NFL Compensatory Picks announced

Would be cool to get one of those one day...

Man that is a terrifying gif

One of WDF's best all time

in all honesty I think the need for these picks have come and gone.

With the salary cap reaching all time highs, the team has to be able to retain the players they want.

Point is that it is rare that that a player signs for less, so why reward a team for not offering a good player a top offer.

In other words, New Orleans might lose Fairley. If they do it will be because they did not make him a max offer. What if the FO thinks Fairley has a fair market value of 5.5-6 million a year, but don't want to go that high so they offer 4.5 million knowing they will pick up a pick when he is taken.

relevant from PFT that I agree fully with...

When the NFL implemented compensatory draft picks in 1994, the idea was that the extra picks would lend a hand to the teams that got out-spent in free agency, which was then new in the league: Compensatory picks go to teams that lose more in free agency than they gain, and so the picks were envisioned as a safeguard against the rich raiding the rosters of the poor.

It hasn’t worked out that way, however. In a league with revenue sharing and a salary cap, there’s not much of a distinction between the rich and the poor.

Instead, compensatory picks have turned out to reward smart teams. The teams that have been wise about not over-spending in free agency and keeping themselves in good salary cap shape are the ones that keep getting lots of compensatory picks, while the teams that overspend in free agency are the ones that don’t receive compensatory picks.

As a result, the consistently good teams tend to be the teams that consistently get a lot of compensatory picks. And the teams that consistently try to spend themselves out of last place are the ones that don’t get a lot of compensatory picks.

The list of teams that have received the most compensatory picks since 1994 is pretty similar to the list of the best teams in football since 1994: The Ravens have received the most compensatory picks, and they’ve won two Super Bowls. The Packers have received the second-most, and they’ve also won two Super Bowls. The Patriots are fourth, and they’ve won five Super Bowls. The 10 teams that have had the most compensatory picks have won most of the Super Bowls since 1994, with a total of 14 titles for those 10 teams.

At the other end of the spectrum, the teams that don’t receive a lot of compensatory picks tend to be bad teams: There are 14 teams that have received fewer than 20 compensatory picks since the system started in 1994, and those 14 teams have won a combined two Super Bowls.

Compensatory picks help teams stock their roster with low-cost depth, which is helpful, but the real reason teams with a lot of compensatory picks do well is that teams with a lot of compensatory picks are good at managing their salary caps. A system that was supposed to reward the poor at the expense of the rich has actually rewarded the smart at the expense of the dumb.

LINK

But we are also one of the two oddballs that won a SB and bucked the system. I'll take that all day.

We also value vet minimum veterans over extra comp picks, and in many of those cases we've done well.

The only issue with going with vet minimum players over comp picks is it's year to year vs. 4 years and the vets are usually what they are while the comp picks could have a higher ceiling (while on the flip side they could be busts).

Sharper was one of those vet minimum players and he turned out pretty well, right?

quote:

---

Washington

12

New Orleans

10

---

And Washington is the team that has historically gotten killed for overspending in free agency.

You can't say that this deficit in draft picks hasn't had an effect over the years.