WHO HAS THE 2nd HIGHEST TRADE VALUE IN THE NFL ???????????

[Bretsky]

JJ Watt.

#4 on their list

[red]

The thing with Watt, Wilson, Kapernick, RGIII and the like is that they are cheap only for the next few seasons, then who knows? To some extent, they are also unproven because careers do sometimes burn brightly for a short time, then flame out. I would look for guys who have proven themselves to be good solid NFL'ers for years, but are signed to long contracts at affordable costs.

something like this might just make this whole list moot

the first thing that ever single player who gets traded does is get a new contract

so the deal the guy currently has, the one that looks decent, is probably going to go right out the window

[red]

megatron?

[red]

oh, i got sick of guessing so i tried to cheat and look up the list

i will no longer be guessing

[pbmax]

The thing with Watt, Wilson, Kapernick, RGIII and the like is that they are cheap only for the next few seasons, then who knows? To some extent, they are also unproven because careers do sometimes burn brightly for a short time, then flame out. I would look for guys who have proven themselves to be good solid NFL'ers for years, but are signed to long contracts at affordable costs.

His annual hamstring issues lower Matthews' value in my opinion.
Stafford might be one to consider. He has shown a lot of promise, is young, but has a long, manageable contract.

The entire theme of the chart, which was originally used by Bill Simmons for the NBA, where direct player for player deals are more common, is what would you do NOW to help the team? To keep with the premise of the column, you cannot use a TT long term approach. Medium term is as long as it gets. Mostly its about deciding if you can imagine any rational team trading Rodgers for anyone else in the League right this instant. If the answer is no, then he is #1.

Contracts have to play into to it because of risk and repercussions on the rest of the roster. Age plays into it to for the same reason. But the contract AFTER the current contract? Not so much of an issue unless its a one year rental. Players are compared to those immediately around them on the list and to this 1 step ahead and behind.

Its almost more of a draft, where you are time and choice limited, rather than a long term personnel plan.

[pbmax]

now you are hitting on the top of the poll..surprisingly....Kapernick....not top 5

As an example of how the current contract comes into play, CK is downgraded from top 5 because he has only 2 years left on deal when other choices have 3 (maybe 4). But that downgrade is applied only after he was slotted among the best QB values.

[Patler]

The entire theme of the chart, which was originally used by Bill Simmons for the NBA, where direct player for player deals are more common, is what would you do NOW to help the team? To keep with the premise of the column, you cannot use a TT long term approach. Medium term is as long as it gets. Mostly its about deciding if you can imagine any rational team trading Rodgers for anyone else in the League right this instant. If the answer is no, then he is #1.

Contracts have to play into to it because of risk and repercussions on the rest of the roster. Age plays into it to for the same reason. But the contract AFTER the current contract? Not so much of an issue unless its a one year rental. Players are compared to those immediately around them on the list and to this 1 step ahead and behind.

You turned around the point I was making. These guys are worth less because there current contracts, though small in dollars, are short, as compared to Rodgers, Thomas, Stafford, etc. As soon as their contracts allow, you know they will be holding out for a major deal the size of which is undetermined. You have less certainty with them, so you would give less.

I'm not worried about the size of the next contract, just the fact they are contracted for only a few seasons.

[CaptainD]

Going with Russell Wilson but it could be Luck as well. He was a bargain for the contract he signed

[pbmax]

You turned around the point I was making. These guys are worth less because there current contracts, though small in dollars, are short, as compared to Rodgers, Thomas, Stafford, etc. As soon as their contracts allow, you know they will be holding out for a major deal the size of which is undetermined. You have less certainty with them, so you would give less.

I'm not worried about the size of the next contract, just the fact they are contracted for only a few seasons.

I did understand your point and I did not mean to imply you meant the cost of next contract rather than term of the current one. Though I erred and should have said the authors consider length of the current contract if its two years or less, not just one.

I was simply trying to point the guessers of Bretsky's original question in the right direction. For the top of the list, talent and production (even if based on shot term evidence) is given priority and then ordered by things such as current contract length and cost.

Re-reading your post, I see that you were also were giving guidance, if from the (partially) contrary point of view

[Bretsky]

I did understand your point and I did not mean to imply you meant the cost of next contract rather than term of the current one. Though I erred and should have said the authors consider length of the current contract if its two years or less, not just one.

I was simply trying to point the guessers of Bretsky's original question in the right direction. For the top of the list, talent and production (even if based on shot term evidence) is given priority and then ordered by things such as current contract length and cost.

Re-reading your post, I see that you were also were giving guidance, if from the (partially) contrary point of view

RESULTS after AROD

2. Russell Wilson
3. Andrew Luck
4. JJ Watt
5. RG3

[Upnorth]

RESULTS after AROD

2. Russell Wilson
3. Andrew Luck
4. JJ Watt
5. RG3

So four players on rookie contract but Arod on extension of second contract is first. I wish TT would figure out how to do his job.

[Fritz]

I wish they'd had lists like this back in the early 70's, so Dan Devine wouldn't have given away the entire decade in exchange for a 36 year old John Hadl. And I think he gave up a couple of second rounders for another QB the year before - Jerry Tagge or something?

Devine just set up the organization to suck for many, many years.

And Bart Starr did not help things, unfortunately.

Back in those days, GM's did seem to give up draft picks pretty easily. The one great trade the Packers made back then was getting Ted "Mad Stork" Hendricks. He played one year for them, had a great year - and they let him walk! What a clownish organization it was.

Ted would've cleaned up on those old NFL GM's. Without the salary cap, he'd have traded guys like Jennings for three first round picks.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Member when Starr brought in John Jefferson to team up with James Lofton and Paul Coffman and Lynn Dickey? Unfortunately, his draft choices that year were all flops, including Rich Cambell at QB.

[Carolina_Packer]

Member when Starr brought in John Jefferson to team up with James Lofton and Paul Coffman and Lynn Dickey? Unfortunately, his draft choices that year were all flops, including Rich Cambell at QB.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1981/draft.htm#drafts::none

Maxi, it pains me when I think back on this draft. We drafted Campbell at #6. Were we that soured on Lynn Dickey (injury concerns) or David Whitehurst (inconsistency) that they felt the need to draft Campbell at #6 overall? Then, he never comes in and distinguishes himself. Never shows why he was drafted so high. The classic solution in search of a problem, reaching for need pick. Of course the insult to that injury is that Hugh Green was the #7 pick that year (productive pro) and Ronnie Lott was the #8 pick (HOF'er). The fact that they thought Campbell was the best player available at that spot tells you all you need to know about Bart's prowess as a GM. I like the coach and GM being separate people. Always have, always will.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Carolina, good comments. You're right. It hurts to remember. Starr was a good guy. Still is, but he was out of his element. Defense stunk. Wasn't that the year Green Bay and Washington hooked up on a Monday night to set all time scoring record? Something like 50 points scored by both teams. Very exciting with Lynn Dickey and company, but frustrating not being able to stop anything.