Around the NFL: 2012 Off-Season-Free Agency/Trades

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Josh Morgan is a beast

Yes he is, he was the best 49ers receiver before he got hurt.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

Yes he is, he was the 49ers receiver before he got hurt.

I know he played for them but I thought he was better as a returner than actual receiver. Everyone talks about how pathetic the 49ers receivers are. I just wouldn't have put him that high myself. I mean he's never even broken 700 yards receiving and more than 3 TDs in four seasons in the league.

[REDSKINS4ever]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You know what's crazy, look at some of the top WRs in the free agent market (including Stevie Johnson)

Johnson-7th round pick
Colston-7th round pick
Garcon-6th round pick
Wes Welker-Undrafted
Josh Morgan-6th round pick

It just goes to show that nobody ever knows how a wide receiver's career will turn out or any player for that matter. Just look at players like London Fletcher, Arian Foster, Victor Cruz and Miles Austin all of whom are NFL icons but neither of those players were even drafted. Even with young talent, there will always be exceptions outside of the NFL draft.

[Ruhskins]

Looks like the numbers came out for the Foster and SJ signings:

Arian Foster's contract $43.5M ($20.75M guaranteed) over 5 yrs
Stevie Johnson's contract $36.25M ($19.5M guaranteed) over 5 yrs

[skinster]

I'm just wondering, why doesn't every team with a high profile free agent that isn't using the franchise tag just tag and trade their players that they're not looking to retain? Mario Williams, Matt Flynn, Terell Thomas, and Levi Brown (maybe, not entirely sure how good he is) come to mind. I'm more talking about williams and flynn considering I'm not entirely sure how much would be gotten for brown or thomas and what their FA plan is (I say this because they can get compensatory picks equal to trade value if they do not sign other FAs). But I would be absolutely shocked if Williams or Flynn didn't get at least a 2nd rounder if put on the trading block, which is significantly better than an after the 3rd round pick from compensation.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by skinster

I'm just wondering, why doesn't every team with a high profile free agent that isn't using the franchise tag just tag and trade their players that they're not looking to retain? Mario Williams, Matt Flynn, Terell Thomas, and Levi Brown (maybe, not entirely sure how good he is) come to mind. I'm more talking about williams and flynn considering I'm not entirely sure how much would be gotten for brown or thomas and what their FA plan is (I say this because they can get compensatory picks equal to trade value if they do not sign other FAs). But I would be absolutely shocked if Williams or Flynn didn't get at least a 2nd rounder if put on the trading block, which is significantly better than an after the 3rd round pick from compensation.

Why would a team trade a draft pick for a player about to become a free agent?

Also, since last season's trading deadline has passed, I don't think you can trade a player at this point. You would have to wait till the start of the new league year, and at that point the FA's by definition are no longer under contract and the old team has no rights to trade.

[skinster]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Why would a team trade a draft pick for a player about to become a free agent?

Also, since last season's trading deadline has passed, I don't think you can trade a player at this point. You would have to wait till the start of the new league year, and at that point the FA's by definition are no longer under contract and the old team has no rights to trade.

Well because he's no longer a free agent when you tag him. The patriots did this with Cassel, so I'm sure it can be done.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by skinster

Well because he's no longer a free agent when you tag him. The patriots did this with Cassel, so I'm sure it can be done.

I am sure there was a conversation about this before, I thought under the new CBA this was not allowed or at the least discouraged. But then again, that's what the Eagles are doing with DJax.

[skinster]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

I am sure there was a conversation about this before, I thought under the new CBA this was not allowed or at the least discouraged. But then again, that's what the Eagles are doing with DJax.

Are they? Didn't know that. I'd be shocked if trades weren't allowed now. But maybe tagged/tendered players cant be traded for less than they are tagged for? If that were the case I wonder if that rule would still apply if the tagged contract went unsigned?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by skinster

Well because he's no longer a free agent when you tag him. The patriots did this with Cassel, so I'm sure it can be done.

Well if you were saying to tag and trade, the reason teams don't is because if they don't find a trading partner, then they are stuck with that tag against their cap. So let's say Matt Flynn was tagged, the Packers would have that cap hit count on the first day of the new league year. So now they have to make that trade asap, if they find a partner, or else their FA funds are limited by that cap hit. Any partner certainly would know this, and use it to diminish any value they might get in a trade.

Further, if they don't find a partner, then they are stuck with a $16million backup.

Thus the FO has to decide if that choice is worth the risk a week before they can officially make the trade.

[skinster]

Completely unrelated to my previous post, but I had an idea that I think is smart and I'm not sure why it isn't done more. Mike Wallace's tender is a 1st rounder. Whats to stop a team picking in the middle of the 1st round from making a series of pre-draft trades to get down as low as possible. The bears for example are in desperate need of a WR. They have the 19th pick, which is 285 pts higher than the last 1st round pick on the value chart. 285 pts is the equivalent of a late second rounder. I'd have to imagine that if nobody really wanted to trade up, somebody would see the value and give up at least a 3rd rounder. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think teams that want mike wallace should be limited to the teams picking at the end of the first round.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by skinster

Completely unrelated to my previous post, but I had an idea that I think is smart and I'm not sure why it isn't done more. Mike Wallace's tender is a 1st rounder. Whats to stop a team picking in the middle of the 1st round from making a series of pre-draft trades to get down as low as possible. The bears for example are in desperate need of a WR. They have the 19th pick, which is 285 pts higher than the last 1st round pick on the value chart. 285 pts is the equivalent of a late second rounder. I'd have to imagine that if nobody really wanted to trade up, somebody would see the value and give up at least a 3rd rounder. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think teams that want mike wallace should be limited to the teams picking at the end of the first round.

I'm really confused by this post. Dumb it down for me please

[skinster]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm really confused by this post. Dumb it down for me please

Mike Wallace is tendered at a 1st rounder, which means that it doesn't matter if you own 1st pick or the 32nd pick, a 1st rounder will get you mike wallace. If a team wants mike wallace, why don't they first trade down as much as possible while still remaining in the 1st round before they sign him?

Example. Lets say the Bears want Wallace. They have the 19th pick. Instead of giving up the the 19th pick to get wallace, first trade as far down as possible in the 1st round to pick up some extra picks, and then trade your new first round pick for mike wallace. Lets say the giants are willing to give up their 3rd and 5th picks to trade up from 32 to 19. The Bears would give the 32nd to the steelers, get mike wallace and get a 3rd and a 5th. Instead of just getting mike wallace, they get the extra 3rd and 5th.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by skinster

Mike Wallace is tendered at a 1st rounder, which means that it doesn't matter if you own 1st pick or the 32nd pick, a 1st rounder will get you mike wallace. If a team wants mike wallace, why don't they first trade down as much as possible while still remaining in the 1st round before they sign him?

Example. Lets say the Bears want Wallace. They have the 19th pick. Instead of giving up the the 19th pick to get wallace, first trade as far down as possible in the 1st round to pick up some extra picks, and then trade your new first round pick for mike wallace. Lets say the giants are willing to give up their 3rd and 5th picks to trade up from 32 to 19. The Bears would give the 32nd to the steelers, get mike wallace and get a 3rd and a 5th. Instead of just getting mike wallace, they get the extra 3rd and 5th.

Well, first I think you're assuming it's quite easier than it is to trade. Secondly, and I'm not sure if this rule still applies, but I'm pretty sure you can only trade the pick you were assigned in the draft. So if you don't have a pick you can't go get one and you can't go get another pick and trade it.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well, first I think you're assuming it's quite easier than it is to trade. Secondly, and I'm not sure if this rule still applies, but I'm pretty sure you can only trade the pick you were assigned in the draft. So if you don't have a pick you can't go get one and you can't go get another pick and trade it.

If I remember it correctly, the Redskins got burned by this a few years ago. In the year they signed all the "JetSkin" RFA guys. The Skins signed Chad Morton who had a 4th round tender. We had a 4th round pick that year but it was acquired from someone else and was lower than our original 4th rounder (which we had traded away). B/c the 4th round pick the Skins actually had was lower than their original slot, the Skins had to trade for a 4th round pick slotted equal to or higher than our original slot. It ended up costing us a pick in the following draft.

I may have the details wrong as to the picks involved, but I am pretty sure for RFA's you must tender a draft pick at your original slot or better.