The NFL Draft: Creates Parity, uh, No

[Mitch]

The compensatory picks are assigned on losses not for the current free agency period, but from the prior period. In 2005 free agency, the Steelers lost Pro Bowl outside linebacker Kendrell Bell, starting right tackle Oliver Ross, above-average #2 wideout and former first-round pick Plaxico Burress, and defensive tackle Kendrick Clancy.

For all those losses, all of whom are starters for other teams, the NFL generously awarded the Steelers with two compensatory draft picks, a fourth rounder (133rd overall) and fifth rounder (167th overall). I'm sure that this gives them an unfair advantage since they lost a guy who gained over 1200 yards and scored 7 TDs the following season and replaced him with a former 49er.

On the other hand, the New York Jets were the only team with a 3rd round compensatory pick. The Tennessee Titans had three compensatory picks. Damn the NFL for keeping the "haves" in power by awarding them those valuable second-day picks.

If you looked at the actual facts, Mitch, you may find that they differ quite a bit from what your "gut" is telling you. Maybe it's just me, but I don't really mind if the NFL rewards teams for developing stars and losing them to free agency with some guy who might make the roster and contribute on a handful of special teams plays during their entire career.

K9-you're right the compensatory picks are from the previous year's losses versus gains...regardless, adding a 4th and 5th is a pretty nice bonus...those players were: (133) DT Orien Harris of Miami (who is a steal here) and (167) TE Charles Davis of Purdue...a 6'6' 260 athlete...great value here too.

To say 4th and 5th rounders are mere special teams acquisitions was not one of the more persuasive points in your inimitable sarcasm. Tom Brady was a 6th rounder.

Having multiple picks is a real luxury in that a team can take a flyer on a prospect...and have another pick in the round to fall back on.

Lastly, all teams have to work within the salary cap...there should be no compensation for losing players because team can sign free agents to replace them...and whether they choose to or not is their prerogative. The Steelers have been using the draft for years to maintain the depth of their roster...they know how to work the system...and the cap, accordingly.

 

[kerouac9]

K9-you're right the compensatory picks are from the previous year's losses versus gains...regardless, adding a 4th and 5th is a pretty nice bonus...those players were: (133) DT Orien Harris of Miami (who is a steal here) and (167) TE Charles Davis of Purdue...a 6'6' 260 athlete...great value here too.

To say 4th and 5th rounders are mere special teams acquisitions was not one of the more persuasive points in your inimitable sarcasm. Tom Brady was a 6th rounder.

Having multiple picks is a real luxury in that a team can take a flyer on a prospect...and have another pick in the round to fall back on.

Lastly, all teams have to work within the salary cap...there should be no compensation for losing players because team can sign free agents to replace them...and whether they choose to or not is their prerogative. The Steelers have been using the draft for years to maintain the depth of their roster...they know how to work the system...and the cap, accordingly.

Adding fourth and fifth round picks is a "nice bonus" to what? Losing three above-average NFL players and a solid depth guy?

Mitch, you know as well as I do that Tom Brady is the exception that proves the rule, and your reliance on his example only serves to highlight the intellectual emptiness of your argument here.

Yes, all teams have to work within the salary cap, but the free agency system is also designed to help the "have not" teams get better. The compensatory pick system is designed to help alleviate the "opportunity cost" of a team spending a ton of time training a player and then having him leave. Again, explain to me how a fourth-round pick really helps ease the sting of losing an elite wideout like Burress.

Perhaps you should advocate running the draft by lot instead of having each individual team scout and rate their prospects. The better teams are better not because the draft process is "rigged" to favor good teams but because they have better scouting and do a better job of training the players that they do get into camp.

 

[Mitch]

Adding fourth and fifth round picks is a "nice bonus" to what? Losing three above-average NFL players and a solid depth guy?

Mitch, you know as well as I do that Tom Brady is the exception that proves the rule, and your reliance on his example only serves to highlight the intellectual emptiness of your argument here.

Yes, all teams have to work within the salary cap, but the free agency system is also designed to help the "have not" teams get better. The compensatory pick system is designed to help alleviate the "opportunity cost" of a team spending a ton of time training a player and then having him leave. Again, explain to me how a fourth-round pick really helps ease the sting of losing an elite wideout like Burress.

Perhaps you should advocate running the draft by lot instead of having each individual team scout and rate their prospects. The better teams are better not because the draft process is "rigged" to favor good teams but because they have better scouting and do a better job of training the players that they do get into camp.

K9...the Steelers chose not to re-sign Burress...every team can get creative with the cap for players they really want to keep. No they can't keep them all...no team can...but, the Steelers can pursue free agent replacements as doggedly as all other teams...the thing is, they often use the draft to do it, like they did this year by moving up to #25 to take WR/PR Santonio Holmes...having the extra picks in the draft gives teams like the Steelers greater flexibility to maneuver for the players they want...while they can't trade compensatory picks, they can trade their own picks and have the compensatory picks to fall back on...

My point about Brady is that the more draft picks you have, the luckier you might get, especially on day two where the hidden gems like Brady and Terrell Davis (another 6th round pick) may be plucked.

I just don't see the need to compensate teams for their own decisions to let players go in free agency when those teams can pursue free agents themselves and/or decide to re-sign their own.

Randall Antwan-El would have remained a Steeler if the Steelers offered him his market value...they chose not to. IMO, there should be no compensation for that.

 

[kerouac9]

K9...the Steelers chose not to re-sign Burress...every team can get creative with the cap for players they really want to keep. No they can't keep them all...no team can...but, the Steelers can pursue free agent replacements as doggedly as all other teams...the thing is, they often use the draft to do it, like they did this year by moving up to #25 to take WR/PR Santonio Holmes...having the extra picks in the draft gives teams like the Steelers greater flexibility to maneuver for the players they want...while they can't trade compensatory picks, they can trade their own picks and have the compensatory picks to fall back on...

My point about Brady is that the more draft picks you have, the luckier you might get, especially on day two where the hidden gems like Brady and Terrell Davis (another 6th round pick) may be plucked.

I just don't see the need to compensate teams for their own decisions to let players go in free agency when those teams can pursue free agents themselves and/or decide to re-sign their own.

Randall Antwan-El would have remained a Steeler if the Steelers offered him his market value...they chose not to. IMO, there should be no compensation for that.

No, Walt, the Steelers used free agency to sign Cedric Wilson to replace Burress in their starting lineup. Then they used a #1 pick to replace a fomer third round pick in Randle-El. The salary that the Redskins offered was not commensurate to his value to the rest of the NFL, and there's a net benefit to letting teams not have to overbid for their own free agents or anyone else's: it keeps free agent salaries down. Nothing's to be gained by having more Daniel Snyder's out there bidding $3 million per season for every third-tier wideout in the League.

Everyone benefits from the free agency system combined with the compensatory pick benefit.

1. Free agent - Gets the highest bid in salary and signing bonus offered.
2. Signing team - Gets their targeted free agent.
3. Losing team - Gets some of the value-added from training a player back in the form of low-round, protected draft choices.

If you really think that it's that unfair for the Steelers to get something in return for taking a player like Randle-El and turning him into a guy that merits a seven-figure bonus from being a guy that got a five-figure bonus as a rookie, in the form of training, system, etc., well, I guess that's your deal. The way I see it, everyone ends up a winner.

Teams shouldn't have to overpay to keep their own talent and end up with nothing at all.

 

[BigDavis75]

K9...the Steelers chose not to re-sign Burress...every team can get creative with the cap for players they really want to keep. No they can't keep them all...no team can...but, the Steelers can pursue free agent replacements as doggedly as all other teams...the thing is, they often use the draft to do it, like they did this year by moving up to #25 to take WR/PR Santonio Holmes...having the extra picks in the draft gives teams like the Steelers greater flexibility to maneuver for the players they want...while they can't trade compensatory picks, they can trade their own picks and have the compensatory picks to fall back on...

My point about Brady is that the more draft picks you have, the luckier you might get, especially on day two where the hidden gems like Brady and Terrell Davis (another 6th round pick) may be plucked.

I just don't see the need to compensate teams for their own decisions to let players go in free agency when those teams can pursue free agents themselves and/or decide to re-sign their own.

Randall Antwan-El would have remained a Steeler if the Steelers offered him his market value...they chose not to. IMO, there should be no compensation for that.

Compensatory picks is an excellent part of the NFL. If you're team loses a quality player your team will get a pick in return. You're whole argument that the Steelers can go as hard as other teams after any FA in wrong, they anually have very very little cap space to work with.

K9 is correct on Randle-El, you probably just watched him in the playoffs and thought he was amazing but the rest of the season he was pedestrian. No one but Snyder was going to offer him that contract.

Also, if you believe that compensatory picks are really that big (IMO they are a necessary but only small concession) then you can look up the recent comp. picks. I realize that Brady was a 6th rounder, so what? If players like him didn't turn up in those rounds it would be useless to scout players that low. The Pats were 8-8 that year (lat in the AFC East!) and that pick (wasn't even a comp.) led them to all their SBs.

Terrell Davis was picked by the Broncos after coming off a 7-9 season (4th in the AFC West!) and he wasn't a compensatory pick. He helped take the Broncos to multiple SBs along with #1 overall pick John Elway! That defeats your examples against compensatory picks completely.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

We should go back to the "old" days when teams had total control of all players and ,once you were drafted by that team ,they pretty much had you for the length of your career. That way we wouldn't have to mess around with these comp picks and free agency in general. .

 

[Mitch]

Compensatory picks is an excellent part of the NFL. If you're team loses a quality player your team will get a pick in return. You're whole argument that the Steelers can go as hard as other teams after any FA in wrong, they anually have very very little cap space to work with.

K9 is correct on Randle-El, you probably just watched him in the playoffs and thought he was amazing but the rest of the season he was pedestrian. No one but Snyder was going to offer him that contract.

Also, if you believe that compensatory picks are really that big (IMO they are a necessary but only small concession) then you can look up the recent comp. picks. I realize that Brady was a 6th rounder, so what? If players like him didn't turn up in those rounds it would be useless to scout players that low. The Pats were 8-8 that year (lat in the AFC East!) and that pick (wasn't even a comp.) led them to all their SBs.

Terrell Davis was picked by the Broncos after coming off a 7-9 season (4th in the AFC West!) and he wasn't a compensatory pick. He helped take the Broncos to multiple SBs along with #1 overall pick John Elway! That defeats your examples against compensatory picks completely.

BigDavis: I never said Brady or Davis were compensatory picks...I brought them up because K9 was claiming that 4th and 5th rounders are typically special teams' players, nothing more.

Yes, Pittsburgh usually has cap issues, but so do most of the teams.

I agree with K9 too that Randall-El was overpaid by Daniel Snyder..,

And this is why Pittsburgh typically lets go of the free agents they don't believe deserve the salaries they are asking for...but if Pittsburgh really wanted to keep the likes of Burress and Randall-El, they would have found a way...like re-signing them during the course of the season.

BTW..I watch a lot of Steeler games and I have always been high on Randall-El and wished the Cardinals had drafted him. Calling his play "pedestrian" is not accurate. He's one of those return men who can turn the momentum of a game around at the snap of a finger...and Pittsburgh didn't feature Randall-El in their passing game as much as they could have...like they did in the playoffs. Just the same, is he worth what the Redskins offered him? Probably not...unless he help bring them the Lombardi the way he helped the Steelers.

Having the compensatory picks, IMO, is not a "small concession" as you suggest, when the picks are 3rd, 4th and 5th rounders. If the league created an 8th round strictly for compensatory picks, then I would agree that they are a small concession.

The Cardinals had 7 picks in this year's draft.

The Steelers had 9 (7 in the first 5 rounds) following a Super Bowl victory.

Parity?

 

[kerouac9]

The Cardinals had 7 picks in this year's draft.

The Steelers had 9 (7 in the first 5 rounds) following a Super Bowl victory.

Parity?

You're joking, right? Seriously. You act like the warm bodies is what makes a difference in the NFL, and if you really think that, you're insane. If the Steelers really thought that quantity was better than quality, then they would have traded out of the #6 spot where they drafted Ben Roethlisberger, but they didn't do that, did they? In fact, the Steelers are Exhibit A in the argument that higher draft picks are of great value regardless of the cost, considering that they trade up frequently for players, regardless of the salary cap cost of moving up seven spots or more (for Santonio Holmes or Troy Polamalu).

Ask anyone in the NFL if they'd rather have Plaxico Burress or Orien Harris and Charles Davis and they'll tell you Burress so fast it would make your head spin. Yes, two out of the past 300+ sixth round picks have worked out, but many, many more first-round and top 10 picks have worked out.

Seriously, Mitch. These arguments have gotten so inane at this point that they almost defy response. I'd post the poll, but I'd guess that basically everyone here would decide that they'd rather have the Cardinals' 7 draft choices than the Steelers' 9 (which would have been Matthias Kiuwanka, Tavaris Jackson [they traded their second round pick for two thirds from the Vikings], Gerris Wilkenson, Guy Whimper, Anthony Smith, Willie Reed, Willie Colon, Orien Harris, Omar Jacobs, Charles Davis, Marvin Phillip, and Cedric Humes).

The Steelers may have gotten more bodies, but the Cardinals got better prospects, and, yes, that's parity.

 

[lobo]

very thoughtful comments and subject....if a team does not know how to pick...i know one that was clueless then the draft only helps the team with superioir scouting...take a look at the so called teams over the years that were in a rebuilding mode...they ALL were known to have the best scouting departments..Dallas, Pitt, Miami, and a few others

 

[Mitch]

You're joking, right? Seriously. You act like the warm bodies is what makes a difference in the NFL, and if you really think that, you're insane. If the Steelers really thought that quantity was better than quality, then they would have traded out of the #6 spot where they drafted Ben Roethlisberger, but they didn't do that, did they? In fact, the Steelers are Exhibit A in the argument that higher draft picks are of great value regardless of the cost, considering that they trade up frequently for players, regardless of the salary cap cost of moving up seven spots or more (for Santonio Holmes or Troy Polamalu).

Ask anyone in the NFL if they'd rather have Plaxico Burress or Orien Harris and Charles Davis and they'll tell you Burress so fast it would make your head spin. Yes, two out of the past 300+ sixth round picks have worked out, but many, many more first-round and top 10 picks have worked out.

Seriously, Mitch. These arguments have gotten so inane at this point that they almost defy response. I'd post the poll, but I'd guess that basically everyone here would decide that they'd rather have the Cardinals' 7 draft choices than the Steelers' 9 (which would have been Matthias Kiuwanka, Tavaris Jackson [they traded their second round pick for two thirds from the Vikings], Gerris Wilkenson, Guy Whimper, Anthony Smith, Willie Reed, Willie Colon, Orien Harris, Omar Jacobs, Charles Davis, Marvin Phillip, and Cedric Humes).

The Steelers may have gotten more bodies, but the Cardinals got better prospects, and, yes, that's parity.

You know K9...I didn't claim I would have taken the Steelers' draft instead of the Cards'. I was pointing out a disparity in the number of picks, that's all. You have a way of twisting what people say so you can point out how "inane" everyone is...and your sarcasm and disrespect are getting old.

It's a good debate. Both sides have been argued.

I always feel more enlightened when people respectfully argue the issues. To tell you the truth, I have found some of your points (when articulated respectfully) rather persuasive...and many of the others too.

 

[BigDavis75]

BigDavis: I never said Brady or Davis were compensatory picks...I brought them up because K9 was claiming that 4th and 5th rounders are typically special teams' players, nothing more.

Yes, Pittsburgh usually has cap issues, but so do most of the teams.

I agree with K9 too that Randall-El was overpaid by Daniel Snyder..,

And this is why Pittsburgh typically lets go of the free agents they don't believe deserve the salaries they are asking for...but if Pittsburgh really wanted to keep the likes of Burress and Randall-El, they would have found a way...like re-signing them during the course of the season.

BTW..I watch a lot of Steeler games and I have always been high on Randall-El and wished the Cardinals had drafted him. Calling his play "pedestrian" is not accurate. He's one of those return men who can turn the momentum of a game around at the snap of a finger...and Pittsburgh didn't feature Randall-El in their passing game as much as they could have...like they did in the playoffs. Just the same, is he worth what the Redskins offered him? Probably not...unless he help bring them the Lombardi the way he helped the Steelers.

Having the compensatory picks, IMO, is not a "small concession" as you suggest, when the picks are 3rd, 4th and 5th rounders. If the league created an 8th round strictly for compensatory picks, then I would agree that they are a small concession.

The Cardinals had 7 picks in this year's draft.

The Steelers had 9 (7 in the first 5 rounds) following a Super Bowl victory.

Parity?

Randle El was absolutely a pedestrian player. Here are his receiving numbers for 05-06 regular season: 35 receptions for 558 yards and 1, YES 1 TD . That is god awful and almost every other 3rd wideout in the league posted better than those numbers when El was the 2nd receiver nearly all season. The reason he wasn't featured more was because had alligator arms and pulled off his route screaming for PR at the slightest contact. Also, I don't know if he is a dynamic returner. He is not a KR and as a PR he had 2 TDs and averaged just a shade over 10 per, I would say he is a top 12 returner. He really wasn't that good of a player.

Also, I am correct in saying that comp. picks are a small concession (generally) in relation to the player given up. If Team a receives a comp. 3rd rounder then they must have given up an excellent player. That's it. That team would almost certainly prefer that player to the pick they received. Example: The Jets received a comp. 3rd rounder after losing LaMont Jordan to the Raiders and their pick was Eric Smith, a slow safety. Now who do you think the Jets would prefer, Jordan, now that C-Mart is on the morphine drip, or their rookie back-up safety in Smith?

One more thing, the earliest compensatory pick in the 2005 draft was, you guessed it, Maurice Clarett. Tell me that pick was anything but a headache and tell me how the Broncos picking Clarett with a comp. pick was unfair to other teams who were thankfully spared form his antics.