Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Apr 17, 2012 23:33:33 GMT -5
I've seen a few links to the proposed rookie draft chart now that we have 6 rounds. I was wondering when we were gong to decide or vote on how that chart lays out?
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Apr 17, 2012 23:36:11 GMT -5
no
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Apr 17, 2012 23:40:21 GMT -5
that's it. no vote
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Apr 17, 2012 23:45:25 GMT -5
awwwww
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Apr 18, 2012 0:08:55 GMT -5
I'll kill myself for this but what would you do with it different?
Trades have been made based on that chart so it isn't changing...but...let's hear it.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Apr 18, 2012 23:29:15 GMT -5
I think we need to take another look at how the rookie pay scale works out (not the pay, but the contract terms), and here's why.
Right now as the chart states rookies drafted in rounds 3, 4, & 5 you only get a rookie contract of 2 years. This makes no sense, as the rookies you draft in rounds 3, 4, 5, & 6 are typically not the "good" ones so to speak. Not the Andrew Luck's, Mark Ingram's, Cam Newtons, or Trent Richardson's. Those rookies typically go in rounds 1 & 2, and they are in all likely hood going to be coming off your Taxi Squad in 2 or less years or starting on your roster from day 1.
The rookies you typically daft in later rounds are going to have to sit on your TS for a few years to develop. If we only get these rookies for 2 years, any team that drafts them is likely going to have to drop them, or if they extend them they'll have to promote them off the TS. I think this kinda defeats the whole purpose of the TS.
I think we should look at making all the rookie contracts 3-4 years regardless of what round they were drafted in. Still leaving round 6 for the drafting team to set a term. Otherwise what's the point of drafting a rookie in a later round and putting them on the TS if it takes them longer to develop than the rookie contract they come with?
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Apr 18, 2012 23:34:28 GMT -5
And I think we should look at changing it... changing the years won't affect the trades, and as far as any of us knew it was still subject to change as it's called: PROPOSED rookie pay scale
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2012 23:39:01 GMT -5
I think we need to take another look at how the rookie pay scale works out (not the pay, but the contract terms), and here's why. Right now as the chart states rookies drafted in rounds 3, 4, & 5 you only get a rookie contract of 2 years. This makes no sense, as the rookies you draft in rounds 3, 4, 5, & 6 are typically not the "good" ones so to speak. Not the Andrew Luck's, Mark Ingram's, Cam Newtons, or Trent Richardson's. Those rookies typically go in rounds 1 & 2, and they are in all likely hood going to be coming off your Taxi Squad in 2 or less years or starting on your roster from day 1. The rookies you typically daft in later rounds are going to have to sit on your TS for a few years to develop. If we only get these rookies for 2 years, any team that drafts them is likely going to have to drop them, or if they extend them they'll have to promote them off the TS. I think this kinda defeats the whole purpose of the TS. I think we should look at making all the rookie contracts 3-4 years regardless of what round they were drafted in. Still leaving round 6 for the drafting team to set a term. Otherwise what's the point of drafting a rookie in a later round and putting them on the TS if it takes them longer to develop than the rookie contract they come with? I agree. The way it works right now is that you are punished for picking a guy and by the time he develops everyone else has a shot at him.
|
|
AA
Not the Droid I Seek
3%
2013 RADL Champion
Posts: 356
|
Post by AA on Apr 19, 2012 15:36:27 GMT -5
Hadn't thought much about this (probably because I'm a crappy drafter...draftee?), but if what Nate is saying is true, and I have not re-read the rules yet to make sure, than I would be in favor of either requiring or allowing teams to give lengthier contracts to all draft picks.
If I was lucky enough to draft the next Jimmy Graham in the third round I would not want to know that no matter what he would become a free agent or restricted free agent. I would want the chance to re-sign him long term without having to compete with other teams for him.
What if you were allowed to sign players to up to a 6 year contract, but if you promoted them off the taxi squad than the year after you promoted them (so not the current season) you had to re-sign them to a new deal similiar to how the franchise tags work.
Like if I drafted Arian Foster in the 4th round, gave him a 4 year term, and decided to promote him in year 2, than I could keep him in his $2 salary for that year, but then if I wanted to keep him past the two remaining years on his contract then I would have to pay him the average of the top 15 players at his position or something like that and could extend the term. If I didn't want to pay him that than after the season he becomes a free agent.
This way you could keep any gem you were smart enough or lucky enough to draft, but you could would have to pay him a fair salary based on league averages if you wanted to make him a starter and keep him long term. What that salary is based on would need to be worked out, I just picked top 15 players because that would allow him to be less than franchised guys, but still get paid well.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Apr 19, 2012 16:12:04 GMT -5
And I thought I was confusing, but I think Alderan and Pugs agree with me. Heck I'd be willing to be that myself and many others would be willing to pay more for later round picks for longer rookie contracts, say 4 years. I really think with the response to this, that this isn't just me throwing ideas out
|
|
AA
Not the Droid I Seek
3%
2013 RADL Champion
Posts: 356
|
Post by AA on Apr 19, 2012 17:12:13 GMT -5
Even a broke clock is right twice a day...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2012 22:19:58 GMT -5
I think that the 2 year contracts on 3,4, & 5 round players is fine. To me these players will still be a restricted free agent and the owning team will have a right to match option. I guess I don't think we should be able to stash players forever with no cost.
I think the only round we should maybe look at is the 2nd round. If I'm understanding the rules correct you will never have a option to extend this players contract or have them as a RFA so essentially you would either have to franchise them or bid as a UFA at the end of their rookie deal.
Just my 2 cents
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Apr 20, 2012 19:56:17 GMT -5
Brock, I would agree with you, but that's not the case.
If players on on our ACTIVE roster, yes they become RFA's.
But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about later round rookies that go on the Taxi Squad (Pratice Squad). If their contracts expire while on the TS, they are just dropped from our teams and put back into the general FA pool. Which is the point Alderan, Pugs, and I are making. Right now we are "punished" for grabbing an unknown talent in the 3rd, 4th, or 5th rounds, because their contacts are set at 2 years. If they are on the TS when that two years are up. We loose them.
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Apr 20, 2012 21:13:37 GMT -5
not true.
they are rfa's.
You just don't want to pay them if they're good.
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Apr 21, 2012 7:55:49 GMT -5
Also round 2 players could be franchised as they will have 4 years credited service at the end of their 3rd season.
If bid on, "the next jimmy graham" would then make a fair wage.
Maybe, just maybe the top half of round 2 should be 4 years so you could extend them without competition.
Maybe, just maybe round 5 could be an "assign term" round.
But round 3 and 4, imo, should be as is because all these super stars you guys plan on drafting would hold out if payed the piss wages in a second contract.
RFA bidding which all these mid-round players would require, is designed to pay them a fair wage.
Which guys like Aldon Smith, Cruz, Washington, and all the other RFA's bid on got. A decent raise and their brilliant drafters get to always match the offers.
undrafted rookies are all "assign term" guys and TS eligible.
I agree though if you get a 5th round stud WR then you should probably be rewarded and allowed to keep them on the cheap. Round 3? Seems like the luck of the draw 70% of the time and I'd imagine that's being generous.
Jesus the NFL hit rate can't be more than 50% as the average NFL career is 3 seasons.
|
|