2023 Free agency and trade thread

[fastforward]

I'd rather take a RB in Round 1 than a G, TE, S or ILB. There's definitely value to having a 5th year option at the position. At G it used to be that the player had to be top 8 of the 64 NFL starters before the 5th year option was worth considering.

 

[jarntt]

 

[fightinfunbags]

I had a post last year when I showed it but the whole "late round RB" is a myth. Virtually every good RB in the league today was drafted in the first 3 rounds of the draft.

There were some exceptions from last year class that were interesting. Pierce and Pacheco. But for the most part any decent RB in the league today was take in about the top 80 picks or so. Obviously a few exceptions'. But a lot fewer and further between than people would have you believe.

I don’t think you need a star at RB. I think you need a great OL to fuel your run game.

 

[fightinfunbags]

I'd rather take a RB in Round 1 than a G, TE, S or ILB. There's definitely value to having a 5th year option at the position. At G it used to be that the player had to be top 8 of the 64 NFL starters before the 5th year option was worth considering.

I’m with you on all of that with the exception of S. I get it but I think with the league becoming more pass happy and the advent of dudes really killing it in the slot I can see a team eyeballing a special prospect in round 1. For me, it would have to be a guy with a versatile skill set that I can play as a nickel LB, a slot corner, a deep half safety, etc…. I’m thinking of a prospect like Kyle Hamilton last year.

 

[jarntt]

I don’t think you need a star at RB. I think you need a great OL to fuel your run game.

I don't think there is only one way to do anything in the NFL. Some teams win with Offense and some with Defense. Some win with Joe Montana and others with Trent Dilfer.

 

[jarntt]

I'd rather take a RB in Round 1 than a G, TE, S or ILB. There's definitely value to having a 5th year option at the position. At G it used to be that the player had to be top 8 of the 64 NFL starters before the 5th year option was worth considering.

Lumping players together by position is just completely misguided. If you take a G at pick # x, you take that specific Guard not just whoever is next up. Zack Martin is worth it. Others aren't. Peyton Manning was a great choice at #1 overall. Baker wasn't. I think people get too hung up on comparing things and losing track of the fact that every situation/player is 100% different from the prior or next.

 

[Clayton]

I don’t think you need a star at RB. I think you need a great OL to fuel your run game.

Really hard to get a great OL. You generally need 3 studs and 3 guys who aren't duds to make it through a season. Good OL players can sometimes take 2-3 years to gel, too, so contract juggling comes into play. RBs generally can come in day 1.

But yeah, OL is essential to fuel an offense.

 

[fightinfunbags]

I don't think there is only one way to do anything in the NFL. Some teams win with Offense and some with Defense. Some win with Joe Montana and others with Trent Dilfer.

That’s fair. It’s dumb for me to ask a question I don’t already know the answer to but when was the last time a team won a Super Bowl with the NFL rushing leader? I think it’s been awhile. I agree though that there are a bunch of ways to get it done and maximize success in the NFL. I personally don’t see eye to eye in investments at RB
<now Karma will result in Howie Roseman dealing one of the Eagles two firsts to Chargers for Ekler and Howie gives him CMC money haha>

 

[fightinfunbags]

Really hard to get a great OL. You generally need 3 studs and 3 guys who aren't duds to make it through a season. Good OL players can sometimes take 2-3 years to gel, too, so contract juggling comes into play. RBs generally can come in day 1.

But yeah, OL is essential to fuel an offense.

Or you just invest in a great OL coach like Howard Mudd or Jeff Stoudtland.

 

[fastforward]

I’m with you on all of that with the exception of S. I get it but I think with the league becoming more pass happy and the advent of dudes really killing it in the slot I can see a team eyeballing a special prospect in round 1. For me, it would have to be a guy with a versatile skill set that I can play as a nickel LB, a slot corner, a deep half safety, etc…. I’m thinking of a prospect like Kyle Hamilton last year.

You are correct here and I am very wrong. The market according to overthecap has massively changed in recent years. There are 19 Ss earning in excess of the likely 5th year option value of $7.901M for the position. Additionally there is now a huge $6.56M difference between the 5th year option value and the $14.46M franchise tag value.

 

[fastforward]

Lumping players together by position is just completely misguided. If you take a G at pick # x, you take that specific Guard not just whoever is next up. Zack Martin is worth it. Others aren't. Peyton Manning was a great choice at #1 overall. Baker wasn't. I think people get too hung up on comparing things and losing track of the fact that every situation/player is 100% different from the prior or next.

If you're picking in the last 8 of the 1st round you have to factor it in. There are now 4 levels of 5th year option. The most common 5th year option value for OL in 2023 is $13.202M. There are only 9 Gs averaging that level of pay* - so if your 1st round pick is the 16th best G out of 64 starters you're not going to pick up the 5th year option. The likely 5th year price for RBs is $8.034M. There are 10 RBs averaging $10M or more*. The 5th year option is more likely to be of value if you pick a RB over a G. On the flip side the difference between 5th year option and franchise tag value is much bigger at G than it is for RB. There's not much net difference in 5th year option value between G and RB. I was very wrong about S. I was still thinking that the RB values were higher than S values but that has massively altered. The franchise tag values have gone up for S and down for RB. 5th year option values have not yet followed that trend.

* Based on averages at overthecap.

 

[jarntt]

If you're picking in the last 8 of the 1st round you have to factor it in. There are now 4 levels of 5th year option. The most common 5th year option value for OL in 2023 is $13.202M. There are only 9 Gs averaging that level of pay* - so if your 1st round pick is the 16th best G out of 64 starters you're not going to pick up the 5th year option. The likely 5th year price for RBs is $8.034M. There are 10 RBs averaging $10M or more*. The 5th year option is more likely to be of value if you pick a RB over a G. On the flip side the difference between 5th year option and franchise tag value is much bigger at G than it is for RB. There's not much net difference in 5th year option value between G and RB. I was very wrong about S. I was still thinking that the RB values were higher than S values but that has massively altered. The franchise tag values have gone up for S and down for RB. 5th year option values have not yet followed that trend.

* Based on averages at overthecap.

You don’t pass up a player you think may be a great player or at a position you really need because what one years salary will be 5 years later. you also can’t be sure you will be able to get him if you trade into the top of the 2nd. a decade ago I think WR would have been a cheaper 5th year option as compared to other positions, but now has skyrocketed. Who knows what it will be 5 years from now and same could happen with other positions. The only exception is QB and not that you take one because of the 5th year option, but if you have one you really like you try and trade up from the top of the 2nd to the end of the first because of it.

 

[fightinfunbags]

You don’t pass up a player you think may be a great player or at a position you really need because what one years salary will be 5 years later. you also can’t be sure you will be able to get him if you trade into the top of the 2nd. a decade ago I think WR would have been a cheaper 5th year option as compared to other positions, but now has skyrocketed. Who knows what it will be 5 years from now and same could happen with other positions. The only exception is QB and not that you take one because of the 5th year option, but if you have one you really like you try and trade up from the top of the 2nd to the end of the first because of it.

I like your perspective. I don’t think you win big by being robotic. I also agree with the way @fastforward assesses value in a salary cap league. I think what’s best is a merger of the two. You have flexibility in your system to successfully identify a Zack Martin or Quentin Nelson or Christian McCaffrey etc… and then have the stones to draft them. I just think you want to discipline yourself to only use your first round pick on that less than ideal 1st round position like once every four first round picks you make over the years.

 

[Battlelyon]

 

[eaglesnut]

If you're picking in the last 8 of the 1st round you have to factor it in. There are now 4 levels of 5th year option. The most common 5th year option value for OL in 2023 is $13.202M. There are only 9 Gs averaging that level of pay* - so if your 1st round pick is the 16th best G out of 64 starters you're not going to pick up the 5th year option. The likely 5th year price for RBs is $8.034M. There are 10 RBs averaging $10M or more*. The 5th year option is more likely to be of value if you pick a RB over a G. On the flip side the difference between 5th year option and franchise tag value is much bigger at G than it is for RB. There's not much net difference in 5th year option value between G and RB. I was very wrong about S. I was still thinking that the RB values were higher than S values but that has massively altered. The franchise tag values have gone up for S and down for RB. 5th year option values have not yet followed that trend.

* Based on averages at overthecap.

So just sign the guy if he's good after year 4.

 

[eaglesnut]

Get a second opinion, kid!!

These fucking doctors and their god damn half assed tests.

 

[DJ]

Cam wants back in the League.

 

[DJ]

I don’t think you need a star at RB. I think you need a great OL to fuel your run game.

This.

 

[eaglesnut]

Get a second opinion, kid!!

These fucking doctors and their god damn half assed tests.

HOW OFTEN DO DOCTORS MISDIAGNOSE CANCER?
Depending on the research study, data shows doctors misdiagnose cancer in approximately 10% – 28% of patients. What’s more, some medical researchers believe the actual numbers are higher because many faulty diagnoses are never reported or pursued through legal action.

In fact, a study at the Mayo Clinic found only 12% of patients seeking a second opinion had the diagnoses from their original health care providers confirmed. For the other 88% of patients, the diagnoses were completely changed for 21% and revised for 66%. When the legions of people who never request second opinions are added in, the probable number of misdiagnosed patients is staggering.

WHAT ARE THE MOST FREQUENTLY MISDIAGNOSED CANCERS?
While doctors can misdiagnose almost any kind of cancer, certain types are more prone to mistakes than others. Some cancers have symptoms that are similar to those associated with other conditions. Examples are lung cancer and mesothelioma, whose symptoms can resemble tuberculosis (TB) or other respiratory diseases. Other cancers are so rare that doctors may not recognize them.

Misdiagnoses occur most often with the following types of cancer:

Lymphoma




In fact, a study at the Mayo Clinic found only 12% of patients seeking a second opinion had the diagnoses from their original health care providers confirmed.


In fact, a study at the Mayo Clinic found only 12% of patients seeking a second opinion had the diagnoses from their original health care providers confirmed.


In fact, a study at the Mayo Clinic found only 12% of patients seeking a second opinion had the diagnoses from their original health care providers confirmed.

 

[fightinfunbags]

This.

And yet McDumbDumb goes and puts the tag on Jacobs during a rebuild. Tons of malpractice going on out in the desert.