ny92mike Posted January 29, 2020 Author Share Posted January 29, 2020 2 minutes ago, mountainpd said: Similar story to me. Not sure if the draft class last year was really bad or someone is gonna post a draft with like 7 starters from last year on it. And a giant BOOM I haven't looked at them all but I did like counselors, we even talked about this a few months back. I think I had like 3 picks that Philly drafted irl perhaps I should apply to be a scout for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedGold Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 6 minutes ago, mountainpd said: Similar story to me. Not sure if the draft class last year was really bad or someone is gonna post a draft with like 7 starters from last year on it. And a giant BOOM @squire12 ‘s draft looked pretty legit 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainpd Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 Who’s the Cowboys GM? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted January 29, 2020 Author Share Posted January 29, 2020 Just now, mountainpd said: Who’s the Cowboys GM? @D82 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainpd Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 4 minutes ago, ny92mike said: @D82 Ta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 6 minutes ago, samsel23 said: @squire12 ‘s draft looked pretty legit I was pretty pleased with that. Burns as EDGE, Risner at OL. Deebo at WR looks like a very solid #2 with potential to become a #1 WR. Crosby showed some flashes and a few other later round picks I am not sure how they played over the course of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainpd Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, squire12 said: I was pretty pleased with that. Burns as EDGE, Risner at OL. Deebo at WR looks like a very solid #2 with potential to become a #1 WR. Crosby showed some flashes and a few other later round picks I am not sure how they played over the course of the season. Okereke was pretty good value too Edited January 29, 2020 by mountainpd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedGold Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, squire12 said: I was pretty pleased with that. Burns as EDGE, Risner at OL. Deebo at WR looks like a very solid #2 with potential to become a #1 WR. Crosby showed some flashes and a few other later round picks I am not sure how they played over the course of the season. Okereke played well for Indy. Hill and Wren I’m guessing will play a lot more next year. If someone did better, props Edited January 29, 2020 by samsel23 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted January 29, 2020 Author Share Posted January 29, 2020 Just now, samsel23 said: Okereke played well for Indy. Hill and Wren I’m guessing will play a lot more next year. If someone did better, props I did better...but there is zero evidence to suggest it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 minute ago, ny92mike said: I did better...but there is zero evidence to suggest it. It is your mock, so naturally you always be the best!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted January 29, 2020 Author Share Posted January 29, 2020 Just now, squire12 said: It is your mock, so naturally you always be the best!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Great Point!!!!! Glad I said it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted January 29, 2020 Share Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, ny92mike said: You're right about the contract being guaranteed only for injury...my fault. I probably should have explained when I declined it in more detail. The reason I declined that particular extension is because the extension sheets aren't set up to manage the extensions for 1st round picks on final year of rookie contract or 5th year options, if you recall I was redoing those those sheets, hopefully friday, but for sure over the weekend because I wanted to provide what I feel would be a more realistic contract for 1st round players seeking extensions. So rather than using the APY values that are listed, in this case APY/ $10,265,600 SB/$1,919,216 CL max / 5. This number is considerably low, not as low as some but still low so by using the listed exclusive tag amount within the workbook which is set to $16,464,167, which after seeing the Howard deal it's a tad high so I'm willing to change this amount to the non-exclusive listed tag amount set at $15,248,262 for this mock. This prevents a 1st round talent from being extended for a far less value than they are worth or would likely sign. So you can still extend him, but I've got to set that sheet up before allowing it to pass. I haven't looked at the contracts for the others but for this I'm only allowing rookies to be extended if they are in their final year of their contract. Hope that clears it up, again the changes to the workbook or actually new work will be available late this weekend. Thanks for the clarification. I'd think the APY is better than using tag numbers. Players and teams agree to extensions as an alternative to free agency so the open market value would seem to be the number to beat to get a deal done. I'm not sure how the APY is calculated , but maybe it's better to raise APYs rather than require paying a franchise tag? In Mixon's case, he was a 2nd round pick and is going into the 4th and final year of his rookie deal. So I'd think he should appear on the extension eligible list? Dalvin Cook was taken about the same spot in the draft so the Vikes should be able to extend him if you need to compare team workbooks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cbrunn Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 Not too mad at my draft for the Steelers Noah fant Garrett Bradbury Mack Wilson Chase winnovich Tytus Howard 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted January 30, 2020 Author Share Posted January 30, 2020 1 minute ago, sparky151 said: Thanks for the clarification. I'd think the APY is better than using tag numbers. Players and teams agree to extensions as an alternative to free agency so the open market value would seem to be the number to beat to get a deal done. I'm not sure how the APY is calculated , but maybe it's better to raise APYs rather than require paying a franchise tag? In Mixon's case, he was a 2nd round pick and is going into the 4th and final year of his rookie deal. So I'd think he should appear on the extension eligible list? Dalvin Cook was taken about the same spot in the draft so the Vikes should be able to extend him if you need to compare team workbooks. APY values are based on the PFF grade, which we all know has it's issues basically the value generated by the PFF grade or the current APY value is used dependant upon the higher amount of these two. However, you also have to keep in mind that these values are minimum APY values for the free agency and not the actual open market value. My idea using the tagged amounts was because the vast majority of these extensions is to provide the player not the team with the best possible value. Just like Jackson I'm reading things like him being the highest paid corner if he does extend. Joe Mixon has had back to back 1,000 yard seasons, you think he'd sign a contract that gave him a 4 million apy contract for 5 years? You not seeing him on the list is because the exp number is 3 which the formula used is only listing players with 4 or more. This can be easily fixed by just changing the exp number from 3 to 4. This is why I'm suggesting using tag values for extensions. Mixon imo would never sign a contract like what is currently set up, this is why in the past we didn't allow players on rookie deals to get extensions, the APY values are just too low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted January 30, 2020 Author Share Posted January 30, 2020 4 minutes ago, ny92mike said: APY values are based on the PFF grade, which we all know has it's issues basically the value generated by the PFF grade or the current APY value is used dependant upon the higher amount of these two. However, you also have to keep in mind that these values are minimum APY values for the free agency and not the actual open market value. My idea using the tagged amounts was because the vast majority of these extensions is to provide the player not the team with the best possible value. Just like Jackson I'm reading things like him being the highest paid corner if he does extend. Joe Mixon has had back to back 1,000 yard seasons, you think he'd sign a contract that gave him a 4 million apy contract for 5 years? You not seeing him on the list is because the exp number is 3 which the formula used is only listing players with 4 or more. This can be easily fixed by just changing the exp number from 3 to 4. This is why I'm suggesting using tag values for extensions. Mixon imo would never sign a contract like what is currently set up, this is why in the past we didn't allow players on rookie deals to get extensions, the APY values are just too low. Also keep in mind that I did say only one rookie extension is allowed...this is mainly because the current structure (generated APY values especially for rookies is undervalued). These are the type of players that set the bar higher each year for every position. Nothing outside of the 5th year option, that prevents a player from walking if the contract isn't high enough. Which is where franchise tags come into play when a deal can't get reached. Just trying to look at the big picture with all of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.