First Pick in the Draft

actually didn't we end up with Gross because the Vikings let time expire?

 

we had some problems (minor problems really) because he was technically picked at the 8 spot instead of 9, so he wanted paid higher, but I don't believe we would've lost out on Gross at all. Jax and Balt both wanted Leftwich supposedly, and MN really wanted the DT anyway.

It's much simpler to have a convoluted scheme where you toy with 5 players and let you be at the mercy of other teams than just pick the one player you think is best, yes. I can see that completely.

 

Jesus Christ dude, you are seriously dense sometimes. YOU RESOLVE THE ISSUE BEFORE THE DAY OF THE DRAFT WITH A SINGLE PLAYER WHO AGREES TO THE TERMS.

 

Even if you went with the lowest agreed contract, I'm betting it still wouldn't be as cheap as the 4th or 5th overall pick's contract range.

 

Then you have the wrong player. There are 22 picks in the 10-32 slot range and probably another 5 or so potentials. Pay which ever one you like AND is willing to take the deal for #7 or #8 money. It is win/win for everyone. The Lions pretty much need every position (though I would not pick a QB in the 1st) so you are not going to have to narrow that list by much based on team needs. One of those guys will take the money I guarantee it.

 

Most mocks have Raji going about 10-15. If his drug test does not lower his stock he is top ten at best. If you sign him for what the #8 pick got last year then draft him #1 you save a lot of money.

I guess the real key is if you think a guy like Raji is good enough (counitng the cap savings) to skip over Stafford and the other top ranked guys.

 

If I'm Detroit I pick the tackle.

 

I'm sorry I'm dense because this is a convoluted idea. I imagine it's my fault this fairy tale doesn't have a legitimate ending. You can say that a player will, but I really, really doubt an agent is going to be that guy, and he's the one with the player's ear. It might not even be in the short term best interests of the player for that to happen, but the agent isn't going to risk screwing future business to do something "interesting".

Ask Ricky Williams how this might work out, though. Owners and fans think incentive contracts are just great - and two CBAs later they still don't work. Contracts are going in the other direction, really.

 

your little pea brain saying it over and over does not make it so. Even genius Thelt gets it. It is very simple. You pay a guy projected at 15 #8 money.

And BTW, 1+1+1=3. I promise you its true.

 

It's not quite that simple, because 'projected' pick orders and actual pick orders are not the same thing.

That's risky for the player and agent. I think it'd have to be a situation where you pay a 1st/2nd rounder top 10 money, and that's not such a great deal.

The fall from top 10 to fifteen is big for $$, but not that big of a stretch for 'projected' 15 to go much higher.

I get the point, though. Not necessarily alot to lose if you don't want anyone in the top 10 anyway.

It'd be more fun to let the clock expire. That would work if it was a Parcells team, b/c everyone thinks he's god. But the Lions? They'd get assassinated.