Economic problems caused by drafting in the top 10

[stuckincincy]

Agent's Take: The hidden economics lurking within the 2014 NFL Draft
By Joel Corry | Former Sports Agent April 30, 2014 4:43 pm ET

...The fifth-year salary for the top ten picks is the transition tender (average of the ten highest salaries) for a player's position in the fourth year of his contract. For example, Newton's 2015 salary, his option year is $14.666 million. The fifth year salary of the rest of the first round (picks 11-32) is the average of the third through twenty-fifth highest salaries at a player's position."...

..."A front office executive from a team with a top 10 pick in the draft within the last two years told me, "We thought about trading out of the top 10 because of the option year salary but weren't sure the player we actually drafted would still be available if we did. I think it will start becoming more of a factor for teams at the end of the top 10.""...

...It may have already inadvertently occurred in the 2013 draft. After trading down from the third overall pick to the 12th overall pick, Reggie McKenzie selected cornerback D.J. Hayden. At the time, McKenzie said he would have taken Hayden third overall if he had not made the trade. Whether or not the economics were a driving force behind the move, McKenzie is saving almost $10.25 million over four years for the player he coveted."...

Full article:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24546593/agents-take-the-2011-cba-and-hidden-economics-of-nfl-draft

[The Jokeman]

Re: Economic problems caused by drafting in the top 10

Agent's Take: The hidden economics lurking within the 2014 NFL Draft
By Joel Corry | Former Sports Agent April 30, 2014 4:43 pm ET

...The fifth-year salary for the top ten picks is the transition tender (average of the ten highest salaries) for a player's position in the fourth year of his contract. For example, Newton's 2015 salary, his option year is $14.666 million. The fifth year salary of the rest of the first round (picks 11-32) is the average of the third through twenty-fifth highest salaries at a player's position."...

..."A front office executive from a team with a top 10 pick in the draft within the last two years told me, "We thought about trading out of the top 10 because of the option year salary but weren't sure the player we actually drafted would still be available if we did. I think it will start becoming more of a factor for teams at the end of the top 10.""...

...It may have already inadvertently occurred in the 2013 draft. After trading down from the third overall pick to the 12th overall pick, Reggie McKenzie selected cornerback D.J. Hayden. At the time, McKenzie said he would have taken Hayden third overall if he had not made the trade. Whether or not the economics were a driving force behind the move, McKenzie is saving almost $10.25 million over four years for the player he coveted."...

Full article:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-...s-of-nfl-draft

I mentioned this before as a reason I felt why the Bills ended up trading out of the top 10 last year to select EJ. Of course if you want to continue with this line of thinking it might be wise to stay where we are this year and select Ebron vs an OT since the top 10 TE salaries are a lot lower than OTs.

[stuckincincy]

Re: Economic problems caused by drafting in the top 10

I mentioned this before as a reason I felt why the Bills ended up trading out of the top 10 last year to select EJ. Of course if you want to continue with this line of thinking it might be wise to stay where we are this year and select Ebron vs an OT since the top 10 TE salaries are a lot lower than OTs.

I see that CLE just picked up the option for DT Phil Taylor. He was selected at #21 in 2011:

"The Browns will have to pay Taylor just $5.477 million for the 2015 season. It's no wonder they picked up the option. Taylor is the 20th player from that class to have his option picked up."

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24548583/browns-pick-up-fifth-year-option-on-phil-taylor

Just wondering out loud...can BUF find a partner willing to trade up to the 9th spot, and at what price?. As that agent's article stated, " "Teams wanting to move up in the draft should be able to get good deals in a trade because of the difference in option year salaries," an AFC front office executive said.".

[Homegrown]

Re: Economic problems caused by drafting in the top 10

Be a better team, then you don't have to worry about "the economic problems " associated with drafting in the top 10....

[X-Era]

Re: Economic problems caused by drafting in the top 10

So you get 4 years to see what a top 10 player is worth and can then either pay the transition tender rate which is less than the franchise tag or simply not pick up the option?

I'm missing why anyone wouldn't want to draft a top 10 player under these terms. If you draft a guy top 10 you're hoping to land an elite player. Paying the transition tag should be a good deal at that point and more importantly the team has the choice to do so or not.

[stuckincincy]

Re: Economic problems caused by drafting in the top 10

So you get 4 years to see what a top 10 player is worth and can then either pay the transition tender rate which is less than the franchise tag or simply not pick up the option?

I'm missing why anyone wouldn't want to draft a top 10 player under these terms. If you draft a guy top 10 you're hoping to land an elite player. Paying the transition tag should be a good deal at that point and more importantly the team has the choice to do so or not.

Money counts, and if I understand this former agent correctly - and if he is right, a team gets bitten for a lot of more bucks in paying the 5th year option for picks 1 - 10 than 11 and on. I've read blurbs about HOU being willing to trade off their #1, we have read this or that about CLE bailing out of their #4, and so on.

I guess what it amounts to, is yes, top ten gives you the pick of the litter, but it also has a back end cost after 3 years. And that a team like BUF at #9 finds that pick not as valuable as in the past in terms of offering it up for a trade down.

OTOH, owners and coaches occasionally get a hard-on for this or that player and want him no matter what.

[X-Era]

Re: Economic problems caused by drafting in the top 10

Money counts, and if I understand this former agent correctly - and if he is right, a team gets bitten for a lot of more bucks in paying the 5th year option for picks 1 - 10 than 11 and on. I've read blurbs about HOU being willing to trade off their #1, we have read this or that about CLE bailing out of their #4, and so on.

I guess what it amounts to, is yes, top ten gives you the pick of the litter, but it also has a back end cost after 3 years. And that a team like BUF at #9 finds that pick not as valuable as in the past in terms of offering it up for a trade down.

OTOH, owners and coaches occasionally get a hard-on for this or that player and want him no matter what.

It's a team option. The team can choose to pick it up or not if they feel the player is worth it. And it's not even like they wouldn't have 4 years of data.

[stuckincincy]

Re: Economic problems caused by drafting in the top 10

It's a team option. The team can choose to pick it up or not if they feel the player is worth it. And it's not even like they wouldn't have 4 years of data.

You've got me there...what do you mean by 4 years of data?

[X-Era]

Re: Economic problems caused by drafting in the top 10

You've got me there...what do you mean by 4 years of data?

That they have 3 years really before they have to pull the trigger and choose the option. They know what they have by that.

Aldon Smith. The guy is a stud in the league and with all the off the field crap SF probably happily picked up that 5 year and pays him 9+ mill. It's a bargain for what that guy is if he plays all the downs. I realize that's a big if.