Updated: Hawks Decline LB Brooks' 5th year option...

[SoulfishHawk]

Meh. Not sure what your quotes are trying to prove. I'm not talking down to anyone like you do on a regular basis.

 

[renofox]

So what's the point of teams trading back into the end of the 1st?

Just in case you hit on guy who's worth it, especially if he didn't hit his escalators - could save big cap $.

 

[HawkRiderFan]

Interesting that a big criticism was that the team should have drafted Patrick Queen instead....and the Ravens declined year 5 on him too.

 

[GGotskill]

Interesting that a big criticism was that the team should have drafted Patrick Queen instead....and the Ravens declined year 5 on him too.

I think only 12 players from that draft had their 5th year option picked up (not including Jordan Love who was just extended).

 

[HawkRiderFan]

I think only 12 players from that draft had their 5th year option picked up (not including Jordan Love who was just extended).

And even his is a big unusual isn't it? Like they signed an extension so the cap hit is less than picking up the option would have been?

 

[GGotskill]

And even his is a big unusual isn't it? Like they signed an extension so the cap hit is less than picking up the option would have been?

I believe you are correct.

 

[sutz]

Is some ways the 5th year option is kind of foolish. If you really want a guy to stick around, you give him an extension before it comes up, which both reduces the cap hit that year, but allows for better long term cap planning. Basically the option is like the franchise tag, you don't use it if you don't have to.

 

[Shane Falco]

I take these kinds of things with a grain of salt ever since I fell for Carroll talking up Aaron Curry back when but there's this quote on Brooks:

"He's got a long, long future for us," Carroll told Sports Radio 93.3 KJR-FM. "We love the way he plays and what he brings and all of that. We've got to orchestrate the way we move forward. The decision we made now, this is not an indication of our future. We expect Jordyn to be with us for a long time."

 

[Mick063]

Is some ways the 5th year option is kind of foolish. If you really want a guy to stick around, you give him an extension before it comes up, which both reduces the cap hit that year, but allows for better long term cap planning. Basically the option is like the franchise tag, you don't use it if you don't have to.

It was intended to mitigate the meteoric rise in quarterback salaries. The QB price tag was going up faster than the anticipated cap limits allowed for and the time investment for developing the position was in serious need of compensation. Actually, you could say that the fifth year option is working as intended. The franchise quarterbacks are being extended. A couple of other high value positions like left tackle have benefited to a lesser degree. The concept is only viable where the arms race is out of control and the salary ceilings are unpredictable. It is a "supply and demand" type thing and there isn't a shortage of mike linebackers.

 

[flv2]

OTC Linebacker Contracts

There are only 7 ILBs in the NFL making more than Brooks option.

There are only 12 ILBs in the NFL making over $7M/yr.

LB, like C and S, is not a highly paid position in the NFL unless the player is considered elite. Brooks' play has not been elite.

Brooks is nowhere near top 7, and comparable play can be found in the $7M range.

This is the problem with selecting certain positions with 1st round picks. Even if the pick becomes a good player they have to be ranked ridiculously high in their position group for the 5th round option to be of value.

 

[Mick063]

This is the problem with selecting certain positions with 1st round picks. Even if the pick becomes a good player they have to be ranked ridiculously high in their position group for the 5th round option to be of value.

There is an alternate line of thinking that goes with this. The Rams brought in Jalen Ramsey to put them over the top. The Jets brought in OBJ to put them over the top. They aren't long term solutions but more like brief talent surges to maximize an anticipated championship window. This isn't confined to just veterans. It can be applied to rookies as well. If you are a player or two away from maintaining a championship window, you aren't thinking about fifth year options. You are thinking about adding that little bit of a strategic edge in talent for a specific window of time.

I am totally on board with drafting ANY position in the first round if there is a planned championship strategy in play.

 

[flv2]

There is an alternate line of thinking that goes with this. The Rams brought in Jalen Ramsey to put them over the top. The Jets brought in OBJ to put them over the top. They aren't long term solutions but more like brief talent surges to maximize an anticipated championship window. This isn't confined to just veterans. It can be applied to rookies as well. If you are a player or two away from maintaining a championship window, you aren't thinking about fifth year options. You are thinking about adding that little bit of a strategic edge in talent for a specific window of time.

I am totally on board with drafting ANY position in the first round if there is a planned championship strategy in play.

I don't disagree with the point you are trying to make. However, Ramsey joined the Rams after a Super Bowl appearance. Beckham Jr. joined during a Super Bowl run. Brooks was picked after a 10-6 season and was thought to be something of a reach. He wasn't a Luke Kuechly - like prospect.

nfl.com/prospects/jordyn-brooks/32004252-4f13-1962-2c2e-fdb174b58eaf

 

[Mick063]

I don't disagree with the point you are trying to make. However, Ramsey joined the Rams after a Super Bowl appearance. Beckham Jr. joined during a Super Bowl run. Brooks was picked after a 10-6 season and was thought to be something of a reach. He wasn't a Luke Kuechly - like prospect.

nfl.com/prospects/jordyn-brooks/32004252-4f13-1962-2c2e-fdb174b58eaf

I'm not calling you wrong, but I will point out that you made the leap from talking about 1st round picks, in general, to talking about Jordyn Brooks specifically. My argument was relative to your argument that 1st round picks should be confined to specific positions. I am not using Brooks as a representative example of why I don't entirely follow your line of thinking (Although it does apply under specific circumstances).

With respect to Ramsey, my line of logic stands. The Rams acquired him as a part of a planned, short term talent surge to keep a championship window open. They never intended to keep Ramsey long-term as evidenced by their recent transaction. Further, saying that Beckham joined during a "Super Bowl run" aligns entirely with the point I am trying to make as well.

If you use the short term, "talent surge" strategy to keep a championship window open with respect to acquiring veterans, it doesn't preclude you from applying that same strategy to impact rookies as well. Hence, ANY position is a viable first round draft choice if it is part of a planned championship strategy. It doesn't work, however, for teams in rebuild mode. The key is to be able to recognize when you have crossed the threshold from rebuilder to contender and adapt your draft philosophy accordingly.

In summary, if your championship window has opened, any method of specific position acquisition (including first round picks) can be justified to prolong the length of that window.

 

[Atradees]

Meh. He is the next Bobby! Except he sucks.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Brooks Sucks? ok

 

[HagFaithful]

I think we're signing him long-term...

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Is some ways the 5th year option is kind of foolish. If you really want a guy to stick around, you give him an extension before it comes up, which both reduces the cap hit that year, but allows for better long term cap planning. Basically the option is like the franchise tag, you don't use it if you don't have to.

It's exactly this, a quasi franchise tag for teams to keep a player they still want long term but haven't worked out the extension yet.

Or to get another great year out of a player desperately playing for a free agent contract. Like Brooks will be when he gets back on the field.

 

[Rat]

I think we're signing him long-term...

Paying for trash is an odd strategy.

 

[chris98251]

Move him to OLB where he can use his skills will help, having Dline that can absorb blockers so he can go un touched more often will help his pressures and TFL numbers and he may get some sacks. He was out of position.

 

[flv2]

I'm not calling you wrong, but I will point out that you made the leap from talking about 1st round picks, in general, to talking about Jordyn Brooks specifically. My argument was relative to your argument that 1st round picks should be confined to specific positions. I am not using Brooks as a representative example of why I don't entirely follow your line of thinking (Although it does apply under specific circumstances).

With respect to Ramsey, my line of logic stands. The Rams acquired him as a part of a planned, short term talent surge to keep a championship window open. They never intended to keep Ramsey long-term as evidenced by their recent transaction. Further, saying that Beckham joined during a "Super Bowl run" aligns entirely with the point I am trying to make as well.

If you use the short term, "talent surge" strategy to keep a championship window open with respect to acquiring veterans, it doesn't preclude you from applying that same strategy to impact rookies as well. Hence, ANY position is a viable first round draft choice if it is part of a planned championship strategy. It doesn't work, however, for teams in rebuild mode. The key is to be able to recognize when you have crossed the threshold from rebuilder to contender and adapt your draft philosophy accordingly.

In summary, if your championship window has opened, any method of specific position acquisition (including first round picks) can be justified to prolong the length of that window.

It's a Brooks thread. It's about the Seahawks declining Brooks 5th year option. It was declined because he'd need to be a top 7 ILB for the option to have value. If the 1st round pick had been at S the player would need to be a top 20 or so player at S for the option to have value. Most positions are more likely to have their 5th year option picked up than ILB. The broader point was that it's cheaper to select a 15th best WR in the NFL through the Draft and sign a 15th best in the NFL FA ILB than it is to get them the other way around. I didn't say 1st round picks should be confined to specific positions. Simplistically pick a 75 rated QB over a 77 rated WR, CB, DL, Edge, or LT. You pick them over a 79 rated RB or C. You pick them over ILB, IOL, or TE. Luke Kuechly and Quenton Nelson level prospects don't drop out of the 1st round.

Off-topic, but I didn't start this. Ramsey was absolutely acquired for the long-term. If the Rams were in better shape competitively he would have remained on the roster for the next 2 years. You don't trade 2 X 1st round picks and then offer big long-term deals to players like Ramsey or Jamal Adams as a short-term talent surge. Beckham jr. and Miller were certainly brought in for immediate effect. Both were wanted longer term, but the Rams couldn't keep them.

A short-term talent surge isn't 4 or 5 years long. If you think it's a legitimate strategy to select a 1st round pick as a short-term talent surge to be discarded after year 2 or 3 then you're wrong.