View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently September 22nd, 2014, 6:15 am



Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
 Compensatory Picks announced 
Author Message
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3195
Location: Maryland
Post Compensatory Picks announced
Quote:
2009 Compensatory Draft Picks
Posted by Mike Florio on March 23, 2009, 7:59 p.m. EDT

The 2009 compensatory picks are set forth below, with round, overall place in round, overall place in draft, and team.

3 (33-97) New England

3 (34-98) Cincinnati

3 (35-99) Chicago

3 (36-100) NY Giants

4 (33-133) San Diego

4 (34-134) San Diego

4 (35-135) Tennessee

4 (36-136) Indianapolis

5 (33-169) Pittsburgh

5 (34-170) New England

5 (35-171) San Francisco

5 (36-172) Dallas

5 (37-173) Tennessee

6 (33-206) Tennessee

6 (34-207) New England

6 (35-2080 Dallas

6 (36-209) Cincinnati

7 (33-242) Tennessee

7 (34-243) Washington

7 (35-244) San Francisco

7 (36-245) Seattle

7 (37-246) Chicago

7 (38-247) Seattle

7 (39-248) Seattle

7 (40-249) Cincinnati

7 (41-250) Jacksonville

7 (42-251) Chicago

7 (43-252) Cincinnati

7 (44-253) Jacksonville

7 (45-254) Arizona

7 (46-255) Detroit

7 (47-256) Kansas City


One lousy pick, one spot away from Mr. Irrelevant.


March 23rd, 2009, 10:44 pm
Profile
Heisman Winner
User avatar

Joined: December 18th, 2008, 9:18 am
Posts: 762
Location: Where I lay my head is home
Post 
All that talk about parity and this is what an 0-16 team gets?


March 23rd, 2009, 11:20 pm
Profile
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3129
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post 
DayDreamer wrote:
All that talk about parity and this is what an 0-16 team gets?

The team's record has nothing to to with compensory picks. I thought it was about players lost and how well those players did after they left.

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


March 23rd, 2009, 11:25 pm
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2007, 5:51 pm
Posts: 2281
Post 
No suprise there. To get High Compensatory Picks I believe you have to lose decent players. Since we have no decent players we never lose any.


March 24th, 2009, 1:28 am
Profile ICQ WWW
Heisman Winner
User avatar

Joined: March 28th, 2005, 7:50 pm
Posts: 805
Location: Burbs of De-town
Post 
They probably figured that anything we lost was actually a gain.


March 24th, 2009, 3:06 am
Profile
National Champion
User avatar

Joined: December 16th, 2008, 8:44 am
Posts: 843
Post 
yostevo wrote:
They probably figured that anything we lost was actually a gain.


LMAO That was a good morning laugh for sure. Thanks for that, hahaha.


March 24th, 2009, 6:29 am
Profile
Heisman Winner
User avatar

Joined: December 18th, 2008, 9:18 am
Posts: 762
Location: Where I lay my head is home
Post 
I know that the players we lost have to do well in other teams, to get decent comp picks. But I thought since we're the only team to ever go 0-16, they'd throw us a bone, guess not.


March 24th, 2009, 9:12 am
Profile
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3195
Location: Maryland
Post 
It has to do with FA lost, FA gained, their performance level and their contract. Players who are cut don't count towards this formula, so if we cut a player, he isn't a loss and if we sign a player that was cut, he isn't a gain.

I know earlier Sly was doing some work on this to try to figure it out and I think he guessed we might get a 3rd or 4th round pick but apparently not.

The only reason we got that 7th rounder is because the draft has to have 256 picks and after awarding all the compensatory selections, they needed two more so the teams towards the top of the draft order get thrown in there to fill it out.


March 24th, 2009, 12:17 pm
Profile
Color Commentator - John Madden
User avatar

Joined: January 19th, 2007, 3:21 am
Posts: 1919
Location: A2
Post 
How does this sort of talent evaluation go? I mean who decides how good these players are in order to award these picks?

_________________
Forward down the field!


March 24th, 2009, 12:47 pm
Profile
#1 Overall Pick

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 10:34 am
Posts: 1427
Post 
Quote:
3 (33-97) New England -- Asante Samuel

3 (34-9 Cincinnati -- Justin Smith

3 (35-99) Chicago -- Bernard Berrien

3 (36-100) NY Giants -- Gibril Wilson

4 (33-133) San Diego -- Michael Turner

4 (34-134) San Diego -- Drayton Florence!

5 (33-169) Pittsburgh -- Alan Faneca

5 (34-170) New England -- Eugene Wilson

5 (35-171) San Francisco

5 (36-172) Dallas -- Julius Jones

5 (37-173) Tennessee -- Jacob Bell



I sure would like to know HOW the Chargers only get a 4th rounder for the loss of Michael Turner???

And the Steelers got only a 5th for Faneca?

Yet....

the Giants got a 3rd rounder for Gibril Wilson?

And who did the 49ers lose that was worth a 5th round pick???


March 24th, 2009, 2:19 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9864
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
phunnypharm wrote:
Quote:
3 (33-97) New England -- Asante Samuel

3 (34-9 Cincinnati -- Justin Smith

3 (35-99) Chicago -- Bernard Berrien

3 (36-100) NY Giants -- Gibril Wilson

4 (33-133) San Diego -- Michael Turner

4 (34-134) San Diego -- Drayton Florence!

5 (33-169) Pittsburgh -- Alan Faneca

5 (34-170) New England -- Eugene Wilson

5 (35-171) San Francisco

5 (36-172) Dallas -- Julius Jones

5 (37-173) Tennessee -- Jacob Bell



I sure would like to know HOW the Chargers only get a 4th rounder for the loss of Michael Turner???

And the Steelers got only a 5th for Faneca?

Yet....

the Giants got a 3rd rounder for Gibril Wilson?

And who did the 49ers lose that was worth a 5th round pick???


Didn't the 49ers lose Justin Smiley, their offensive guard?

And are we sure each pick is directly attributed to single players? I was under the impression the picks were determined based on players lost versus players gained, their contracts and performance levels. Once a team is determined to be a "winner" or "loser" in free agency, the losers are then assigned comp picks based on the levels of their loss.

At least, that is how it was described somewhere that I read.


March 24th, 2009, 3:20 pm
Profile
#1 Overall Pick

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 10:34 am
Posts: 1427
Post 
Quote:
And are we sure each pick is directly attributed to single players? I was under the impression the picks were determined based on players lost versus players gained, their contracts and performance levels. Once a team is determined to be a "winner" or "loser" in free agency, the losers are then assigned comp picks based on the levels of their loss.

At least, that is how it was described somewhere that I read.


The NFL has never realeased their "formula"...... but some NFL execs have made comments that refer to losing a player in free agency would provide them with a comp pick.

The most recent comment I remember is when A.J. Smith made a comment about Michael Turner when he was a RFA. I think some teams were offering a 2nd round pick, but Smith mentioned that he wasn't trading him for less than a 1st round pick because he would get a 3rd round comp pick even if they let him go as a free agent.

In essence, there was very little incentive to trade Turner because San Diego got a year of play from him.... but expected to get a 3rd rounder even when he left.

That is why I was surprised that the Chargers only got a 4th rounder for a top RB lost in UFA. The Chargers also did NOT sign any big name free agents in the offseason that I can recall.


March 24th, 2009, 3:47 pm
Profile
#1 Overall Pick

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 10:34 am
Posts: 1427
Post 
Quote:
More interesting facts: Since 1994, when the NFL first started awarding compensatory picks, the teams that have earned the most are the Ravens with 29, followed by the Cowboys with 28 and the Eagles and Rams, each with 25. Each team has been to a Super Bowl since then.

The teams with the fewest? The Jets with five, the Texans with three (they only have been a team since 2002), and the Browns with a stunning one. That's all. No wonder they have been bad -- making poor decisions in free agency can hurt you in more than one way. Those teams have a combined four playoff wins over that stretch, three by the Jets. Coincidental, right?



I can't believe the Lions aren't on the lsit for fewest picks received. It seems like Millen NEVER got any comp picks. Maybe the picks we got at the end of the 7th round put us over the top. :cry:


March 26th, 2009, 7:06 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 13 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.