NFL 2021 - Draft Day or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Pick

[briantw]

 

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

A true work of art:

 

[DireWolfSpirit]

Lions kicking the tires on Gurley. Don't know if he's got any tread left?

[Jace, Extat]

19 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Lions kicking the tires on Gurley. Don't know if he's got any tread left?

I drove the tires on my Honda until the wires were sticking out through the mostly-non-existent rubber. That was twenty years ago.

I'd rather drive on those tires today than put Todd Gurley in my backfield.

[PyroclasticFlow]

Anybody need a pass rusher? One with 97 sacks since entering the league in 2012(2.5 more than Von Miller)? Surprised that none of the talking heads have thrown his name around, but after seeing the $$ his team spent on Hopkins & Watt, I can’t imagine him being a Cardinal this upcoming season. 

Anyone have the cap space to pull this off?

 

[briantw]

12 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Lions kicking the tires on Gurley. Don't know if he's got any tread left?

They've already got Swift and Williams.  Not sure why they'd even bother with Gurley.  He's donezo. 

Crazy to think that Gurley was basically the top player in dynasty fantasy football like three or four years ago and now his career is essentially over.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

So Jones to Tennessee for a second and a fourth. Seems like a bargain. I wonder why the Ravens didn't offer a little bit more given the cap hit shouldn't be an issue and Jackson really needs a true number one WR. 

[DireWolfSpirit]

Julio for a 2nd and 4th rounder? Geezus that is a steal.

[Maithanet]

I have always been down on trading day 1-2 draft picks for (non-QB) veteran players who are already on expensive deals.  Jones is a great player, but the reason Atlanta was willing to deal him was because they were no longer sure his production would really match his salary, particularly given that he's 33 and coming off an injury.  So I'm inclined to say that Atlanta got the better of the deal. 

That said, a second rounder isn't a crippling cost for a player of Jones caliber.  If Tennessee had a strong roster and one extra weapon could theoretically push them into the realm of real contenders, then I could see the deal.  For example, the Ravens could make this deal make sense.  But I feel like ever since that one playoff run to the AFCCG Tennessee has had a really inflated idea of how good they are, and this is more evidence of that.  Tennessee isn't one veteran WR away from contending, and that's why I don't like this deal.  It's possible this makes them the favorite to win the division, but that's more dependent on Wentz being bad in Indy than Jones being good in Tennessee. 

[briantw]

31 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

I have always been down on trading day 1-2 draft picks for (non-QB) veteran players who are already on expensive deals.  Jones is a great player, but the reason Atlanta was willing to deal him was because they were no longer sure his production would really match his salary, particularly given that he's 33 and coming off an injury.  So I'm inclined to say that Atlanta got the better of the deal. 

That said, a second rounder isn't a crippling cost for a player of Jones caliber.  If Tennessee had a strong roster and one extra weapon could theoretically push them into the realm of real contenders, then I could see the deal.  For example, the Ravens could make this deal make sense.  But I feel like ever since that one playoff run to the AFCCG Tennessee has had a really inflated idea of how good they are, and this is more evidence of that.  Tennessee isn't one veteran WR away from contending, and that's why I don't like this deal.  It's possible this makes them the favorite to win the division, but that's more dependent on Wentz being bad in Indy than Jones being good in Tennessee. 

I do think the move makes sense from a roster construction standpoint.  Tennessee really only had one WR of consequence after Davis and Smith walked in free agency and essentially went unreplaced.  There's a definite need for a WR across from AJ Brown.

[Maithanet]

1 minute ago, briantw said:

I do think the move makes sense from a roster construction standpoint.  Tennessee really only had one WR of consequence after Davis and Smith walked in free agency and essentially went unreplaced.  There's a definite need for a WR across from AJ Brown.

Sure, no argument there.  I'm not saying it's a terrible trade, just one that I don't like.  My philosophy is that you win under the salary cap by having guys who match or outplay their contracts.  Julio is paid like a top 5 receiver, so the best you're going to get is him matching his contract.  He also carries injury concerns given his age. 

In contrast, a 2nd round pick, while usually not as impactful as Jones, has a very good chance of outplaying his contract, because 2nd rounders are woefully underpaid.  If that 2nd rounder turns out to be a decent starter at really any position, then that's a big win for a GM. 

[dbunting]

So Carl Nassib from the LV Raiders came out yesterday. I guess it's a good thing that this wasn't huge program interrupting news, maybe it means we are a little more understanding as a culture?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, dbunting said:

So Carl Nassib from the LV Raiders came out yesterday. I guess it's a good thing that this wasn't huge program interrupting news, maybe it means we are a little more understanding as a culture?

I think the positive sign is that it was both breaking news and the general response was "about time." Hopefully more male athletes will feel comfortable coming out in the not too distant future. Many have privately with their teammates already.

[Maithanet]

I would like to endorse this idea. 

 

[l2 0 5 5]

Steelers adding Melvin Ingram on a one year deal. Injury prone and 32, but if healthy he's an asset on the edge. We'll need that with Dupree going to the Titans and Highsmith coming into his second year. I'm sure TJ Watt will be happy. 

[briantw]

 

 

Bout to be a wild lead up to the season start.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

I was surprised to hear that the players on the "winning" team of forfeited games also don't get their paychecks.

[Wilbur]

4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I was surprised to hear that the players on the "winning" team of forfeited games also don't get their paychecks.

What?  How can that be possible?  I would find that unacceptable unless there is some REALLY GOOD reason that hasn't come to mind yet.

[DMC]

8 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

What?  How can that be possible?  I would find that unacceptable unless there is some REALLY GOOD reason that hasn't come to mind yet.

They won't receive their game checks.  While I don't necessarily agree with that, it's not an entirely unreasonable position if the game isn't played.  Hell, the player's union is apparently fine with it - because it's the same thing they did last year:

Quote

In an email to membership issued in response to Thursday’s memo from the NFL to all teams, the unions said, “We remind you that the same basic rules applied last year.”

As noted by the NFLPA, if games were missed in 2020 because of a COVID outbreak, nobody would have gotten paid.

“The only difference this year is the NFL’s decision to impose additional penalties on clubs which are responsible for the outbreak and the availability of proven vaccines,” the memo explains. “The protocols we jointly agreed to helped get us through a full season last year without missing game checks and are effective, when followed.”

It’s not a surprise. Even though the NFLPA has not agreed to make vaccines mandatory, the NFLPA realizes (to its credit) that players should get vaccinated. That’s why the NFLPA hasn’t fought the league’s efforts to create real incentives to get vaccinated — and real disincentives for players who don’t.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

One wrinkle I heard is that irresponsible teams may have to foot the bill for lost revenue. I don't think it's unreasonable for players to sue other teams for missed game checks if it was clearly the other team's fault the game had to be cancelled.