Hey guys, I'm just curious if anyone else has thought about the implications that the rookie wage scale that was put in place from last year could have on this draft as we see a shift in the value of picks. There has been a lot of talk about the possibility of moving down or up this season as there is a variety of value from the 3rd pick to our spot in the draft. However, I feel as though trading down just because there is a lack of value at the 10 spot is a bad idea. Prior to last year's draft, the top 10 picks made a substantial amount of money as you can see in the table below. Take note of the amount of money and the length of the #10 pick, Tyson Alualu who got a 5 year deal worth $28 Million.
|1.||Sam Bradford||QB||St. Louis||Signed||Six years, $78 million ($50M guaranteed)|
|2.||Ndamukong Suh||DT||Detroit||Signed||Five years, $68 million ($40M guaranteed)|
|3.||Gerald McCoy||DT||Tampa Bay||Signed||Five years, $63 million ($35M guaranteed)|
|4.||Trent Williams||OT||Washington||Signed||Six years, $60 million ($36.75M guaranteed)|
|5.||Eric Berry||SS||Kansas City||Signed||Six years, $60 million ($34M guaranteed)|
|6.||Russell Okung||OT||Seattle||Signed||Six years, $46.5 million ($29.5M guaranteed)|
|7.||Joe Haden||CB||Cleveland||Signed||Five years, $50M million ($26M guaranteed)|
|8.||Rolando McClain||LB||Oakland||Signed||Five years, $40 million ($23M guaranteed)|
|9.||C.J. Spiller||RB||Buffalo||Signed||Five years, $37 million ($20.8M guaranteed)|
Five years, $28 million ($17.5M guaranteed)
With the massive amount of money being paid out to rookies in 2010, it is no wonder that a team would like to trade out of the top 10 in the 2010 draft, if they did not see a player there that they liked. In the 2011 draft we see a different story with the rookie wage scale implemented in the table below.
|1.||Cam Newton||QB||Carolina||Signed||Four years, $22M guaranteed|
|2.||Von Miller||LB||Denver||Signed||Four years, $21M guaranteed|
|3.||Marcell Dareus||DT||Buffalo||Signed||Four years, $20.4M guaranteed|
|4.||A.J. Green||WR||Cincinnati||Signed||Four years, $19.6M|
|5.||Patrick Peterson||CB||Arizona||Signed||Four years, $18.5M|
|6.||Julio Jones||WR||Atlanta||Signed||Four years, $16.2M guaranteed|
|7.||Aldon Smith||DE||San Francisco||Signed||Four years, $14.3M|
|8.||Jake Locker||QB||Tennessee||Signed||Four years, $12M|
|9.||Tyron Smith||OT||Dallas||Signed||Four years, $12.5M guaranteed|
|10.||Blaine Gabbert||QB||Jacksonville||Signed||Four years, $12M guaranteed|
Again, take note of the #10 pick, Blaine Gabbert, who signed a 4 year $12 million dollar deal (fully guaranteed I believe).
The difference from 2010 to 2011 is about $16 million over the length of the contract, but $5.5 million guaranteed. However, the cause of the 2011 rookie wage scale was to ensure that teams were not crippled by lack of value and missing on draft picks in the first round. Below is an excerpt by John Czarnecki of Fox Sports on the further purpose of the rookie wage scale that I think is pretty relevant to our pick.
In the former system, teams often wanted to drop out of the draft’s top 10 but generally couldn’t find any trade partners. Teams had simply become afraid of pulling the trigger and being aggressive unless a stud quarterback or superior pass rusher was available. General managers and owners simply became leery of the escalating salaries, refusing to risk being tagged with a multimillion-dollar bust in the first round. It often led to some teams selecting what we all termed as “a safe pick."
Because of this, I do not believe the Bills will trade out of the top 10 pick. While it appears we will be torn on the BPA available, the necessity to trade out of the top 10 is not what it was in years past due to the reduced financial burden now given to teams in the top 10 selections. If this was the 2010 draft I would be screaming for the Bills to trade out of the 10 spot as there are very few blue chip prospects that are worthy of a $28 million contract over 5 years. However, because a top 10 pick will not cost us $28 million, does anyone see the need to trade down unless we get a substantial amount of picks in return? I feel as though the BPA at the #10 spot is worth the $12 million contract we hand out and worth more in value than any pick package we may receive unless it includes something massive like 2 1st round picks (not happening).
Anyone else feel this way? Or am I the only one who feels as though the reduced financial burden of the #10 pick makes it worth while to sit still on this pick and take the better value player rather than a worse value player later in the draft for a minor pick package.