Jimmy G to 49ers for 2nd round pick

[Jimbodandy]

This Burr stuff is soap opera nonsense, worth of a Felger & Mazz guest spot.

Let's get past this "Brady is like a son to him, and Kraft would overrule the trade" horseshit and focus on the other side for a second. Why would BFB be considering trading TB out of town for even a millisecond?

BFB held on to a valuable asset for as long as it made sense and then moved him for another valuable asset, with a suitable backfill already in place. That's your story.

 

[dcmissle]

View from SF of the introductory press conference there:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/new-49ers-quarterback-jimmy-garoppolo-quickly-takes-charge/ar-AAuhaIC?li=BBnba9I&ocid=DELLDHP17

EDIT. Most interesting note to me. SF called on JG in the offseason, were rebuffed. Pats call this week; 49ers were shocked and accepted the offer within 10 minutes.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

View from SF of the introductory press conference there:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/new-49ers-quarterback-jimmy-garoppolo-quickly-takes-charge/ar-AAuhaIC?li=BBnba9I&ocid=DELLDHP17

EDIT. Most interesting note to me. SF called on JG in the offseason, were rebuffed. Pats call this week; 49ers were shocked and accepted the offer within 10 minutes.

That doesn't exactly suggest that the Patriots had a well conceived and executed plan to maximize value.

 

[tims4wins]

That doesn't exactly suggest that the Patriots had a well conceived and executed plan to maximize value.

You have no idea what other discussions the Pats had. They may have called Cleveland first. We have no idea. Nothing this team does it by the seat of its pants.

 

[dcmissle]

That doesn't exactly suggest that the Patriots had a well conceived and executed plan to maximize value.

Why not, if they took the negotiations with JG down to the wire? Which you might expect them to do if they really valued JG. Shefter said these efforts were ongoing since the spring.

I think they got pretty much what they would have received in the spring. I don’t think maximizing value necessarily entails having an auction. Maybe they didn’t want JG in the AFC period. If you think he’s very good, there certainly is value in that.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

You have no idea what other discussions the Pats had. They may have called Cleveland first. We have no idea. Nothing this team does it by the seat of its pants.

I don't know and neither do you. All we have is the available evidence, which in this case is that they publicly signaled that JG was not available (or only available for a king's ransom) in the offseason then made an offer this week that was accepted within 10 minutes.

I am the biggest BB fanboy around but people are way too quick to rationalize everything as part of some master plan, in the belief that the guy is infallible. At least entertain the possibility that the team sort of fucked this up. Because the publicly available evidence sure points in that direction.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

Why not, if they took the negotiations with JG down to the wire? Which you might expect them to do if they really valued JG. Shefter said these efforts were ongoing since the spring.

I think they got pretty much what they would have received in the spring. I don’t think maximizing value necessarily entails having an auction. Maybe they didn’t want JG in the AFC period. If you think he’s very good, there certainly is value in that.

We don't know what offers they received in the spring. All we know is that they didn't do much to try to maximize those offers, since they publicly signaled that he wasn't available or that they'd only trade him for an insane haul. Numerous other teams have gone on the record at this point with some version of "We called and they refused to even start negotiating."

The bottom line is that there is a logical disconnect between refusing to seriously negotiate in the offseason (especially this particular offseason, when the QB market was very weak and many teams were interested in adding a QB) and then trading JG midseason. The only way that makes sense is if you placed a very high premium on having JG on the roster for an additional 3-4 months (some value there, but hard to see this being so significant as to justify a blanket refusal to negotiate in the offseason) or if they really, really thought they would be able to extend him (fair enough, but in that case they clearly fundamentally misjudged the situation).

 

[tims4wins]

I don't know and neither do you. All we have is the available evidence, which in this case is that they publicly signaled that JG was not available (or only available for a king's ransom) in the offseason then made an offer this week that was accepted within 10 minutes.

I am the biggest BB fanboy around but people are way too quick to rationalize everything as part of some master plan, in the belief that the guy is infallible. At least entertain the possibility that the team sort of fucked this up. Because the publicly available evidence sure points in that direction.

I fully acknowledge that this did not play out 100% how they had hoped. But by the time this week rolled around, I think they were resigned to having to trade him. Given that, I highly doubt they just talked to one team and took the first offer. I mean, that's just not how they do business.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

I fully acknowledge that this did not play out 100% how they had hoped. But by the time this week rolled around, I think they were resigned to having to trade him. Given that, I highly doubt they just talked to one team and took the first offer. I mean, that's just not how they do business.

I agree with that. My point is more about the consistency of their actions and strategy over time, not so much how they handled things with the 49ers.

 

[dcmissle]

Look, they failed in what they really wanted to do: extend JG. Schefter — who has proven over time he is as reliable as it gets — said they tried for months to extend him.

So that’s a failure. But not for the ridiculous reasons Volin and the Boston radio guys suggest — the salary cap is illusory. And not because of what the golf guy wrote — Kraft beat B.B. into submission at the last minute. And not for the contrary reason Barnwell of ESPN implies — that BB and TB are riding into the sunset together and that BB fucked Kraft long term. There is no substance to any of this I can see — it appears all made up.

Now if anyone wants to argue they were naive in believing they could extend JG, I suppose that’s fair. It suggest to me they went the last mile because they believed it was very important.

 

[joe dokes]

That doesn't exactly suggest that the Patriots had a well conceived and executed plan to maximize value.

If you define "value" as trade return, then maybe you're right. But if you include in that value that fact that they had him for half a season, then maybe not.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

Look, they failed in what they really wanted to do: extend JG. Schefter — who has proven over time he is as reliable as it gets — said they tried for months to extend him.

So that’s a failure. But not for the ridiculous reasons Volin and the Boston radio guys suggest — the salary cap is illusory. And not because of what the golf guy wrote — Kraft beat B.B. into submission at the last minute. And not for the contrary reason Barnwell of ESPN implies — that BB and TB are riding into the sunset together and that BB fucked Kraft long term. There is no substance to any of this I can see — it appears ok made up.

Fully agreed. Those are all really dumb takes.

 

[tims4wins]

I agree with that. My point is more about the consistency of their actions and strategy over time, not so much how they handled things with the 49ers.

I agree. Things changed since the spring, including but not limited to:
- they probably thought they could sign Jimmy to an extension, which obviously didn't happen
- they might have had some concern about a performance dip from Brady, hasn't happened
- the roster has been decimated by injuries, meaning that if Brady got hurt a title seems more unlikely than during the summer
One thing that I don't think changed dramatically is Jimmy's actual value in terms of a trade. The current rumor is that the best offer was from Cleveland, and it was a 2nd rounder plus something else. So they didn't seem to do a ton worse than that.

It is also hard for me to believe they would have traded Brissett if they knew this was coming. So something has even changed, in all likelihood, since the start of September.

Edit: one other thing that may have changed is Jimmy's mindset. Maybe he came into the year thinking that Brady would decline, or that Brady would actually retired post 2017 or something. And then he decided, shit, Brady just isn't going away any time soon, I want to start somewhere, so even a nice extension doesn't make sense for me, since I want to play

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

I don't know and neither do you. All we have is the available evidence, which in this case is that they publicly signaled that JG was not available (or only available for a king's ransom) in the offseason then made an offer this week that was accepted within 10 minutes.

I am the biggest BB fanboy around but people are way too quick to rationalize everything as part of some master plan, in the belief that the guy is infallible. At least entertain the possibility that the team sort of fucked this up. Because the publicly available evidence sure points in that direction.

Sorry, what were the public signals? (Honest question). All I ever saw were rumors. I don’t recall BB, Kraft or anyone else from the organization saying anything about the topic.

 

[tims4wins]

Joe Fann‏Verified account @Joe_Fann
Kyle Shanahan on Jimmy Garoppolo: "I can't promise you that he will play this year."

 

[PayrodsFirstClutchHit]

Joe Fann‏Verified account @Joe_Fann
Kyle Shanahan on Jimmy Garoppolo: "I can't promise you that he will play this year."

And you think Jimmy will sign a long term contract with you after being treated like that? Seems like a bunch of smoke to keep the clubhouse from thinking they are handing a job to a unproven player.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

Sorry, what were the public signals? (Honest question). All I ever saw were rumors. I don’t recall BB, Kraft or anyone else from the organization saying anything about the topic.

My language is a little sloppy there. I'm assuming that when Schefter (and others) came out and said authoritatively that the team wasn't interested in trading Garoppolo, at virtually any price, that this message originated from a conversation with someone within the Patriots organization. Or if it didn't, that the organization made no public steps to try to correct that record.

Its possible that there were extended conversations going on that were never reported on. But I think the Occam's Razer interpretation is that Schefter was right when saying things like the following:

They were never trading Jimmy Garoppolo. Period. That was the case in February, and in March, and in April. It didn’t stop teams from calling to inquire, but there wasn’t a team out there that was going to be able to put together an offer that would have changed the Patriots’ thinking with trading Jimmy Garoppolo.

 

[loshjott]

That doesn't exactly suggest that the Patriots had a well conceived and executed plan to maximize value.

I think it has something to do with seeing a 40 yr old Brady still playing like the GOAT after a half season.

 

[tims4wins]

And you think Jimmy will sign a long term contract with you after being treated like that? Seems like a bunch of smoke to keep the clubhouse from thinking they are handing a job to a unproven player.

Oh completely agree. But who knows.

 

[Papelbon's Poutine]

My language is a little sloppy there. I'm assuming that when Schefter (and others) came out and said authoritatively that the team wasn't interested in trading Garoppolo, at virtually any price, that this message originated from a conversation with someone within the Patriots organization. Or if it didn't, that the organization made no public steps to try to correct that record.

Its possible that there were extended conversations going on that were never reported on. But I think the Occam's Razer interpretation is that Schefter was right when saying things like the following:

How was he right when they just traded him? I think the Occam’s Razor interpretation is that whatever source he had was using him to try to drive the price up. I can see different takes on that, but quite clearly he was wrong, since they in fact did just trade him. The one thing we do actually know is that the organization is pretty much as sealed tight as there is. They were never going to address a trade rumor publicly, even to refute it. That’s not how they work.

 

[scott bankheadcase]

And you think Jimmy will sign a long term contract with you after being treated like that? Seems like a bunch of smoke to keep the clubhouse from thinking they are handing a job to a unproven player.

I watched the press conference. That's a quote that needs context: He also said I can't promise that he won't start. I need to see him learn the offense and won't put him out there without a chance to be successful.

To translate that: Joe Staley, all-pro left tackle, out until after their bye. Jimmy G isn't playing without him in.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

How was he right when they just traded him? I think the Occam’s Razor interpretation is that whatever source he had was using him to try to drive the price up. I can see different takes on that, but quite clearly he was wrong, since they in fact did just trade him. The one thing we do actually know is that the organization is pretty much as sealed tight as there is. They were never going to address a trade rumor publicly, even to refute it. That’s not how they work.

I don't see how the trade impacts a judgement about whether Schefter's report was accurate. He was talking about their posture toward a trade during the spring. They traded him during the fall. The two could easily both be true.

There has not been a single report since last February along the lines of "This team entered into serious negotiations with the Patriots on Garoppolo but they just couldn't get a deal over the line." What we have are media insiders like Schefter saying the Patriots were not interested in trading JG for virtually any price, the 49ers publicly saying they made an approach in the spring but were "rebuffed," etc.

Again, its possible that they did have serious discussions in the spring and they've just never come to light. But the preponderance of the evidence points to them essentially shutting down trade discussion - either by telling teams JG wasn't available or by making an initial ask so high that nothing got going - in the offseason, then changing course later.

 

[Stitch01]

I don't know and neither do you. All we have is the available evidence, which in this case is that they publicly signaled that JG was not available (or only available for a king's ransom) in the offseason then made an offer this week that was accepted within 10 minutes.

I am the biggest BB fanboy around but people are way too quick to rationalize everything as part of some master plan, in the belief that the guy is infallible. At least entertain the possibility that the team sort of fucked this up. Because the publicly available evidence sure points in that direction.

Very plausible. Also plausible that the Pats judged they could trade him mid season for this kind of deal so there was no need to trade him last offseason for less than a first rounder and none were forthcoming and that was translated as "not listening to offers'. Also possible that Jimmy was willing to sign an extension if the Pats would give him the starting job and the Pats were willing to do that if Brady hit the wall this year but when that didn't happen extension talks died.

I certainly think its plausible they fucked up, most likely by misjudging the Jimmy G extension market. But I also thought the most likely outcome if Brady played well was Jimmy walking for a comp pick so what they did isn't inherently illogical IMO.

 

[DJnVa]

Joe Fann‏Verified account @Joe_Fann
Kyle Shanahan on Jimmy Garoppolo: "I can't promise you that he will play this year."

LOL. He's playing.

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

Very plausible. Also plausible that the Pats judged they could trade him mid season for this kind of deal so there was no need to trade him last offseason for less than a first rounder and none were forthcoming and that was translated as "not listening to offers'. Also possible that Jimmy was willing to sign an extension if the Pats would give him the starting job and the Pats were willing to do that if Brady hit the wall this year but when that didn't happen extension talks died.

I certainly think its plausible they fucked up, most likely by misjudging the Jimmy G extension market. But I also thought the most likely outcome if Brady played well was Jimmy walking for a comp pick so what they did isn't inherently illogical IMO.

That's a fair take.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

LOL. He's playing.

Managing expectations. That's all it is.

 

[edmunddantes]

He's not playing near term at all regardless of playbook knowledge. Beyond Staley being out there were other injuries on that o-line. It was getting Beathard killed against the Eagles. Lots of free runners (including on the same play).

 

[finnVT]

So, with no heir apparent anymore post-JG and JB, it seems reasonable to think the Pats may use one of those 2nd or 3rd round picks on a developmental QB (in fact, I'd bet pretty heavily on it). For those more tuned in to this stuff, who are the guys we should be keeping an eye on?

Assuming that Jackson/Darnold/Rosen are all gone (or stay in school), seems like the next batch would include some of:

Clayton Thorson*, QB, Northwestern
Josh Allen*, QB, Wyoming
Luke Falk, QB, Washington State
Mason Rudolph, QB, Oklahoma State
Baker Mayfield, QB, Oklahoma
Jarrett Stidham**, QB, Auburn
Chase Litton*, QB, Marshall
Riley Ferguson, QB, Memphis
Nic Shimonek, QB, Texas Tech
Daniel Jones**, QB, Duke
Nick Fitzgerald*, QB, Mississippi State
Will Grier*, QB, West Virginia

(from http://walterfootball.com/draft2018QB.php)

Without knowing anything about most most of these guys, any that jump out as NE-types that are worth watching?

 

[InstaFace]

That's a great post worthy of being a thread-starter. I can't evaluate college QBs even well enough to act like I can on the internet, but I'm interested in reading the thoughts of those who can.

 

[Super Nomario]

The bottom line is that there is a logical disconnect between refusing to seriously negotiate in the offseason (especially this particular offseason, when the QB market was very weak and many teams were interested in adding a QB) and then trading JG midseason. The only way that makes sense is if you placed a very high premium on having JG on the roster for an additional 3-4 months (some value there, but hard to see this being so significant as to justify a blanket refusal to negotiate in the offseason) or if they really, really thought they would be able to extend him (fair enough, but in that case they clearly fundamentally misjudged the situation).

I don't necessarily disagree with this, but what you see as a logical disconnect I see as a probabilistic way to proceed into the future in a world with uncertain outcomes. There's A% change Brady falls off, B% chance he gets hurt, C% chance they can work something out to keep them both in NE beyond 2017, and a fallback plan of still getting pretty nice value for a guy who was a late 2 and has less than a season on his contract. If the goal was to maximize trade return, keeping Jimmy was probably a mistake, but I think they had several goals or potential goals, some of which are inconsistent, and trading Garoppolo last offseason was only going to help one of those. Now they are at a point where A% is essentially zero, C% is zero, and B% is half of what it was a few months ago, so maximizing return becomes the primary goal. That isn't to say they might not have misjudged some of the odds along the way, but one thing I will always give Belichick the benefit of the doubt on is that he thought about the different possibilities. This isn't arcane stuff; these eventualities all occurred to people here.

That doesn't exactly suggest that the Patriots had a well conceived and executed plan to maximize value.

Even though it doesn't seem like negotiations got serious in the offseason, I imagine they still had some idea of Garoppolo's trade value then and now. Like 1/6 of the front offices used to work for Belichick, and the degrees of separation are miniscule (in this case, Lynch played for the Patriots briefly, and Shanahan OC'd for the Browns when Mike Lombardi was there). If there was a Godfather offer, they would know, and they talk to these teams all the time.

I would imagine they didn't need to make a lot of phone calls. There aren't a lot of teams that need a QB for the future and have an opening now (the NYG, for instance, need a QB, but can't offer Jimmy PT now without benching Eli). If we assume they wanted to send Garoppolo out of conference, I count SF, ARI, and maybe MIN as the only real possibilities. SF had expressed an interest in Garoppolo, had a really high two to offer, and also allowed them to seamlessly fill the backup role with an experienced player they had familiarity with.

So, with no heir apparent anymore post-JG and JB, it seems reasonable to think the Pats may use one of those 2nd or 3rd round picks on a developmental QB (in fact, I'd bet pretty heavily on it). For those more tuned in to this stuff, who are the guys we should be keeping an eye on?

@mascho has written about Idaho QB Matt Linehan and how closely his offense parallels NE's: http://insidethepylon.com/pylon-u/teams-ncaa/division-ia-fbs/sun-belt/idaho-vandals/2017/05/10/matt-linehan-next-c-j-beathard/

Hoyer's three-year deal means they don't have to use a high pick in 2018 on a QB. They could use a late pick or pick up a UDFA (as Hoyer was) or wait until 2019 if they don't like the value / fit of the 2018 options.

 

[RedOctober3829]

According to @JayGlazer, John Lynch asked Belichick if Brady was available when he was initially told Garoppolo was off limits

 

[InstaFace]

Nice pair of brass ones Lynch has. It's the smart play. Tessio was always smarter.

 

[soxhop411]

Nice pair of brass ones Lynch has. It's the smart play. Tessio was always smarter.

According to Fox Sports' Jay Glazer, when 49ers GM John Lynch attempted to acquire Jimmy Garoppolo from the Patriots this offseason and was turned down, he then asked Bill Belichick about the availability of Tom Brady.

“So Lynch calls back," Glazer said. "‘Garoppolo’s off limits. Will you trade us Tom Brady?’ Belichick said, ‘What did you just ask me?’ [Lynch said>, ‘I’m asking would you trade us Tom Brady? You said Garoppolo’s off limits.’ He goes, ‘Did you just ask me if you’d trade Tom Brady … Did you just ask me if I’d trade the greatest quarterback of all time?’"

 

[Gash Prex]

Given the fact that BB preferred Jimmy G I find that story hard to believe

 

[Mystic Merlin]

Given the fact that BB preferred Jimmy G I find that story hard to believe

This is a mighty shaky inference

 

[DJnVa]

This is a mighty shaky inference

But I believe it’s pretty solid sarcasm.

 

[GoDa]

I suspect the Patriots are very practical with their evaluation of Brady and the risks of playing QB at age 40. In the off-season, no team blew them away with an offer, so they kept JG as insurance for the first half of the season. Half of the season down - Brady playing well - the Patriots made another call that keeping JG beyond this season was not practical and the offer from the 49ers was more valuable than the final half-season of insurance. Also wouldn't be surprised if the Pats have some efficiency metric that shows high 2nd round draft picks are among the most valuable.

 

[Marciano490]

Also curious what a half season of college football prospecting has shown them, if anything.

 

[BigJimEd]

In the off-season, no team blew them away with an offer, so they kept JG as insurance for the first half of the season.

That might be practical except multiple reports are that they didn't even listen to offers in the off-season.

 

[joe dokes]

That might be practical except multiple reports are that they didn't even listen to offers in the off-season.

I doubt that "didn't listen" is meant literally. They just didn't hear anything to make it worth it.

"Bill, don't hang up we'll give you all of our draft picks for the next........"
Click.

 

[5dice]

IAlso wouldn't be surprised if the Pats have some efficiency metric that shows high 2nd round draft picks are among the most valuable.

The Loser's Curse whitepaper details this (one of the authors just won a Nobel). Pats are probably up on this kind of science.

"Top picks do perform better than lower-round choices, but performance falls much more slowly than compensation. The most value per dollar can be found in the second half of the first round and in the second round, where players have good performances on average but are not as expensive. The payoff peaks at about the forty-third pick (the eleventh pick in the second round of this year’s draft), who brings in a five-year performance worth around $750,000 more than his price. Of those first forty-three selections, the No. 1 pick is actually the worst in cost-benefit terms, since that player eats up so much of the budget. This phenomenon is growing more pronounced over time."

Source: The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/05/the-losers-curse/304795/

 

[Stitch01]

That's a pretty dated study at this point, its based on an old CBA. Higher picks are more valuable now because compensation is capped.

 

[Super Nomario]

The Loser's Curse whitepaper details this (one of the authors just won a Nobel). Pats are probably up on this kind of science.

"Top picks do perform better than lower-round choices, but performance falls much more slowly than compensation. The most value per dollar can be found in the second half of the first round and in the second round, where players have good performances on average but are not as expensive. The payoff peaks at about the forty-third pick (the eleventh pick in the second round of this year’s draft), who brings in a five-year performance worth around $750,000 more than his price. Of those first forty-three selections, the No. 1 pick is actually the worst in cost-benefit terms, since that player eats up so much of the budget. This phenomenon is growing more pronounced over time."

Source: The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/05/the-losers-curse/304795/

That's under the old CBA. The cost curve is a lot less steep under the new one.

From a trade perspective, I can see high picks in a round being undervalued psychologically. There isn't much difference between the 28th pick and the 34th pick, but one of them is a FIRST ROUNDER and the other is just a second rounder.

 

[Hendu for Kutch]

The Loser's Curse whitepaper details this (one of the authors just won a Nobel). Pats are probably up on this kind of science.

"Top picks do perform better than lower-round choices, but performance falls much more slowly than compensation. The most value per dollar can be found in the second half of the first round and in the second round, where players have good performances on average but are not as expensive. The payoff peaks at about the forty-third pick (the eleventh pick in the second round of this year’s draft), who brings in a five-year performance worth around $750,000 more than his price. Of those first forty-three selections, the No. 1 pick is actually the worst in cost-benefit terms, since that player eats up so much of the budget. This phenomenon is growing more pronounced over time."

Source: The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2006/05/the-losers-curse/304795/

That article is from before they changed the compensation system though, I think in large part because of this exact problem.

Sam Bradford got a 6 year / $78M contract as the #1 pick, whereas Jared Goff got a 4 year / $28M contract.

 

[ZMart100]

That's under the old CBA. The cost curve is a lot less steep under the new one.

From a trade perspective, I can see high picks in a round being undervalued psychologically. There isn't much difference between the 28th pick and the 34th pick, but one of them is a FIRST ROUNDER and the other is just a second rounder.

First rounders under the current CBA come with a fifth year option. I imagine the extra year of control is a pretty valuable difference between drafting a player at #32 vs #33.

 

[Shelterdog]

First rounders under the current CBA come with a fifth year option. I imagine the extra year of control is a pretty valuable difference between drafting a player at #32 vs #33.

It's kind of weird actually. For a quarterback or a star player it's worth a ton but the option years are pretty expensive if you draft a decent starter (in my mind a Joe Thuney or Malcom Brown or Patrick Chung)--I think the option level is the average of the third through 25th players at that position so, ballpark, you're paying someone as the 14th best guy in the league and that can be a lot. People generally exercise them if the player is around but you're essentially getting an option to have one year of a player at market rates.

 

[Super Nomario]

It's kind of weird actually. For a quarterback or a star player it's worth a ton but the option years are pretty expensive if you draft a decent starter (in my mind a Joe Thuney or Malcom Brown or Patrick Chung)--I think the option level is the average of the third through 25th players at that position so, ballpark, you're paying someone as the 14th best guy in the league and that can be a lot. People generally exercise them if the player is around but you're essentially getting an option to have one year of a player at market rates.

To piggyback on this, here's the report of who from the 2014 draft got exercised: https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/05/02/fifth-year-option-tracker

In addition to the guys who didn't get it picked up, there's a bunch where they're not really a bargain at the price. Are you feeling great about paying Darqueze Dennard or Jimmie Ward $8.5MM? Zack Martin is probably the best guard in football, but his option year at north $9 MM isn't much of a bargain - he's like the seventh-highest-paid G at that price.

Obviously it's a great deal if you get a guy like OBJ or Aaron Donald who's a top-five player at his position and taken outside the top 10.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

It's kind of weird actually. For a quarterback or a star player it's worth a ton but the option years are pretty expensive if you draft a decent starter (in my mind a Joe Thuney or Malcom Brown or Patrick Chung)--I think the option level is the average of the third through 25th players at that position so, ballpark, you're paying someone as the 14th best guy in the league and that can be a lot. People generally exercise them if the player is around but you're essentially getting an option to have one year of a player at market rates.

Right -- by definition they are close to market. But their value comes in the fact that it's only a one year deal and also they are very flexible. They are not guaranteed except for injury. You can still cut the player until the first day of the fifth league year.

There may be other reasons the 33d pick is more valuable than the 32d pick that I'm not aware of. I'm hardly a draft- or cap-ologist. But just looking at it in terms of the option, I think it definitely adds some value to the first rounder that is not present in the second round.

 

[InstaFace]

Is there a major difference in slot value, for AAV of the first 4 years, between pick 32 and 33? Is the salary slope roughly continuous?

edit: from this article and Spotrac, picks 17-28 seem to be all pretty bunched in at ~$2.5M AAV, with #s 29-32 dropping a bit closer to $2.3M. The AAV for pick 33 appears to jump quite a bit down, to ~$1.7M, and picks 33-44 are all roughly in the $1.5-1.7 range. So there's some cap-value difference between low-1st / high-2nd that's worth bearing in mind.

 

[BigJimEd]

I doubt that "didn't listen" is meant literally. They just didn't hear anything to make it worth it.

"Bill, don't hang up we'll give you all of our draft picks for the next........"
Click.

Lynch has been quoted that they didn't even get to the point of exchanging an offer. The Patriots shut it down quickly, saying he was off limits. That's the same as we heard all off season.