It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 2:08 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Duckett, Destination: New York?
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:20 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4526
Location: Vancouver, WA
With Curtis Martin apparently retiring the Jets are in need of a new starter. I wonder if Atlanta has sent any trade ideas to the Jets?

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:31 pm 
Offline
2009 Mock Contest Winner
2009 Mock Contest Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 6:16 am
Posts: 12232
Location: Aschaffenburg, Germany
Duckett isn't a starter by ANY stretch of the imagination. They have Houston and Blaylock, who at least can sniff out a hole now and then. Keep duckett..then let him sign somewhere and get a Draft pick as compensation.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:55 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26041
Location: North Carolina
Duckett is a better player than both Blaylock and Houston, but I don't see him going to New York. The Jets would be prudent to look up a player like Duckett, just like they would be smart to look at guys like Chris Brown and Lee Suggs, other prominent backs on the trade market.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 2:49 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4526
Location: Vancouver, WA
Duckett isn't a starter now but he's a warm body and a young warm body at that. So far I'd blame the system more than the player for his under development. Of course Duckett isn't know as a workout warrior either which doesn't help his situation.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 2:57 pm 
Offline
2009 Mock Contest Winner
2009 Mock Contest Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 6:16 am
Posts: 12232
Location: Aschaffenburg, Germany
dirtybirdnw wrote:
Duckett isn't a starter now but he's a warm body and a young warm body at that. So far I'd blame the system more than the player for his under development. Of course Duckett isn't know as a workout warrior either which doesn't help his situation.


The "system" isn't responsible for him falling down at the line of scrimmage like a wounded Buffalo, or his poor performance after a certain number of carries. If you can't run the ball well behind the best rushing line in the league then you have a serious problem. TJ built his resume on running the ball in from the one yard line, and a handfull of good gains against teams expecting us to pass the ball. He isn't as good as Blaylock or Houston or another team that needed help would have picked him up by now...


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:21 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 5:30 pm
Posts: 2347
Might wanna consider we need to really see what we have in Norwood before Duckett can be traded. Pulling the trigger before knowing this would be pretty stupid.

_________________
Good is the Worst Enemy of Great


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:30 pm 
Offline
2009 Mock Contest Winner
2009 Mock Contest Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 6:16 am
Posts: 12232
Location: Aschaffenburg, Germany
widetrak21 wrote:
Might wanna consider we need to really see what we have in Norwood before Duckett can be traded. Pulling the trigger before knowing this would be pretty stupid.


We already know what we have in Norwood. The market for duckett isn't out there because once training camp opened the Falcons decided to keep him, they set the value too high. He could have been had easily for a 4th rounder in the spring.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:18 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26041
Location: North Carolina
BirdBrain wrote:
The "system" isn't responsible for him falling down at the line of scrimmage like a wounded Buffalo, or his poor performance after a certain number of carries. If you can't run the ball well behind the best rushing line in the league then you have a serious problem.

That's a much too black and white approach to the issue. Had Barry Sanders played for a coach that wanted him to run up the middle 30 times a game, he never would have emerged as an all-time great. The system does have an impact on how a RB performs. Some backs are good downhill runners, some are straight-ahead, some work best when they are able to work in space. Just like QBs are geared towards offensive systems. Sure, you put VIck in Indy with their line and their WR corps, and you'll get a better player out of him, but it doesn't automatically mean he'd be just as good as Peyton Manning. You forget that Duckett was playing well through the first 9 or so weeks last year, and generally played well in 2004. If you look at Duckett's performance in 2003, if you project his performance over his 10 starts to 16 games, he would have been a 1000-yard rusher that season. Why? Because the system was different. Duckett was a relatively good fit in an offense like that used by Dan Reeves, but is a poor one in this one used by Knapp & Gibbs.

BirdBrain wrote:
He isn't as good as Blaylock or Houston or another team that needed help would have picked him up by now...

Just like Blaylock built his rep running behind the best O-line in the league for what has been seemingly 3 or 4 years running. Just like Blaylock was a good fit in KC behind their line and blocking schemes, and their offense, but proved to be a poor fit in New York, that's why he was 3rd string to a 6th round pick there. And if Houston is such a gifted runner, then why are the Jets turning him into a fullback?

Also, teams have been reluctant to deal for Duckett because the Falcons have held out for the right return. That sort of logic would indicate that Matt Schaub is a crappy QB because no one has enticed the Falcons to part ways with him. Forget what Blank or McKay may have said, if the right offer was on the table, the Falcons were going to deal Schaub. But obviously the right offer hasn't been on the table. And it's the same with Duckett. Fact is, that there are only a few teams out there that Duckett is a really solid fit for. For majority of teams in the NFL, Duckett would be a backup. But for teams like Pittsburgh, Carolina, New England, Dallas, Miami, and a few more, Duckett would be a starter and would probably get 20 or so carries a game. But because all of these teams have a relatively settled RB position, none are really willing to offer the right compensation for Duckett, particularly when there is no guarantee he'd be better than their current backs or the fact that he would be with the team beyond this season.

The issue is much more complicated BB than you think it is. The RB market for a player like Duckett has constricted over the past year. The way I see it, the market was pretty good for Duckett prior to 2005, but that has since dried up. It may reopen a bit after this year, but we shall see.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 5:07 pm 
Offline
2009 Mock Contest Winner
2009 Mock Contest Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 6:16 am
Posts: 12232
Location: Aschaffenburg, Germany
Pudge wrote:
That's a much too black and white approach to the issue. Had Barry Sanders played for a coach that wanted him to run up the middle 30 times a game, he never would have emerged as an all-time great. The system does have an impact on how a RB performs. Some backs are good downhill runners, some are straight-ahead, some work best when they are able to work in space. Just like QBs are geared towards offensive systems. Sure, you put VIck in Indy with their line and their WR corps, and you'll get a better player out of him, but it doesn't automatically mean he'd be just as good as Peyton Manning. You forget that Duckett was playing well through the first 9 or so weeks last year, and generally played well in 2004. If you look at Duckett's performance in 2003, if you project his performance over his 10 starts to 16 games, he would have been a 1000-yard rusher that season. Why? Because the system was different. Duckett was a relatively good fit in an offense like that used by Dan Reeves, but is a poor one in this one used by Knapp & Gibbs.


You are dealing in hypotheticals Pudge, and I am dealing in facts. Duckett wears down easy, that's my beef with him. That and the way he hits the hole, which is poor. Because of his running style if you hit him early he will go down. He tends to wait too long for a hole to develop, thus his horrible loss behind the line of scrimmage ratio, one of the worst in the NFL. Since we have seen him play in our offense the past two years that is the most current data we have and his YPC average after the 10th carry or so is really bad. By the way, put vick in the INDY offense and he would last just a few games. His accuracy wouldn't hold up there just as it hasn't held up here. I don't agree with this "well look at what he would have done there" theories. That's all they are therories. Comparing Schaub's situation and Duck's is laughable, they couldn't be more different. The Falcons have a Plan B in motion that depended on Schaub sticking around. Sure the right offer was 2 #1 draft picks...but no one would bite. Schaub will be the QB for the Falcons in the future, you can count on it.

BirdBrain wrote:
He isn't as good as Blaylock or Houston or another team that needed help would have picked him up by now...

Just like Blaylock built his rep running behind the best O-line in the league for what has been seemingly 3 or 4 years running. Just like Blaylock was a good fit in KC behind their line and blocking schemes, and their offense, but proved to be a poor fit in New York, that's why he was 3rd string to a 6th round pick there. And if Houston is such a gifted runner, then why are the Jets turning him into a fullback?

Blaylock was hurt most of last year, he will still be better than duck when all is said and done

Also, teams have been reluctant to deal for Duckett because the Falcons have held out for the right return. That sort of logic would indicate that Matt Schaub is a crappy QB because no one has enticed the Falcons to part ways with him. Forget what Blank or McKay may have said, if the right offer was on the table, the Falcons were going to deal Schaub. But obviously the right offer hasn't been on the table. And it's the same with Duckett. Fact is, that there are only a few teams out there that Duckett is a really solid fit for. For majority of teams in the NFL, Duckett would be a backup. But for teams like Pittsburgh, Carolina, New England, Dallas, Miami, and a few more, Duckett would be a starter and would probably get 20 or so carries a game. But because all of these teams have a relatively settled RB position, none are really willing to offer the right compensation for Duckett, particularly when there is no guarantee he'd be better than their current backs or the fact that he would be with the team beyond this season.

The issue is much more complicated BB than you think it is.

No..it is rather simple...Duckett is horrible..he will be gone next year, and we will get a 4th rounder as compensation


The RB market for a player like Duckett has constricted over the past year. The way I see it, the market was pretty good for Duckett prior to 2005, but that has since dried up. It may reopen a bit after this year, but we shall see.[/quote]
Quote:


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 5:17 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 12:59 am
Posts: 2125
Location: Deepinthehearta
Forum coding > Birdbrain :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:43 pm 
Offline
Superstar
Superstar

Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:22 am
Posts: 1548
Location: Parts Unknown
FalconWease wrote:
Forum coding > Birdbrain :D


And I might add

reality > Birdbrain

also.

"Plan C" is the real future QB scenario in Atlanta. The "real decision" to make this training camp is which QB -- Randall or Shockley -- can most safely be stashed on the practice squad while we make the Schaub deal.

Schaub looked great that game last year. So while the perception is high, they need to continue to limit his playing time lest he is gameplanned for and struggles -- thus hurting that trade value. Schaub is good bait. I'd like to see us work a deal to send him to Oakland for Porter.

_________________
Image
There's no question about that!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 9:07 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26041
Location: North Carolina
BirdBrain wrote:
You are dealing in hypotheticals Pudge, and I am dealing in facts.

OK, we'll see about this one.
BirdBrain wrote:
He tends to wait too long for a hole to develop, thus his horrible loss behind the line of scrimmage ratio, one of the worst in the NFL.

A rather interesting point you bring up considering the Duckett finished SECOND in the NFL last year in terms of not being stopped behind the line of scrimmage last year (if you need to confirm, here's the link). This is why Duckett was stopped behind the line on only 5% of his total carries, with only Mike Anderson (3.8%) being better.
BirdBrain wrote:
Blaylock was hurt most of last year, he will still be better than duck when all is said and done

Yes, the same Derrick Blaylock that had 53 yards on 17 carries (3.1 avg) prior to his injury. I realize the Jets had either the worst or 2nd worst offensive line last season, but that doesn't excuse him. He is a guy that has basically had 2 very good games (1 vs. Falcons in '04 and 1 vs. Saints in '04), which has earned him this rep as a good RB, when he's not anything special. It's the reason why the Jets are shopping for other backs right now. He's the type of runner that are most teams he would be lucky to rush for 700 yards on a season if he started 16 games. Blaylock played in an offensive system in KC that is notorious for making average players look great.
BirdBrain wrote:
No..it is rather simple...Duckett is horrible..

And that statement is factual how?
BirdBrain wrote:
he will be gone next year, and we will get a 4th rounder as compensation

Well I'm not sure what sort of compensation you are referring to. As far as a trade, that's not going to happen because Duckett is an unrestricted free agent. And as far as draft pick compensation that the league awards to teams for losing prominent free agents, that too makes your statement very doubtful. Do you know how that system works? It is based on the size of the contract that players sign. It's why the Falcons haven't gotten a compensatory pick in a while, because we don't have very many players sign elsewhere for big contracts. I believe the last one we received was in 2001, after an off-season that saw guys like Chuck Smith, Lester Archambeau, and others leave after the '99 season.

You said it yourself, the market for Duckett's services is limited and not a lot is going to change between now and April. Sure, a few teams like Green Bay, Denver, San Francisco, and maybe a few others could be looking for starting RBs, but not a lot. But a number of those teams will attempt to settle those issues in the draft. And if Duckett is so horrible, then why would any of those teams being willing to pay the amount of money that would merit a 4th round pick as draft pick compensation.

The factors that go into that equation are if the Falcons lose more high-priced free agents than they gained. It's why the team is unlikely to get any help for Shaffer signing with the Browns, because the combined contracts we gave Abraham and Milloy easily negates it.

So in order to get that sort of compensation, the Falcons probably couldn't sign any player above the veteran minimum and then Duckett would have to sign elsewhere for a deal that approaches $25-30 mililon or has a signing bonus approaching 8 figures.

Among our upcoming free agents, only Patrick Kerney has that sort of potential to garner a deal like that. So if Kerney signs with another team, t hen yes I would say we could get a 4th round pick for him, but nobody else.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 5:48 am 
Offline
2009 Mock Contest Winner
2009 Mock Contest Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 6:16 am
Posts: 12232
Location: Aschaffenburg, Germany
Pudge wrote:
A rather interesting point you bring up considering the Duckett finished SECOND in the NFL last year in terms of not being stopped behind the line of scrimmage last year (if you need to confirm, here's the link). This is why Duckett was stopped behind the line on only 5% of his total carries, with only Mike Anderson (3.8%) being better.

I realize that stats can be used to say just about anything, but of course the one you just quoted is somewhat laughable. Not much difference in behind the line and on the line or a few inches over the line. The bottom line is when he carries the football, he doesn't carry it very far.

On 4th down, rushed 3 times.....minus 3 yards. I recall each of those critical situations, and i went back to my DVD's of the games and watched them again. Line blocked well..in each case TJ just fell down, with little of no contact.

On 3rd down he rushed 16 times for 24 yards. ...a 1.5 YPC...pathetic...getting a TD you say???? Only 1 3rd down rush resulted in a TD.

About 300 yards of his 380 yards rushing came on passing downs, where the opposing defense was in a pass defense, not a rush defense....most of the time it was 2nd down and +6-11 yards to go....

His 47 rushes for only 101 yards in division games is also a very telling stat. Thats only 2.1 YPC for those at home.

TJ makes his rep on running the ball in from the one yard line, something any back in the NFL can and should do behind an MVP line such as ours.





BirdBrain wrote:
Blaylock was hurt most of last year, he will still be better than duck when all is said and done

Yes, the same Derrick Blaylock that had 53 yards on 17 carries (3.1 avg) prior to his injury. I realize the Jets had either the worst or 2nd worst offensive line last season, but that doesn't excuse him. He is a guy that has basically had 2 very good games (1 vs. Falcons in '04 and 1 vs. Saints in '04), which has earned him this rep as a good RB, when he's not anything special. It's the reason why the Jets are shopping for other backs right now. He's the type of runner that are most teams he would be lucky to rush for 700 yards on a season if he started 16 games. Blaylock played in an offensive system in KC that is notorious for making average players look great.
BirdBrain wrote:
No..it is rather simple...Duckett is horrible..

And that statement is factual how?
BirdBrain wrote:
he will be gone next year, and we will get a 4th rounder as compensation

Well I'm not sure what sort of compensation you are referring to. As far as a trade, that's not going to happen because Duckett is an unrestricted free agent. And as far as draft pick compensation that the league awards to teams for losing prominent free agents, that too makes your statement very doubtful. Do you know how that system works? It is based on the size of the contract that players sign. It's why the Falcons haven't gotten a compensatory pick in a while, because we don't have very many players sign elsewhere for big contracts. I believe the last one we received was in 2001, after an off-season that saw guys like Chuck Smith, Lester Archambeau, and others leave after the '99 season.


Once again you are talking about the past and i am talking about a specific player...I think when Duck leaves next year, we will get at least a 4th rounder. Do you know how it works Pudge???? The awarded compensatory picks aren't for specific players, but a somewhat complicated formular.

Taking into account free agents lost, free agents gained,player performance and value of the contracts.So it isn't based on the contract the player signed.When you think some players such as Tom Brady and Larry Allen were chosen with Comp. picks it makes me feel rather good that we will get something. Of course if Schaub does leave and I don't think he will, then that means even more bounty.We didn't receive many comp. picks because we were signing free agents as well, which threw off the balance of the compensatory system.

The compensatory picks are awarded annually by the Management Council, the league's labor arm, under an esoteric computation more difficult to crack than the formula for McDonald's secret Big Mac sauce. The formula is said to be based on salary, playing time and postseason honors and not every player gained or lost by a team in free agency is covered.


You said it yourself, the market for Duckett's services is limited and not a lot is going to change between now and April. Sure, a few teams like Green Bay, Denver, San Francisco, and maybe a few others could be looking for starting RBs, but not a lot. But a number of those teams will attempt to settle those issues in the draft. And if Duckett is so horrible, then why would any of those teams being willing to pay the amount of money that would merit a 4th round pick as draft pick compensation.

Once again it isn't just about the contract signed by the player, there are many other important parts to the overall equation.



Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:30 pm 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 3:11 pm
Posts: 4526
Location: Vancouver, WA
Yeap BB is the new Iraqi Information Officer.

_________________
Fear the BEARD!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:06 pm 
Offline
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
Purveyor of Truth & Justice
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 3:03 pm
Posts: 26041
Location: North Carolina
BirdBrain wrote:
I realize that stats can be used to say just about anything, but of course the one you just quoted is somewhat laughable. Not much difference in behind the line and on the line or a few inches over the line. The bottom line is when he carries the football, he doesn't carry it very far.

Good spin. When I point out stats that easily negate your statement, then of course you say it really doesn't matter. It's a technique I've used a few times when people pointed out I was wrong.
BirdBrain wrote:
About 300 yards of his 380 yards rushing came on passing downs, where the opposing defense was in a pass defense, not a rush defense....most of the time it was 2nd down and +6-11 yards to go....

Here's some more stats, so let's see how you spin this in your response. I broke down the Falcons run vs. pass tendencies on every down and situation.

Since the Falcons ran the ball 54% of the time last year, it's too cut and dry to say that if they ran the ball 51% of more in a certain situation, it was a running situation for them. So I basically indicated that if the team ran the ball 60% of time in a certain situation, it was a running situation for them. If they passsed the ball 50% or more, it was a passing situation. If it was in between, it was a mixed situation.

As it broke down, 8 of Duckett's 121 (7%) carries came in these passing situations vs. 48 in run sitches (39.7%), and 65 (53.7%) in mixed situations.

Now, I will agree that Duckett's rushing totals on rushing downs was poor (1.5 ypc vs. 5.1 in passing situations).

I'm going to keep repeating this statistic because I think people are dismissing it too easily.

5 for 6 on 3rd & short (less than 3 yards) success rate in getting 1st downs. That's what Duckett was through the first 9 weeks of 2005. That is a mark that only a handful of players in the league approached, as seen here.

Yes, Duckett was only 1 of 5 over the last 5 weeks of the year in the same situation, which was poor. But you won't hear me dispute that the Duckett we saw last December was a bad player. But it is my firm belief that the Duckett of December '05 is not the "normal" T.J. Duckett. It's the tale of 2 Ducketts.

BirdBrain wrote:
TJ makes his rep on running the ball in from the one yard line, something any back in the NFL can and should do behind an MVP line such as ours.

If it's so easy, then why were only a dozen or so RBs more than 50% successful in such situations last year? Cited here

I'm not here to say Duckett is a great running back. But I'm here to say that in his role as a short-yardage and goalline runner, he's very good. I believe among the best in the league, and that has to count for something. To say he is "horrible" as you put it, is a ridiculous exaggeration.

I agree that statistics can be used to support almost any argument or claim. But there are certain times where stats are a pretty clear indicator of a certain argument as being the stronger one. And I believe this one of those times.

There is two different T.J. Ducketts: the Sept./Oct. Duckett and the December Duckett. IMHO, the "normal" Duckett is the Sept./Oct. version.

If it's so easy to score from the 1-yard line behind our "MVP" line, how come Warrick Dunn's success doesn't approach Duckett's? In blank down & goal situations, Dunn has scored 6 times on 30 carries (20%), while Duckett has scored 12 times in 24 carries (50%) over the past 2 years.

He doesn't sound too horrible when he ranks in the Top 20 in either his conference or in the entire league, where in a league with about 100 RBs around, it makes him in the 60th, 70th, or even 80th percentile in several rushing categories. Doesn't sound like a horrible back to me. But oh, we can simply dismiss it as his stats are only as good as they are because he plays behind an "MVP" line.

BirdBrain wrote:
Once again you are talking about the past and i am talking about a specific player...I think when Duck leaves next year, we will get at least a 4th rounder. Do you know how it works Pudge???? The awarded compensatory picks aren't for specific players, but a somewhat complicated formular.

Taking into account free agents lost, free agents gained,player performance and value of the contracts.So it isn't based on the contract the player signed.When you think some players such as Tom Brady and Larry Allen were chosen with Comp. picks it makes me feel rather good that we will get something. Of course if Schaub does leave and I don't think he will, then that means even more bounty.We didn't receive many comp. picks because we were signing free agents as well, which threw off the balance of the compensatory system.

The compensatory picks are awarded annually by the Management Council, the league's labor arm, under an esoteric computation more difficult to crack than the formula for McDonald's secret Big Mac sauce. The formula is said to be based on salary, playing time and postseason honors and not every player gained or lost by a team in free agency is covered.


So since this is such a complicated formula, that I would have little idea of how it works, then please explain this complicated formula to us. Enlighten me how you cracked this formula in order to discover that we will get at least a 4th round pick for Duckett.

BirdBrain wrote:
The awarded compensatory picks aren't for specific players, but a somewhat complicated formular.

You're the one who said that we'd get a 4th rounder for Duckett. Seemed pretty specific in that insight.

If you look at the teams awarded 4th round picks over recent drafts, all of them have suffered net losses of starters in an off-season before they received such high compensation. And the majority of those starters signed big contracts elsewhere.

Knowing that info, what it is about a horrible player like T.J. Duckett that leads you to believe that he will get both a big contract and that he's a starter worthy of being highly regarded by the mysterious NFL formula?

Now if you were to say the Falcons could get a 4th rounder if any combination of the following players were lost this off-season: Kerney, Griffith, McClure, Weiner, I wouldn't disagree with you. Based on the # of starts they see, their current salaries, and the likelihood that they can/will see higher salaries in their next contracts, my believe is we could net a 4th round pick if we lost any combination of those 4 players. But without cracking the code, I would wager at best that if we lost just Duckett, it would factor into a 6th round compensatory pick at best. But again that's speculation, the same speculation you used when you said 4th round pick.

_________________
"Vincere scis, Hannibal, victoria uti nescis" -- Maharbal, 216 B.C.E.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  


cron