league next year. Stanley will be 31st.
I know average annual salary is not the best measuring stick, but I'm not sure how to determine the dead money and cap hit on an annual basis for rookies.
Obviously team needs and best available are other concerns, but how much should the slot value come into play? Drafting an OT is popular because they're considered safe picks from an evaluation standpoint, but they are also a great value outside of the first 5 or so picks. On the flip side, not only are RBs devalued in today's game and seem to be a dime a dozen, drafting someone like Elliot @ 4 is expensive, very expensive. He'll be the highest paid pick relative to the rest of the positions.
ETA: For the Buckeye fans, I really like Elliot, but that doesn't mean the pick was a good value and/or idea.
The 4th pick in the draft is going to get a $16.35MM signing bonus and a 4 year contract worth almost $25MM, or $6.24MM per year whether he is a center, QB, or PK.
You can find the slot values here.
So last night Zeke Elliot just became the 10th highest paid RB in the NFL with respect to average annual value, slightly behind DeMarco Murray's $6.25MM/year contract and far outpacing C. J. Anderson's $4.5MM.
Carson Wentz ($6.67MM/yr) will be making less per year than new Eagles' signee Chase Daniel ($7.00MM/yr).
On the other hand, someone like Laremy Tunsil is going to cost the Dolphins 40% less than Ronnie Stanley will cost Baltimore, despite being separated by only 6 players. Tunsil will be the 47th highest paid OT in the league next year. Stanley will be 31st.
I know average annual salary is not the best measuring stick, but I'm not sure how to determine the dead money and cap hit on an annual basis for rookies.
Obviously team needs and best available are other concerns, but how much should the slot value come into play? Drafting an OT is popular because they're considered safe picks from an evaluation standpoint, but they are also a great value outside of the first 5 or so picks. On the flip side, not only are RBs devalued in today's game and seem to be a dime a dozen, drafting someone like Elliot @ 4 is expensive, very expensive. He'll be the highest paid pick relative to the rest of the positions.
ETA: For the Buckeye fans, I really like Elliot, but that doesn't mean the pick was a good value and/or idea.
This post was edited on 4/29/16 at 11:56 am
5
Posted on 4/29/16 at 11:23 am to slackster
For the record, the values form last night and their position rankings based on average annual salary:
Posted on 4/29/16 at 11:29 am to slackster
I am not understanding the chart. the high/low veterans for Goff and Wentz are Chase Daniel and James Winston.
The high lows for Lynch are Colt McCoy and Matt McGloin
ETA. Peat is the high 'veteran' for pick 16. i'm so lost
The high lows for Lynch are Colt McCoy and Matt McGloin
ETA. Peat is the high 'veteran' for pick 16. i'm so lost
This post was edited on 4/29/16 at 11:31 am
Posted on 4/29/16 at 11:29 am to slackster
For the most part that's still chump change relative to what it used to be or could be
And if you pick Zeke Elliot 4th overall, he better be a top 10 RB, might as well pay him like one
And if you pick Zeke Elliot 4th overall, he better be a top 10 RB, might as well pay him like one
Posted on 4/29/16 at 11:39 am to slackster
It's better now than when Sam Bradford was drafted. Teams do consider the slot & player position when drafting. That's why QB, DE, T & CB dominate the early rounds.
RB is nearly impossible to scout. So many high draft picks have busted, while tons of late round & free agents have been Pro Bowlers. If Zeke lives up to being the #4 pick, his contract is worth it. Much better to spend money on a 21 yo if you think he's the real deal than a 29 yo & hope he doesn't fall apart. Problem is so many young RBs don't, so teams tend to avoid that position early in the draft.
RB is nearly impossible to scout. So many high draft picks have busted, while tons of late round & free agents have been Pro Bowlers. If Zeke lives up to being the #4 pick, his contract is worth it. Much better to spend money on a 21 yo if you think he's the real deal than a 29 yo & hope he doesn't fall apart. Problem is so many young RBs don't, so teams tend to avoid that position early in the draft.
Posted on 4/29/16 at 11:40 am to Mr.Perfect
quote:
I am not understanding the chart. the high/low veterans for Goff and Wentz are Chase Daniel and James Winston.
The high lows for Lynch are Colt McCoy and Matt McGloin
Yeah I'm not sure what the veterans column is discussing.
The rest of the stuff is useful.
Posted on 4/29/16 at 11:55 am to wildtigercat93
quote:
For the most part that's still chump change relative to what it used to be or could be
Oh I completely agree, which is why QBs, OTs, DEs, CBs, etc. will continue to be so popular.
quote:
And if you pick Zeke Elliot 4th overall, he better be a top 10 RB, might as well pay him like one
Agree here as well, but I guess my point is you didn't want to pay a proven guy like Demarco that kind of money as a free agent, but you'll pay the same money to a rookie who is unproven at that level? (Demarco is a wreck now, but he was a proven commodity when he was with Dallas)
Another point is that I think teams overvalue top picks and undervalue the quantity of picks. It is hard to build your team with 7 picks a year, but you can spread your chances out by trading back and picking up valuable assets along the way. The Browns moved from 2 to 16 and picked up 5 picks in the Top 100 this year and next year combined, plus a 2018 third rounder. It is hard to argue that is a bad move, particularly knowing how much of a crapshoot the draft tends to be.
If you don't love a guy at that spot and for that amount of money, get out.
Posted on 4/29/16 at 11:57 am to slackster
This makes draft picks more valuable for higher paid positions. It's why guards aren't getting drafted in the top 5.
Posted on 4/29/16 at 12:07 pm to slackster
It's crazy how much the draft has changed in 10 years due to the d rules/progression of the game to basketball on grass.
In 2005, 3 Running Backs were taken in the top 5 of the 1st round. Benson, Brown, Williams.
(now people look at the Cowboys and think they're crazy)
In 2005, 3 Running Backs were taken in the top 5 of the 1st round. Benson, Brown, Williams.
(now people look at the Cowboys and think they're crazy)
Posted on 4/29/16 at 12:43 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
This makes draft picks more valuable for higher paid positions. It's why guards aren't getting drafted in the top 5.
Exactly, which is why Elliot @ 4 is such a head scratcher, especially if you consider the Cowboy's needs. He may be a straight beast, and I think he will be, but I don't know if he can outperform his contract, much less his draft position in this current dynamic.
It is not about what Elliot does nearly as much as it is about the relative value of that spot. They could take Henry with the 34th pick @ $6.5MM for the entire contract instead of Elliot at $6.5MM per year. Is Elliot really 4 times more valuable than Henry?
Again, not knocking Elliot and I'm not a Dallas fan whatsoever, but there seems to be so many things the point away from taking him @ 4.
Posted on 4/29/16 at 1:01 pm to slackster
Zeke is a three down back and can catch out of the backfield, something Henry can't do.
As a Cowboys fan, I love the pick. The best our defense has ever been was when we had a solid RB and has Scandrick and Sterling Moore in our secondary.
This year we will have that back that can eat up clock, alongside Byron Jones, Scandrick and a mediocre Claiborne. We will be fine.
As a Cowboys fan, I love the pick. The best our defense has ever been was when we had a solid RB and has Scandrick and Sterling Moore in our secondary.
This year we will have that back that can eat up clock, alongside Byron Jones, Scandrick and a mediocre Claiborne. We will be fine.
Posted on 4/29/16 at 1:04 pm to slackster
It's definitely a gamble and a luxary pick for the Cowboys.
They aren't your typical 4th overall team though.
But if they wanted Elliot, was it worth trading down and risk losing him for a couple hundred thousand in cap space?
They aren't your typical 4th overall team though.
But if they wanted Elliot, was it worth trading down and risk losing him for a couple hundred thousand in cap space?
Posted on 4/29/16 at 1:20 pm to slackster
happens in baseball all the time
Posted on 4/29/16 at 1:22 pm to KosmoCramer
Yeah Dallas is definitely a unique situation. It just seems goofy considering RB is not really a position of need foe them. They must obviously love Elliot, and he'll kill it, but it will be very difficult to provide value on this team at this spot in the draft.
Posted on 4/29/16 at 2:54 pm to Mr.Perfect
My guess for the high/low is the veteran that is 1 place higher and 1 place lower than the rookie's spot. The top 2 QBs are 26 & 27, so the both share the same high, #25, and low, #28. However Lynch is #39, so his high/low are 38 and 40. If you look at the WRs picked 21 - 23, they are ranked 59, 60, and 62. Lafell is the low for the first 2 and high for the 3rd, meaning his salary is ranked 61st.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News