Compensatory Picks Announced

[7thFloorRA]

This really should not be hard for them to curb. Original team or rookie contract (in the case that someone was traded on their rookie deal). Judging from the responses I have seen at various sites about the Patriots 3rd round pick I hope some attention is drawn to this and they make an adjustment.

 

[Half Empty]

If it's that easy, how come nobody else has caught on?

 

[HardRightEdge]

If it's that easy, how come nobody else has caught on?

Right. It's ridiculously hard to implement as a "plan".

To get the third round pick, the player is presumably of high quality because he's signing a big contract with the new team. To do this on regular basis and be successful with it, you're having to fill a big hole (or holes) following one year of "use" for each contract handled this way.

I would think "Packer Nation", which generally agrees with the Thompson approach that high priced FA are to be eschewed as crap shoots, would appreciate the difficulty in accomplishing this. It's a double-risk. First, that the one year player will play up to the third round pick contract the following year. Second, that the replacement the following year will be at least adequate. And in the process possibly messing with unit chemistry if the new piece or pieces don't jell in the system. (See Philly Dream Team).

This doesn't even account for how hard it is to find players of that quality who will sign a one year contract.

Sounds like sour grapes to me.

 

[RRyder]

They need to adjust the rules on this. The Pats are clearly signing guys to 1 year deals and letting them go and picking up high picks. They are going to get another 3 for Revis and that is really not the spirit of this compensation allowance. This needs to be reserved for players on rookie deals or that have played for the team for at least 4/5 years. You absolutely should not be allowed to sign a free agent yourself and flip him into a 3rd round pick in 1 year.

The Lions should get a really nice pick because they lost Suh who was their homegrown player. The Pats getting a 3rd round pick for Revis is a joke.

Correct me if im wrong but im pretty sure the Pats cut Revis because his cap number was going to over 20 million.

You dont get awarded comp picks for losing players you cut. Not sure how it works if theres a team option that just isnt picked up

 

[7thFloorRA]

He had an option and they declined it. That is not the same as cutting and I think it allows for them to get the compensation.

This system was set up to maintain competitive balance when teams lose their own free agents. It was not meant to reward teams that pick up guys on 1 yr deals and lose them. There is nothing accidental about the Patriots getting the highest compensation available for 1 year rental players. They have this played perfectly. You offer players the chance to take a reasonable 1 yr deal in order to win a ring and then they go and cash in somewhere else the next year and the Pats get a 3rd round pick.

 

[thisisnate]

Other comps:

Kansas City Chiefs: 3rd round (98), 5th round (172), 5th round (173), 6th round (217)

Denver Broncos: 4th round (133), 6th round (208), 7th round (250), 7th round (251)

Seattle Seahawks: 4th round (134), 5th round (170), 6th round (209), 6th round (214)

Baltimore Ravens: 4th round (136), 5th round (171), 5th round (175)

Houston Texans: 5th round (174), 6th round (211), 6th round (216)

New England Patriots: 3rd round (97), 7th round (253)

Cincinnati Bengals: 3rd round (99), 4th round (135)

San Francisco 49ers: 4th round (132), 7th round (254)

Carolina Panthers: 5th round (169), 6th round (213)

Green Bay Packers: 6th round (210), 6th round (212)

St. Louis Rams: 6th round (215)

Pittsburgh Steelers: 7th round (252)

Indianapolis Colts: 7th round (255)

Arizona Cardinals: 7th round (256)

 

[Vrill]

True...and lots more haven't. My point is, it seems to get way more importance attached to it than it deserves. The biggest reason it's not a focus for me is you never know till they're announced what -if anything- you're getting.
Was it last year or the year before, when we got the 2nd highest comp pick you can get at #98? Now that was a big deal.
Actually, come to think of it, what bothers me the most is the perception that you'd pass on a proven player in FA in the hope of getting a late round comp pick that you don't even know you'll get.

All picks are important. The mid/late rounds of a draft are what separate great GM's from good GM's. Everyone knows about the "Popular picks" in round one, but its the mid/late rounds that build the depth of your team.

One of our two 6th round comp picks this year could end up being a hall of famer. You just never know. That is the beauty of it.

 

[PackerDNA]

I don't disagree with any of your points, Vrill.
My issue is with the 'hope' and ya never know ' aspect . Neither is a plan. Get some solid vets in FA to give yourself some options and breathing room. Don't depend on strictly the draft to fix everything; odds are , especially with late round picks, you'll be disappointed.
While it's still early, Thompson seems prepared to do just that. There is a very real risk of running into the safety issue of recent years, only at NT, ILB, and CB depth. Resign Raji and Guion? Maybe they end up 'good enough'. At least as good a chance they don't.

 

[7thFloorRA]

Maybe the NFL will take away this years and next years compensatory picks given to the Patriots as punishment for that deflate thing that has been swept under the rug.

 

[sschind]

Where is the comp pick for Newhouse!!!!

That's why we only got a 6th for Jones. It should have been a 5th but they penalized us because the Bengals signed Newhouse. If I am not mistaken it was the first time in history a team (the Bengals) was awarded a comp pick for SIGNING a player

 

[sschind]

True...and lots more haven't. My point is, it seems to get way more importance attached to it than it deserves. The biggest reason it's not a focus for me is you never know till they're announced what -if anything- you're getting.
Was it last year or the year before, when we got the 2nd highest comp pick you can get at #98? Now that was a big deal.
Actually, come to think of it, what bothers me the most is the perception that you'd pass on a proven player in FA in the hope of getting a late round comp pick that you don't even know you'll get.

I tend to agree with you. The thing is when you rely as heavily on the draft to stock, or restock, your team getting more draft picks is the best way to do it. Its true that 6th rounders don't usually contribute much but as others have said, you never know.

Its also important remember that not every team is filled with high round starters. There are lots of low round backups that also contribute. With the salary cap and paying a lot of money out to a few older vets you need a lot of cheap young guys to round out the roster. The best way to insure that you have the best of those cheap young guys is by drafting a lot of them and picking the best ones. The old "the more crap you throw against the wall" principle.

Some of the people on another board lambasted me when I disagreed with the notion that the reason Ted does not sign more free agents is because he covets the comp picks he gets for losing his own players and he doesn't want to off set this. My point was like yours if there was a FA Ted liked and thought he could help the team he would sign him comp pick be damned and I said, just like you did, I would be disappointed if Ted passed on a FA he thought could help just so he might get that extra pick .

 

[Deleted member 6794]

While it's still early, Thompson seems prepared to do just that. There is a very real risk of running into the safety issue of recent years, only at NT, ILB, and CB depth. Resign Raji and Guion? Maybe they end up 'good enough'. At least as good a chance they don't.

I would be fine with Thompson re-signing Raji and Guion while adding another prospect at NT with an early round pick. It´s imperative though that he brings in a veteran at the ILB position as it´s extremely unlikely he will be able to find a three down starter and much needed depth to the position in a single draft.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

They need to adjust the rules on this. The Pats are clearly signing guys to 1 year deals and letting them go and picking up high picks. They are going to get another 3 for Revis and that is really not the spirit of this compensation allowance. This needs to be reserved for players on rookie deals or that have played for the team for at least 4/5 years. You absolutely should not be allowed to sign a free agent yourself and flip him into a 3rd round pick in 1 year.

The Lions should get a really nice pick because they lost Suh who was their homegrown player. The Pats getting a 3rd round pick for Revis is a joke.

Agreed. Never thought of it that way... Damn them pats.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Due to an error made by the NFL in calculating the compensatory picks two of the Packers picks in the sixth round dropped a spot each. The team now owns pick 206, 210 and 213.

 

[HardRightEdge]

This system was set up to maintain competitive balance when teams lose their own free agents.

I question that premise as a blanket statement. It sounds like a PR sound bite offered up to deflect from the unsavory reality.

The owners would like the compensation to be as astronomically high as possible to create as great a disincentive as possible to sign outside free agents in order to suppress competition for players and thereby suppress salaries across the league.

The union would like no compensation at all to bring those disincentives down to a minimum and thereby maximizing competition for players and thereby their salaries.

This provision is a byproduct of the byzantine horse trading involved in constructing the CBA which is after all just a mechanism for defining how the pie is divided between players and owners.

The union seems to have won this one given that the levels of compensation are a marginal disincentive to negotiating for an outside free agent. Maybe they gave up something in return, perhaps a basis point or two in the revenue percentage split.

Keeping one's "own" has the ring of some kind of inherent good that should be promoted, as opposed to what it actually is...just one of the two primary competing approaches.

As far as I'm concerned, one's "own" players are only those under contract. They're again your own when they re-sign. They're only especially your own when they take less money to stay...and in that case the savings is it's own reward.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Well, the league should just make no difference between signing unrestricted free agents and players who were cut by their former teams. The Patriots only got a third-round pick in this year´s draft for losing Aqib Talib during the 2014 offseason because the Buccaneers released Revis before he signed with the Patriots.

From the union's perspective, less compensation is better. This is not a league rule; it's a product of the CBA negotiation.

As far as providing compensation for cut players in the next CBA, the union's argument against would be compelling.

The idea of being rewarded for firing an employee under contract, in many cases without a "severance package" in the form of remaining guarantees, can easily be cast in repugnant light. That argument should resonate among those owners with some remaining shred of shame and decorum, which I'd think would be at least a small majority.

The owners will look for other ways to suppress the competition that drives up salaries which is what compensation is all about.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

From the union's perspective, less compensation is better. This is not a league rule; it's a product of the CBA negotiation.

As far as providing compensation for cut players in the next CBA, the union's argument against would be compelling.

The idea of being rewarded for firing an employee under contract, in many cases without a "severance package" in the form of remaining guarantees, can easily be cast in repugnant light. That argument should resonate among those owners with some remaining shred of shame and decorum, which I'd think would be at least a small majority.

The owners will look for other ways to suppress the competition that drives up salaries which is what compensation is all about.

I should have been more precise in formulating my idea. I don't want teams to be awarded compensatory picks for cutting players but signing a released player should have the same impact on the calculation of compensatory picks than signing an UFA.

 

[TJV]

As far as I'm concerned, one's "own" players are only those under contract. They're again your own when they re-sign.

So you equate the Packers acquiring the best OT in UFA and one of the best WRs with acquiring UFAs from other teams? Thompson has been very active in UFA - good to know.

I am in favor of no compensation for lost players. The salary cap and revenue sharing level the field enough IMO.

 

[fanindaup]

Where is the comp pick for Newhouse!!!!

I heard Ted Thompson had to beg Goodell not to take away one of the 6th rounders to punish the Packers for foisting that human turnstyle off on someone else.

 

[El Guapo]

Compensatory picks are important and the Packers have done reasonably well with them. I don't know how other teams have fared, but I would guess we are near the top of the list in terms of success:

2006: T Tony Moll (fifth round, 165th overall), DE Dave Tollefson (seventh, 253)
2007: TE Clark Harris (seventh, 243)
2008: G Josh Sitton (fourth, 135)
2009: None
2010: OL Marshall Newhouse (fifth, 169)
2011: CB Davon House (fourth, 131)
2012: DT Mike Daniels (fourth, 132), S Jerron McMillian (fourth, 133), OL Andrew Datko (seventh, 241), QB B.J. Coleman (seventh, 243)
2013: DL Josh Boyd (fifth, 167)
2014: TE Richard Rodgers (third, 98), WR Jared Abbrederis (fifth, 176)

That's five solid players (Sitton, House, Daniels, Boyd, & Rodgers) or six if you make an assumption that Abbrederis will pan out. That's 5 comp picks out of 13 or 38% in mostly low rounds. Pretty good.

Other comp picks pre-Thompson include: Scott Wells, David Martin, Josh Bidwell, Matt Hasselbeck, Tyrone Williams, Marco Rivera, and Keith McKenzie.

 

[PackerDNA]

The Packers , Ravens and Steelers are always the teams regarded as the most successful in the area of comp picks.

 

[HardRightEdge]

So you equate the Packers acquiring the best OT in UFA and one of the best WRs with acquiring UFAs from other teams? Thompson has been very active in UFA - good to know.

I am in favor of no compensation for lost players. The salary cap and revenue sharing level the field enough IMO.

Right, I don't consider players in the free market "your own".

Yes, Thompson has been active in the free agent market, signing two Pro bowl caliber players.

The problem is that Thompson has not improved a defense that needs some serious improvement.

 

[sschind]

Right, I don't consider players in the free market "your own".

Yes, Thompson has been active in the free agent market, signing two Pro bowl caliber players.

The problem is that Thompson has not improved a defense that needs some serious improvement.

I agree. An unrestricted free agent is an unrestricted free agent in my book. These players are free agents who can sign with Green Bay or any other team. Just because you may have the inside track in negotiations does not make them any less of a free agent. If we would have lost Cobb and Bulaga but signed Wilfork and Revis I think people would have said the Packers were pretty darn active in free agency. If any other team had signed Cobb AND Bulaga I think most people would have considered that pretty active in free agency.

 

[Pack-12]

Right, I don't consider players in the free market "your own".

Yes, Thompson has been active in the free agent market, signing two Pro bowl caliber players.

The problem is that Thompson has not improved a defense that needs some serious improvement.

Yeah, a lot of people only take signing outside players as being active in FA and that is the only way you get better. Nobody ever takes into account the fact that at the end of the season every single team gets WORSE when they lose their own players. This team just usually gets less worse than other teams do when they resign their own players. It has the same net effect of bringing in an outside player.

 

[fanindaup]

Right, I don't consider players in the free market "your own".

Yes, Thompson has been active in the free agent market, signing two Pro bowl caliber players.

The problem is that Thompson has not improved a defense that needs some serious improvement.

I would speculate many posters here would comment not having Hawk or Jones anywhere near the defense has already improved it.