PDA

View Full Version : Buying a Draft Pick?



troyc11a
06-17-2011, 03:59 PM
Does anyone know what the Pacers would have to do in order to "buy" a draft pick from another team. There has been a lot of talk about teams under the cap being able to do that but I am not aware of the specifics needed to get it done.
Also, what teams are possible "sellers" anyway? Could this be a less expensive route to building a roster?

OakMoses
06-17-2011, 04:29 PM
There are a couple of different ways to do it.

There is the traditional route where a team "trades" it's first round pick for "cash considerations". The going rate the past few years has been about $3 million for a 1st round pick.

There is also a way to "buy" a pick by taking on a player. Say Boston decides they don't want to pay the $6 million they stupidly gave Jermaine O'Neal to play for them next year. They could draft a player for a team (like the Pacers) who is under the cap. Then they trade Jermaine O'Neal + whomever they draft to the Pacers once the lockout is over. This way we "buy" the pick by agreeing to pay J.O.'s salary for the year.

troyc11a
06-17-2011, 05:17 PM
There are a couple of different ways to do it.

There is the traditional route where a team "trades" it's first round pick for "cash considerations". The going rate the past few years has been about $3 million for a 1st round pick.

There is also a way to "buy" a pick by taking on a player. Say Boston decides they don't want to pay the $6 million they stupidly gave Jermaine O'Neal to play for them next year. They could draft a player for a team (like the Pacers) who is under the cap. Then they trade Jermaine O'Neal + whomever they draft to the Pacers once the lockout is over. This way we "buy" the pick by agreeing to pay J.O.'s salary for the year.

Thanks! I was aware of the second way in which someone would send us a player and a pick for taking him (this was done a lot last year). What I did not know was the going rate for a pick. Are all picks worth the same? Can anyone purchase one that is for sale or does the team have to be under the cap?

Justin Tyme
06-17-2011, 05:58 PM
Does anyone know what the Pacers would have to do in order to "buy" a draft pick from another team. There has been a lot of talk about teams under the cap being able to do that but I am not aware of the specifics needed to get it done.
Also, what teams are possible "sellers" anyway? Could this be a less expensive route to building a roster?



Just approach another team and ask them if they are interested in selling their pick. Cap has nothing to do with buying a pick. 1st round picks can be sold for up to 3 mil. The money an owner spends for a pick comes straight out of his pocket like Paul Allen has done.

IndyPacer
06-17-2011, 06:37 PM
I'd be up for getting an extra pick this year. I know it's a weak draft, but I think we could grab a pretty decent player with an extra pick.

I'm thinking of someone like Reggie Jackson, JaJuan Johnson (definitely not a homer pick; I am an alum of IU-Bloomington), or Jeremy Tyler with a late 1st or early 2nd round pick. If scouting thinks a player will be a good long-term prospect, the low price of the rookie contract helps offset the cost of acquring the extra pick somewhat.

cdash
06-17-2011, 06:40 PM
With our team's financial situation, I'd be incredibly shocked to see us "buy" a pick in this draft.

troyc11a
06-17-2011, 07:13 PM
With our team's financial situation, I'd be incredibly shocked to see us "buy" a pick in this draft.

Why is that? They will be several millions under the cap. They purchase the pick and take the cost off of what they were going to spend. In other words, if they targeted a payroll next year of 60mill, just spend 57 mill and the pick is paid for right away. There are numerous ways to do things like this. How do you think the Simons got so rich?

cdash
06-17-2011, 07:15 PM
Why is that? They will be several millions under the cap. They purchase the pick and take the cost off of what they were going to spend. In other words, if they targeted a payroll next year of 60mill, just spend 57 mill and the pick is paid for right away. There are numerous ways to do things like this. How do you think the Simons got so rich?

Not by buying late first round picks in crappy drafts for a team that doesn't need any more young players.

troyc11a
06-17-2011, 07:19 PM
Not by buying late first round picks in crappy drafts for a team that doesn't need any more young players.

The end of the first round will not be crappy. The only crappy part of the draft will be the lottery. There will be significant value in the bottom half of the draft. Josh Shelby, JuJuan Johnson, Kenneth Faried will be terrific picks in the second half of the first round.

beast23
06-17-2011, 07:36 PM
The end of the first round will not be crappy. The only crappy part of the draft will be the lottery. There will be significant value in the bottom half of the draft. Josh Shelby, JuJuan Johnson, Kenneth Faried will be terrific picks in the second half of the first round.The draft is a very weak one. If the new CBA still includes guaranteed contracts for first round selections, then purchasing a late first round draft choice might be considered a "crappy decision", since late first round choices in a weak draft are not even certain to make a roster, let alone become rotational players.

CooperManning
06-17-2011, 07:49 PM
The draft is a very weak one. If the new CBA still includes guaranteed contracts for first round selections, then purchasing a late first round draft choice might be considered a "crappy decision", since late first round choices in a weak draft are not even certain to make a roster, let alone become rotational players.

You have to do more research about a draft than just reading that it's weak. As Troy said in the post you quoted, the lottery is weak. There's good value in the 2nd half of the first round this year.

That said, I'd be surprised if we bought a pick too.

pacer4ever
06-17-2011, 07:50 PM
You have to do more research about a draft than just reading that it's weak. As Troy said in the post you quoted, the lottery is weak. There's good value in the 2nd half of the first round this year.

That said, I'd be surprised if we bought a pick too.

10-30 has good value IMO then a drop off


the reason it is considered so weak is no clear cut tier 1 type guy. But there is a lot of decent players.

cdash
06-17-2011, 08:37 PM
I agree that there is good value for guys late in the first round, but if you buy a pick for the going rate of $3 million, then sign the guy to the guaranteed contract, you are putting a pretty big investment in him. You better be damn sure he is going to contribute. We are a small market team that hemorrhages money, that type of investment in a player is big. It's not like uberbillionaire Paul Allen dipping into his penny jar to buy a draft pick.

troyc11a
06-17-2011, 09:03 PM
10-30 has good value IMO then a drop off


the reason it is considered so weak is no clear cut tier 1 type guy. But there is a lot of decent players.

That is pretty much what I have been hearing all along. This draft will probably end up having more players who actually contribute than most drafts of recent memory. It is full of quality players in the first round. All I hear is how there are no potential superstars. Well, how often do you get one of those in the last half of the 1st rd anyway. Buying a pick in the 2nd half would seem to be the least expensive way to go about it.

Justin Tyme
06-17-2011, 11:01 PM
That is pretty much what I have been hearing all along. This draft will probably end up having more players who actually contribute than most drafts of recent memory. It is full of quality players in the first round. All I hear is how there are no potential superstars. Well, how often do you get one of those in the last half of the 1st rd anyway. Buying a pick in the 2nd half would seem to be the least expensive way to go about it.



Herb Simon to my knowledge has never put out money to buy a pick, so why now? I believe you have a better chance tonight of winning Mega Millions, if you bought a ticket ;) than Herb Simon spending 3 mil on a bottom 3rd pick.

CooperManning
06-17-2011, 11:25 PM
I agree that there is good value for guys late in the first round, but if you buy a pick for the going rate of $3 million, then sign the guy to the guaranteed contract, you are putting a pretty big investment in him. You better be damn sure he is going to contribute. We are a small market team that hemorrhages money, that type of investment in a player is big. It's not like uberbillionaire Paul Allen dipping into his penny jar to buy a draft pick.

Any other year I'd be 100% sure we're not buying a pick, this year I'm just like 95% sure. I think the slight chance could be if Bird really pushes for it and says, "Hey Herb, you're not going to be shelling out any cash for Tinsley, Dunleavy, or TJ Ford this year and we just made the playoffs but we need to get better. Hook it up."

$3 mil is a hefty price for the pick, but the contract really isn't adding much. Say we buy the 25 pick, last year's 25 pick (Dominique Jones) made $1.11 mil his rookie year, $1.19 mil second year, then two team option years. Say that's taking the roster spot of a guy who would otherwise have made $800,000, then that means (with the $3 mil fee) it'd be an extra $3.7 mil over two years. A good chunk, but well worth it if we were to find a quality role player (/attractive trade chip down the road).

troyc11a
06-18-2011, 12:12 AM
Herb Simon to my knowledge has never put out money to buy a pick, so why now? I believe you have a better chance tonight of winning Mega Millions, if you bought a ticket ;) than Herb Simon spending 3 mil on a bottom 3rd pick.

If you understand how finances work, you will agree that Herb doesnt have to be out one penny for the pick. He tells Bird to take whatever the pick costs off the team payroll next year. Period! The pick will in essence be free. The only question will be does Bird see a player he likes enough to agree not to spend the cash he paid for the pick?
BTW - the asking price for a bottom of round one pick is not necessarily $3mill. The lower the pick, the lower the cost.

Justin Tyme
06-18-2011, 10:47 AM
If you understand how finances work, you will agree that Herb doesnt have to be out one penny for the pick. He tells Bird to take whatever the pick costs off the team payroll next year. Period! The pick will in essence be free. The only question will be does Bird see a player he likes enough to agree not to spend the cash he paid for the pick?
BTW - the asking price for a bottom of round one pick is not necessarily $3mill. The lower the pick, the lower the cost.


But that 3 mil for a 25-30 pick could come back and bite Bird b/c he doesn't have enough salary left to get another player that comes available later. Is that pick going to be worth 4-5 mil in overall salary next season? That same money can be used on acquiring a good player with experience who can help the team immediately.

What team in the last 4 years has paid less than 3 mil for a 1st round pick? It's a sellers market. You want my pick you pay my price.

I just don't see Bird or Simon buying a pick. Even after saying that, I'm not against it in theory. The player being picked has to be worth what's being spent. If not, it's a waste of money/salary that could be used better elsewhere.

PR07
06-18-2011, 11:27 AM
I'd be up for buying a pick. It seems like every year the Pacers are too, they just seem to come up short on these trades for whatever reasons.

troyc11a
06-18-2011, 11:50 AM
But that 3 mil for a 25-30 pick could come back and bite Bird b/c he doesn't have enough salary left to get another player that comes available later. Is that pick going to be worth 4-5 mil in overall salary next season? That same money can be used on acquiring a good player with experience who can help the team immediately.

What team in the last 4 years has paid less than 3 mil for a 1st round pick? It's a sellers market. You want my pick you pay my price.

I just don't see Bird or Simon buying a pick. Even after saying that, I'm not against it in theory. The player being picked has to be worth what's being spent. If not, it's a waste of money/salary that could be used better elsewhere.

I dont see anyway that the Pacers will spend all of their cap money this year. With all the young talent they have, it is not imperitive that they pick up all the pieces this year. Partly, because not all the pieces are available. There is plenty of money to play with. Buying a pick is one, taking on a big contract from another team could net them a pic for nothing as well. I am not suggesting this is necessary but it is possible.

troyc11a
06-18-2011, 11:52 AM
I'd be up for buying a pick. It seems like every year the Pacers are too, they just seem to come up short on these trades for whatever reasons.

I am an IU fan, but would still love to see them acquire a lower pick in order to get JuJuan Johnson. I think he will be a solid pro! Great kid, great work ethic, and he is 6"10 on top of that.

ECKrueger
06-18-2011, 01:13 PM
I would love to get JaJuan in the 20's somewhere.

dlewyus
06-18-2011, 01:29 PM
Why is that? They will be several millions under the cap. They purchase the pick and take the cost off of what they were going to spend. In other words, if they targeted a payroll next year of 60mill, just spend 57 mill and the pick is paid for right away. There are numerous ways to do things like this. How do you think the Simons got so rich?

The Simon's got rich by building shopping malls, not by owning an NBA team.

pacer4ever
06-18-2011, 02:15 PM
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/blog?name=nba_draft&id=6672205&action=upsell&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fblog%3fname%3dnba_draft%26id%3d6672205

can someone post this article?


it is suppose to have trade rumors and Reggie Jackson news.

imbtyler
06-18-2011, 03:46 PM
Herb Simon to my knowledge has never put out money to buy a pick, so why now?

Remember that one of the conditions of Bird's return was that Simon allow him to actually spend this season (and presumably, the following ones until a championship team is found). That would probably include buying draft picks as necessary, if they happen to bring us viable roster pieces.

Justin Tyme
06-18-2011, 04:13 PM
Remember that one of the conditions of Bird's return was that Simon allow him to actually spend this season (and presumably, the following ones until a championship team is found). That would probably include buying draft picks as necessary, if they happen to bring us viable roster pieces.


Simon spending money is sooo broad anything can be derived from that comment, even buying a pick.

IT JUST AIN'T HAPPEN!

Trade for a pick, possibly, but not buying a 1st outright with no trade involved.

troyc11a
06-18-2011, 08:46 PM
Remember that one of the conditions of Bird's return was that Simon allow him to actually spend this season (and presumably, the following ones until a championship team is found). That would probably include buying draft picks as necessary, if they happen to bring us viable roster pieces.

That is a good point. And buying a draft pick makes the most sense economically. Why trade pieces away when you can basically get one for free. There should be plenty of sellers too since some teams will be up against the cap and wont want to commit the extra money. From an owners stanpoint and a GM's standpoint, this is the way to go to build a roster. By far the cheapest and less risky route.

xBulletproof
06-18-2011, 08:51 PM
Buying picks this year does make some sense. It would be a roster spot filled for cheap for a couple of years. It would maximize our ability to keep whatever cap space we don't use until next season. If that's the plan, to wait until next season then spending some cash won't hurt much because we plan on staying under the cap anyway.

I wouldn't be bothered by this approach at all.

cdash
06-18-2011, 08:53 PM
That is a good point. And buying a draft pick makes the most sense economically. Why trade pieces away when you can basically get one for free. There should be plenty of sellers too since some teams will be up against the cap and wont want to commit the extra money. From an owners stanpoint and a GM's standpoint, this is the way to go to build a roster. By far the cheapest and less risky route.

If it was cheap and less risky, it would be a widespread practice, no? It's risky because you are investing about $4 million in a late first round pick. If you are absolutely certain this guy is going to be worth it, then that's fine. But there are never sure-fire hits at that point in the draft.

The benefit of trading pieces is that you don't take on that extra payroll. You limit your financial investment in a player if you are eliminating salary off your books at the same time you are adding that draft pick. There's a reason only a few teams can afford to buy draft picks.

troyc11a
06-18-2011, 09:12 PM
If it was cheap and less risky, it would be a widespread practice, no? It's risky because you are investing about $4 million in a late first round pick. If you are absolutely certain this guy is going to be worth it, then that's fine. But there are never sure-fire hits at that point in the draft.

The benefit of trading pieces is that you don't take on that extra payroll. You limit your financial investment in a player if you are eliminating salary off your books at the same time you are adding that draft pick. There's a reason only a few teams can afford to buy draft picks.

You make some good points here. The one you overlooked is that usually teams do not want to sell their picks. This assumption of buying a pick is based on two things: 1. Claims of a weak draft (I dont agree for the 2nd half); and: 2. It should be a buyers market for once since teams are facing the possibility of a hard (and lower) cap.
If these assumptions are wrong, then your point is exactly right, teams will not be selling and it is all wishful thinking.
Why would you want to trade away quality pieces for other quality pieces? That gets us nowhere. Why not replace some of our expirings with cheaper contracts?
But, the Pacers being able to "afford" to buy a pick is a given this year. They have like over $20mill to play with that is expected to be spent. Bird would just have to take the cost of the extra pick off the cap space for this year and then the pick is essentially free. Nobody expects Bird to use all the cap space this years with this weak FA market. That would be Washington Redskin dumb.

troyc11a
06-18-2011, 09:14 PM
Buying picks this year does make some sense. It would be a roster spot filled for cheap for a couple of years. It would maximize our ability to keep whatever cap space we don't use until next season. If that's the plan, to wait until next season then spending some cash won't hurt much because we plan on staying under the cap anyway.

I wouldn't be bothered by this approach at all.

I would actaully like this approach. Fill in the roster gaps via draft and pick up a piece or two FA or trade. Then there will be money available next year to finish the job. This would be smart and fortunate if it works out.

cdash
06-18-2011, 09:22 PM
But, the Pacers being able to "afford" to buy a pick is a given this year. They have like over $20mill to play with that is expected to be spent. Bird would just have to take the cost of the extra pick off the cap space for this year and then the pick is essentially free. Nobody expects Bird to use all the cap space this years with this weak FA market. That would be Washington Redskin dumb.

You keep mentioning this, and while it is plausible in theory, I'm not so sure it is realistic in practice. What happens if an impact veteran becomes available and we need to use our cap space? Besides, it is Herb Simon's money. It is unlikely (hopefully, because you're right: this free agent class sucks) that we use all of our cap space this season, but any of that money we don't use goes back to Herb. Seeing as how he has lost millions upon millions of dollars on this team, wouldn't you think he would like the extra savings as opposed to spending $4 million on a risk?

I like the practice of buying draft picks, and there are certainly some guys sure to be available in the 20s that make sense for our team, but I just don't see it as a realistic option for us. I wish it were, but with our financial troubles, it just seems really far fetched.

troyc11a
06-18-2011, 09:29 PM
You keep mentioning this, and while it is plausible in theory, I'm not so sure it is realistic in practice. What happens if an impact veteran becomes available and we need to use our cap space? Besides, it is Herb Simon's money. It is unlikely (hopefully, because you're right: this free agent class sucks) that we use all of our cap space this season, but any of that money we don't use goes back to Herb. Seeing as how he has lost millions upon millions of dollars on this team, wouldn't you think he would like the extra savings as opposed to spending $4 million on a risk?

I like the practice of buying draft picks, and there are certainly some guys sure to be available in the 20s that make sense for our team, but I just don't see it as a realistic option for us. I wish it were, but with our financial troubles, it just seems really far fetched.

Good points there. But if I recall, Bird was promised that he would be able to spend up to the cap. And if I was Simon, I would be much happier with a 4 year $7mill gamble than a 4 year $40-45 one.
In reference to the savings, the money will probably be spent one way or another. Dont you think they have a number in mind for the payroll? Just take $4mill off it then and the pick is paid for.
All of this and who knows if there will even be a player the Pacers want. That is the key point. But I am guessing there will be a lot of value from 20 on down. But we will see.

cdash
06-18-2011, 09:34 PM
Good points there. But if I recall, Bird was promised that he would be able to spend up to the cap. And if I was Simon, I would be much happier with a 4 year $7mill gamble than a 4 year $40-45 one.
In reference to the savings, the money will probably be spent one way or another. Dont you think they have a number in mind for the payroll? Just take $4mill off it then and the pick is paid for.
All of this and who knows if there will even be a player the Pacers want. That is the key point. But I am guessing there will be a lot of value from 20 on down. But we will see.

Well, we don't know exactly what Bird was promised. I think Simon promised to spend money, but within reason. Who knows what any of that means besides Simon and Bird.

Financially speaking alone, of course Simon would prefer a 4 year/$7 million gamble over a 4 year/$45 million gamble. But with the more expensive option, you are (hopefully) getting an established, veteran player whose track record fits in with what this team wants to do and where it wants to go. You aren't taking as big of a risk on the actual player, because you know what he has done in the NBA. With the cheaper option, you are hoping that your scouting and projections come to fruition. You are also taking a gamble on putting another young player on a roster full of young players. In the more expensive option, you are likely taking another step to being a perennial playoff team. With the cheaper option, you are staying young and hoping that this gamble will pay off in the future.

troyc11a
06-18-2011, 10:08 PM
Well, we don't know exactly what Bird was promised. I think Simon promised to spend money, but within reason. Who knows what any of that means besides Simon and Bird.

Financially speaking alone, of course Simon would prefer a 4 year/$7 million gamble over a 4 year/$45 million gamble. But with the more expensive option, you are (hopefully) getting an established, veteran player whose track record fits in with what this team wants to do and where it wants to go. You aren't taking as big of a risk on the actual player, because you know what he has done in the NBA. With the cheaper option, you are hoping that your scouting and projections come to fruition. You are also taking a gamble on putting another young player on a roster full of young players. In the more expensive option, you are likely taking another step to being a perennial playoff team. With the cheaper option, you are staying young and hoping that this gamble will pay off in the future.

Young players on the roster together could be great! Could you imagine how JuJuan Johnson would having to battle for playing time? Competition brings out the best in all of us.
In regards to FA, they are just as big of a gamble too. How many trades and FA signings have worked out for the Pacers in the last few years? Mixed bag just like with the draft picks. Some good, some bad. Show me a FA who could dramatically alter this franchise and of course I would want him over a pick any day. But, all I keep hearing are Josh Smith and Paul Milsap. No thanks!

cdash
06-18-2011, 10:21 PM
Young players on the roster together could be great! Could you imagine how JuJuan Johnson would having to battle for playing time? Competition brings out the best in all of us.
In regards to FA, they are just as big of a gamble too. How many trades and FA signings have worked out for the Pacers in the last few years? Mixed bag just like with the draft picks. Some good, some bad. Show me a FA who could dramatically alter this franchise and of course I would want him over a pick any day. But, all I keep hearing are Josh Smith and Paul Milsap. No thanks!

I'm a pretty big fan of Josh Smith. I've beat his drum around here quite a bit. For some reason, people like to dwell on the negative with him. Questionable attitude, kind of a waste of talent, jacks up too many dumb threes, etc. All of these are legitimate concerns, of course, but he is still playing a vital role on a winning team. His defense is extremely good and he is a good fit in our frontcourt. If he ever did finally "get it", he could easily be an all-star year in, year out. Whether that ever actually happens is anyone's guess, and it's fair to argue that it will never happen. He has been in the league a good while now. I just think he improves our team more than any other guy who is (potentially) available.

beast23
06-18-2011, 10:33 PM
Young players on the roster together could be great! Could you imagine how JuJuan Johnson would having to battle for playing time? Competition brings out the best in all of us.
In regards to FA, they are just as big of a gamble too. How many trades and FA signings have worked out for the Pacers in the last few years? Mixed bag just like with the draft picks. Some good, some bad. Show me a FA who could dramatically alter this franchise and of course I would want him over a pick any day. But, all I keep hearing are Josh Smith and Paul Milsap. No thanks!
I think you are overlooking a couple of things.

First off, all season long, the word out of Bird is that what the Pacers were missing was a few veterans. He kept stating that they had enough young players and now their goal was to acquire a few veterans to fill in their needs.

No how, no way is the risk as great in acquiring a free agent as in acquiring a late first round pick. In consideration of talent and filling roster needs, this should not even be a debatable topic. You know pretty much what you are getting if you acquire a free agent that you have played against for a few years... and you have a very good idea of exactly what his role will be and how he will help your team. As for a late first round draft choice, you don't even know for sure that he will be able to make your roster. You may have a hint of what he can do athletically, but as a late first rounder, he will have a lot to learn and will probably not even see much court time for a year or two.

The only thing that could be debated in deciding whether to go after a free agent or buying an additional first round draft pick would be financial considerations and what impact each decision might have on your ability to use the resulting cap room in later years.

But for me, it boils down to one important point. We don't need any more mid- to late-first round toddlers... we need either some established vets or some low first round draft selections to get us to the next level.

troyc11a
06-18-2011, 11:00 PM
I'm a pretty big fan of Josh Smith. I've beat his drum around here quite a bit. For some reason, people like to dwell on the negative with him. Questionable attitude, kind of a waste of talent, jacks up too many dumb threes, etc. All of these are legitimate concerns, of course, but he is still playing a vital role on a winning team. His defense is extremely good and he is a good fit in our frontcourt. If he ever did finally "get it", he could easily be an all-star year in, year out. Whether that ever actually happens is anyone's guess, and it's fair to argue that it will never happen. He has been in the league a good while now. I just think he improves our team more than any other guy who is (potentially) available.

Josh is a good player and could help any team. He just seems to want to be a wing to much. Really, his game is better suited as a big 3 than a small 4. If we did not have Granger and George, I would not mind bringing him in via trade. In spite of all the negatives you mentioned, he does have some game.

troyc11a
06-18-2011, 11:03 PM
I think you are overlooking a couple of things.

First off, all season long, the word out of Bird is that what the Pacers were missing was a few veterans. He kept stating that they had enough young players and now their goal was to acquire a few veterans to fill in their needs.

No how, no way is the risk as great in acquiring a free agent as in acquiring a late first round pick. In consideration of talent and filling roster needs, this should not even be a debatable topic. You know pretty much what you are getting if you acquire a free agent that you have played against for a few years... and you have a very good idea of exactly what his role will be and how he will help your team. As for a late first round draft choice, you don't even know for sure that he will be able to make your roster. You may have a hint of what he can do athletically, but as a late first rounder, he will have a lot to learn and will probably not even see much court time for a year or two.

The only thing that could be debated in deciding whether to go after a free agent or buying an additional first round draft pick would be financial considerations and what impact each decision might have on your ability to use the resulting cap room in later years.

But for me, it boils down to one important point. We don't need any more mid- to late-first round toddlers... we need either some established vets or some low first round draft selections to get us to the next level.

Beast, nobody has said we have to do one or the other. Both are viable options since there will be so much money available. But we cant fill all the open roster spots via FA. It would be silly to invest 5-6mill a year for 3-4 years to have a guy sit on the bench. I think most of us are referring to the final 2-3 spots on the roster. You know, guys 9-12. In terms of starters and jey bench guys, we all want the best player available.

Edit: Only 9 players are under contract for next year. That means there are 6 open? We will not sign 6 FA's. (minus 1 draft pick)

beast23
06-19-2011, 12:19 AM
Beast, nobody has said we have to do one or the other. Both are viable options since there will be so much money available. But we cant fill all the open roster spots via FA. It would be silly to invest 5-6mill a year for 3-4 years to have a guy sit on the bench. I think most of us are referring to the final 2-3 spots on the roster. You know, guys 9-12. In terms of starters and jey bench guys, we all want the best player available.

Edit: Only 9 players are under contract for next year. That means there are 6 open? We will not sign 6 FA's. (minus 1 draft pick)

A minor technicality, we have 10 under contract, but I do understand the point you are making.

Whether you buy a late first round selection or simply invite players to camp that were not selected or are cut by other teams, you are obtaining players that have about the same likelihood of making your roster and/or getting any serious playing time. I don't see the intelligence in shelling out 6M - 7M (3M cost of pick plus a couple of years guaranteed at around 1.5M) for a likely scrub that is very unlikely to see any court time before we give him the boot. Every free agent we sign does not have to be a 6M+ free agent. I believe that there will be several free agents available that could be signed for 2M or so per year would be far more beneficial to our team and would cost less over 2 years than going the route of buying a late first round pick.

We are just as likely to acquire a player just as good in the second round or from another team on the cheap that is attempting to reduce salary by dumping a player.

As far as roster size goes, after the draft we will eventually have 12 players under contract (current 10 plus 1st and 2nd round selections). I would not be in any hurry at all to fill out the roster. I think we will have opportunities to pick up players without giving any in return if we choose to do so. I would definitely leave a couple of roster slots open to accomodate that possibility... and I would enter the season with only 14 players under contract to be able to easily/quickly take a player during the season.